Chat Attributes Vs Role Traits

[BatiGoal]

Hi guys,

I'd like to know how some of you approach and deal with certain "dilemma's" of the game, a tactical one to be exact, so here's a question for you. I'm interested in all your views so let's see if we can get a healthy discussion going. The more opinions the better.

The player in question is Celta man Jonny (ok, ex-Celta in my save)..

Solid. Good defensive attributes. I'm in particular looking at his weaker numbers.. low Aerial.. so I suppose FB spots left and right are likely to be his best positions. Alternatively a CB since he's accomplished there but he's unlikely to win many duels off the grass.

 

A closer look gives us a little more info on his better (as he's right-footed) RB spot..

No green role traits but OK still a good defender on the flanks to stop incoming wingers.

 

Alternatively we have his CB spot..which isn't great for a Central Defender who's kinda got "no head" basically but there's a green trait..

Quite nice to have a 'Marks Opponent Tightly' trait for any of your backline players I must say, but playing vs Wingers is in this case a deadly combination. But apart from that, doesn't this create a luxury problem?

 

I'm not really into poll numbers which is why I didn't include a poll, numbers mean little to me, I much rather have a discussion so we can learn a couple of things off of eachother. So my question is simple. How do you approach something like this? Do you look for his best position only? Do you even look at role traits at all?

• A- play him as a Full Back because his attributes favor this position.
• B- play him as a Central Defender because his role traits favor this position.
• C- Both. Opponent with Wingers Jonny goes FB. No Wingers he plays as a CB.
• D- Neither. Please explain.

There's something to say for every answer I suppose. Laziness, time-restrictions te get to deep in the game, you keep it casual so prefer to speed thru games etc etc.. Love to hear your thoughts.

[rseven]

Traits come from attributes. There is no data for traits in FMM.

Why Jonny has "Marks opponent tightly" because he has high tackling in attributes.

So, my answer is ATTRIBUTE is the key.

Edited November 27, 2017 by rseven

[Woody]

This is a great discussion...seeing Jonny' stats and his 'not green' marks opponents tightly trait i would train him to be comfortable in the wingback role.

His defending abilities wouldnt be a major issue then as his pace and general defensive abilities are excellent, allowing him a little leeway.

Just a thought.

[billy2shots]

I'm a stats man myself. The traits have always seemed a little gimmicky to me so they wouldn't come into my thinking. 

That particular player would be a squad player at best if I was a top club. His  technical skills are not good enough for what I want my first choice fullbacks to do. He actually looks a far better CB but again, a little short of the quality needed for a top club. 

I would have no problem playing him as a CB in a lesser league. One thing to consider, there seems to be an unusual amount of headers this year. It could just be the OME or the way I play but it's not unusual to have several players in double figures for heading at the end of the game. Strong tall players are goal scoring machines and opposing teams are regularly scoring from corners. For that reason, Jonny would still be a Celta man on my save. 

[Ares_2]

I used to find players base on their key attributes and traits and coach reports, key attributes >  coach reports（positives）> traits, look all over.

But since I notice that attributes will affect the coach reports and traits, form then on I only look into key attributes and watch their in game actions.

[danovic78]

51 minutes ago, billy2shots said:

I'm a stats man myself. The traits have always seemed a little gimmicky to me so they wouldn't come into my thinking. 

That particular player would be a squad player at best if I was a top club. His  technical skills are not good enough for what I want my first choice fullbacks to do. He actually looks a far better CB but again, a little short of the quality needed for a top club. 

I would have no problem playing him as a CB in a lesser league. One thing to consider, there seems to be an unusual amount of headers this year. It could just be the OME or the way I play but it's not unusual to have several players in double figures for heading at the end of the game. Strong tall players are goal scoring machines and opposing teams are regularly scoring from corners. For that reason, Jonny would still be a Celta man on my save. 

Headers are ridiculous on the OME, 15 games in a row I had the opposition score from a corner/free kick.

The player in question had Arial stats ranging from 9-15! 

