Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 49 of 49

Thread: Strikers - One on Ones

  1. #26

    Join Date
    02-06-14
    Posts
    28

    One on Ones in editor?

    Does this affect strikers aswell?

  2. #27

    Join Date
    26-09-18
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    878
    No one knows yet. There is this thread that discussed it: https://champman0102.co.uk/showthread.php?t=7648 , they found some evidences it is important for strikers, then they started doing an experiment, but never completed it.

  3. #28

    Join Date
    15-12-11
    Location
    Your Mother
    Posts
    29,770
    It you set One-on-ones to 20 for an outfield player it gets reduced to 1 in game so it's likely a GK only attribute

  4. #29
    According to the manual it affects strikers too, but if that's the case I don't know why the figure resets if edited.

    One-on-Ones


    The One-on-One attributes deals with situations that occur when
    an attacker player is faced with just the goalkeeper between
    himself and the goal.

    Given the nature of the situation, this attribute is important for
    attacking players, but most importantly for goalkeepers.

    Look to what happens during One-on-Ones and the players
    involved. Who came off better the attacking player or the
    keeper? The keeper with a good One-on-One can be of untold
    value to you over the course of a season. Similarly, a forward
    who frequently scores from One-on-Ones is useful to you should
    you be playing the type of through balls that generally bring
    about such incidents.

  5. #30

    Join Date
    26-09-18
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    878
    As its a hidden attribute, we use scout tools to be able to see the value of One-on-ones. CMScout (and all other scout tools available there) will show a very low value in One-on-ones for outfield players indeed, even if the player has 20 in editor for it, as Dermotron said.