[BatiGoal]

1 hour ago, rseven said:

Why Jonny has "Marks opponent tightly" because he has high tackling in attributes.

So, my answer is ATTRIBUTE is the key.

I thought so too. Tackling+Positioning. However, v. Dijk's only green role trait is as a BPD, Dictates Tempo, while those key attributes are double 19. Bailly and Jones are in the 20's atrr number and no greens as a CB either. They have Stays Back and Short Passes as LDs. 

But surely he'd do OK as a CB provided there were no Wingers to play against. I like looking at opponents tactics from time to time. If the question was Is he a better FB or CB yes agree, FB, but doesn't need to be I think when you can pick the right game for him.

1 hour ago, Chris Woodward said:

i would train him to be comfortable in the wingback role

Good alternative I think. Not sure if that's possible at his age now but perhaps at the start of the save. 

1 hour ago, billy2shots said:

That particular player would be a squad player at best if I was a top club. His  technical skills are not good enough for what I want my first choice fullbacks to do. He actually looks a far better CB but again, a little short of the quality needed for a top club. 

He's a sub in this squad due to his versatility. Interesting you see more CB in him than FB. He does perform well in that role I have to say, but again, I make sure he isn't playing against wingers with high crosses into the box when he's positioned in the center. 

I think sometimes depending on how adversaries line up against us we get a few extra/new options to utilize our squad players. It can be fun to dig a little deeper into that idea during specific careers. 

Edited November 27, 2017 by BatiGoal

[Scratch]

1 hour ago, rseven said:

Traits come from attributes. There is no data for traits in FMM.

Why Jonny has "Marks opponent tightly" because he has high tackling in attributes.

Hmm, is that true? What about things like Shoots from distance and Takes first time shots? If they are based on attributes, then which ones are they based on? I'd always assumed they were recorded separately in the DB. I've seen lots of similar players have different traits, so assumed it wasn't from the attributes. Would love to learn more about this!

[JohnWeulfoe]

I would like to play him as a Full Back because of his physical, passing, dribbling, decision & teamwork so he can support well to winger and he is also good in defending as a Full Back.

Not perfect fit for the CB because of his aerial and accomplished in that position.

In my opinion attributes is more reliable than traits.

[Scratch]

Oh yeah. forgot to answer the question!

I'd play him as an FB (or more likely as a WB because that's how I roll). The low Aerial worries me and the Marks opponent tightly is black, not red (which I see as meaning it's not too bad a trait for that position). 

I will say that while I personally always pick CBs with high Aerial, I think that's because historically I've always played in England and that's what's needed there. I think other leagues are more likely to have BPDs that can't head at all... So in England, I'd play him as a WB, but if Holland I may be more tempted to play him as a BPD or CD. 

[Taff]

I must admit It's rare that I look at their traits, I'm more in to their stats.

He's a decent looking FB and I always like DB's who can play both sides, always helpful when picking your subs, but I agree with his low aerial being a concern, as I like my CD to be big strong and good in the air, but always nice to have a back up if your struck with an injury crisis 

My choice would be FB, but I agree that if the opposition aren't playing with Winger or WB's maybe he'd be a solid CD 

[KennyMiller27]

I go with the stats. If the traits sync up with what the stats tell me then that's great,  otherwise I'll follow the stats. 

[FuddledFox]

I always look at attributes as a priority. I only look at traits if I notice an issue such as an AP taking a lot of long shots. I really should pay more attention to the traits though especially when  I'm doing challenges.

I would play Jonny as a RB or an emergency LB. I would play him at CB but his lack of aerial ability would annoy me.

 

[Ashez]

I'd only consider him for a wingback position and that's to take advantage of his amazing physical stats. 

With traits I wonder how they'd link with opposition, for example is there a striker trait that says they spin away from the opposition which would make him a bad CB? Etc

I'm a stats man and I'll rarely look at traits, mainly because we have no control over them. If we could say ourselves what a good or bad trait is I think the feature would be so much better. 

[Stam]

Traits are preferred moves renamed. I'm guessing the green color depends on which position you play him. For example, "marks opponents tightly" is not something full backs really do, but it's a must for centre-backs (hence the green at the DC spot).

[billy2shots]

I've already mentioned my preference of attributes over traits but for conversation sake I will also throw in hidden stats which I place above all. 

WE are not privy to the hidden stats but you can quite quickly work out who performs in the big games and who doesn't. Likewise we can workout who is consistent and who isn't. So for me I use the following when choosing my team-

-My understanding of the players hidden stats. 

-Attributes 

-Traits

Traits are so far down the line I have completed Triple Threats and 1k challenges without ever looking at the trait screen. Mind you, I do the same with picking playing positions. I place players by attributes and not silly coloured dots. They perform in that position or they don't, simple. 

 

[BatiGoal]

4 hours ago, scratch99 said:

So in England, I'd play him as a WB, but if Holland I may be more tempted to play him as a BPD or CD. 

Interesting point you raise. Different (type of) players for different leagues? I like it, eventho it'd be hard to prove, I love the sensical side of it. I'm a sucker for that. 

2 hours ago, Ashez said:

If we could say ourselves what a good or bad trait is I think the feature would be so much better. 

True. For now I'm going with - no green no problem- Vs - green Ah lovely- 

 

1 hour ago, Stam said:

For example, "marks opponents tightly" is not something full backs really do, but it's a must for centre-backs (hence the green at the DC spot).

Yes, the player's Characteristic becomes an advantage in that particular position. That makes role traits quite important no?

50 minutes ago, billy2shots said:

WE are not privy to the hidden stats but you can quite quickly work out who performs in the big games and who doesn't. Likewise we can workout who is consistent and who isn't.

Ultimately this is the way to go, by testing and experimenting. For arguments sake I'll throw in one more dilemma in a couple minutes. Maybe it inspires one or the other to have a closer look at some of the (not so obvious) aspects of the game. 

[Joewins]

I go with stats but mostly because I don't understand the traits - they are inconsistent at best. The only one I really look at is whether wingers and IFs have a preferred side of the pitch to run down and whether they cut inside.

When the trait is present on the screen in white does that mean the player does have that trait? Then it will be highlighted in green if it is a strong trait and then red when they actively don't have the trait - ie would do the opposite? Assuming if the trait isn't there at all then they just don't have it (rather than doing the opposite)... 

 

[Ashez]

2 minutes ago, Joewins said:

I go with stats but mostly because I don't understand the traits - they are inconsistent at best. The only one I really look at is whether wingers and IFs have a preferred side of the pitch to run down and whether they cut inside.

When the trait is present on the screen in white does that mean the player does have that trait? Then it will be highlighted in green if it is a strong trait and then red when they actively don't have the trait - ie would do the opposite? Assuming if the trait isn't there at all then they just don't have it (rather than doing the opposite)... 

 

Green - It's a positive trait for the role

Clear - Neutral

Red - It's a negative trait for the role 

From my understanding they do all the things listed but the game only sees some as a positive attribute (the green ones) etc. 

This is why I wish we could tailor the traits and build how the player plays the role ourselves. Like Modric uses the outside of his foot a lot IRL but Benitez ordered him to play safer more traditional passes etc (apparently this is one reason why everyone turned on him). 

[Joewins]

1 minute ago, Ashez said:

Green - It's a positive trait for the role

Clear - Neutral

Red - It's a negative trait for the role 

 

This is why i get confused - what is the difference between Clear and just not there?

So I could have a natural striker for example have nothing under role traits for Target Man or it could show have any number of traits for that role but they are all clear and it would mean the same thing?

[Ashez]

9 minutes ago, Joewins said:

This is why i get confused - what is the difference between Clear and just not there?

So I could have a natural striker for example have nothing under role traits for Target Man or it could show have any number of traits for that role but they are all clear and it would mean the same thing?

Now that's a question. Hmm

I'd assume these are what the player is strong at (mentioned) while he's just okay at everything else (not mentioned). Even if the trait is negative for the role it could be one of the players strengths which is why it's mentioned. If a player has no traits it's not like he'll just stand there and do nothing I suppose haha. 

[BatiGoal]

One last drop of fuel to the fire

Here's another one, not so much attributes but positioning Vs role traits..

Have a look at the following two players. Koke and Mkhitaryan. Both quality in their own right, but.. the question is not where they'd be best positioned at if they're already part of the squad. That's an easy question to answer. No, my question to you is whom of the pair you'd rather pick when you're in need of a creative force. That little magical touch behind the strikers in AMC that you're looking for to finish your product. 

Mkhitaryan..

 

Koke..

 

One the one side you have a player in Mkhitaryan who is a Natural Playmaker with 2 green role traits only. And on the other side you have one in Koke who's a Competent Playmaker with 5! green role traits. That's a lot of green tbh. Price isn't too far off, Mkhitaryan probably better overall attributes and peaking Vs a younger Koke who's got lots of potential to grow. But main attributes Creativity-Decisions-Passing are dead even which makes it kind of a hard choice. Well.. unless you're really put off by Koke's yellow.

Sometimes I'm faced with this dilemma when there's an injury crisis for example and I need to either switch to a new formation which brings risks of its own or play the one I'm accustomed to for only 2-3 games but with a couple of players out of (prefered) position. I think there's a fair case to be made for Koke in AMC hence my question. I'm pretty sure the large majority here sticks to 'natural' or 'accomplished' players over 'competent' as they're more comfortable thus more consistent etc and we don't like seeing yellow dots in our line-ups. Just doesn't feel right. not even temporarily?

I can, and probably will, experiment with this issue playing both in identical saves under identical circumstances to see how much better/worse one performs over the other. Quite curious now and fairly simple experiment. But would love to hear your thoughts and see if we answer more questions than we create (<-- ) this time.

 

So the question remains Mkhitaryan or Koke and why? But perhaps the bigger question would be; Are you open at all to playing players somewhat out of position (in yellow) if there's an abundance in green role traits?

Edited November 27, 2017 by BatiGoal

[veerus]

Don't pay attention to the role traits. Attributes and role descriptions > role traits as far as the player behavior is concerned on matchday. 

[phila]

In miki's case, his better movement and dribbling would (for me) tilt it in his favour for playing in the hole.

[jamesogbowu]

17 hours ago, BatiGoal said:

Hi guys,

I'd like to know how some of you approach and deal with certain "dilemma's" of the game, a tactical one to be exact, so here's a question for you. I'm interested in all your views so let's see if we can get a healthy discussion going. The more opinions the better.

The player in question is Celta man Jonny (ok, ex-Celta in my save)..

Solid. Good defensive attributes. I'm in particular looking at his weaker numbers.. low Aerial.. so I suppose FB spots left and right are likely to be his best positions. Alternatively a CB since he's accomplished there but he's unlikely to win many duels off the grass.

 

A closer look gives us a little more info on his better (as he's right-footed) RB spot..

No green role traits but OK still a good defender on the flanks to stop incoming wingers.

 

Alternatively we have his CB spot..which isn't great for a Central Defender who's kinda got "no head" basically but there's a green trait..

Quite nice to have a 'Marks Opponent Tightly' trait for any of your backline players I must say, but playing vs Wingers is in this case a deadly combination. But apart from that, doesn't this create a luxury problem?

 

I'm not really into poll numbers which is why I didn't include a poll, numbers mean little to me, I much rather have a discussion so we can learn a couple of things off of eachother. So my question is simple. How do you approach something like this? Do you look for his best position only? Do you even look at role traits at all?

• A- play him as a Full Back because his attributes favor this position.
• B- play him as a Central Defender because his role traits favor this position.
• C- Both. Opponent with Wingers Jonny goes FB. No Wingers he plays as a CB.
• D- Neither. Please explain.

There's something to say for every answer I suppose. Laziness, time-restrictions te get to deep in the game, you keep it casual so prefer to speed thru games etc etc.. Love to hear your thoughts.

Role traits simply means how the player behaves during match.

If its green = its needed in that role

If its black = the player has it but not needed

If its red = the player has such behavior and its against the role appointed. 

[BatiGoal]

Thanks for the comments 

Interesting to note that very few here actually pay attention to these role traits. As if they're not there lol, or it's regarded as a stat, like any other number, that has no actual impact on the game other than just stating a player's behavior on the pitch. I take it no one could really care less then if SI were to remove them altogether. 

[phila]

If its red then it does raise questions in my mind. one thing it does I suppose is fill out the players personality a bit.

[Meow]

I mostly will still play a player with good attributes who has 0 green role traits. There's 0 issues for Jonny to deal with wingers after all, he's got good pace and stamina. It'd be a different case if he had role traits that actively go against the role... though these traits do sometimes change over time, so you could shift him into the role anyways if the red trait disappears.

In the case of  Mkhi vs Koke, it'd depend on what other options I have on the right wing and centre mid. But assuming good cover in both areas, then it's less how well they perform in that specific role, but how much effectiveness they'd lose playing other roles. If Koke is barely less effective as CM or BBM in centre mid but Mhki is considerable worse on the wing as IF or winger, I'll likely drop Koke to centre mid and keep Mkhi as AP. As long as Mkhi's effectiveness is barely affected out wide, Koke will still be pulled back to CM but will remain as AP and Mkhi is shifted out wide. If they are both less effective, then whoever loses less effectiveness will be shifted.

Edited November 28, 2017 by Meow

[billy2shots]

8 hours ago, BatiGoal said:

 

Interesting to note that very few here actually pay attention to these role traits. As if they're not there 

 

 

The cynic in me questions a number of things that are in game. How much is there that actually impacts the game and how much is there to just look nice and make it feel like with have more options. 

I might be being really stupid but I can't see 'Primary Attacker' 'Primary outlet (or playmaker whatever it was'. 

Maybe it is there and I just can't find it but if it's not it begs the question, why have SI taken it away? Admitting it never did anything???

[Scratch]

8 hours ago, BatiGoal said:

Thanks for the comments 

Interesting to note that very few here actually pay attention to these role traits. As if they're not there lol, or it's regarded as a stat, like any other number, that has no actual impact on the game other than just stating a player's behavior on the pitch. I take it no one could really care less then if SI were to remove them altogether. 

I'm not sure how important they are, but I do pay attention to them for 1KC attempts. I tend not to play/buy other players with Shoot from distance and Takes first time shots as (in theory) they are likely to score too many goals themselves. I do like midfielders with Tries killer balls often. But whether those things actually have much of an affect I couldn't really say. 

18 hours ago, BatiGoal said:

Interesting point you raise. Different (type of) players for different leagues? I like it, eventho it'd be hard to prove, I love the sensical side of it. I'm a sucker for that. 

To be honest, I've never tested it or paid it too much attention, it's just something I've noticed when playing in different leagues. Play in England and there's relatively few BPDs and most are strong in the air anyway. Play in another (such as Holland but I suspect it's more the case in others) and there are relatively more BPDs and many not so strong in the air.

I assumed that's because football there is less direct and there are less target men there or something like that, but didn't really pay it enough attention or look for any real evidence. Would be great if someone dug into it a bit more. 

17 hours ago, BatiGoal said:

So the question remains Mkhitaryan or Koke and why? But perhaps the bigger question would be; Are you open at all to playing players somewhat out of position (in yellow) if there's an abundance in green role traits?

Mkhi - I always try to have full green, though sometimes go with dark green, but yellow is only for emergencies. Not sure how much of an effect it has, but I do know in the actual database there is a number for this (ie full green is 20/20, dark green is 15-18/20, etc). It's been that way for years and years so I presume that those stats actually have some effect. I just don't know what! 

Hmm, now I'm starting to feel stupid! There is just so much I don't know about how the game actually works and which things are most important.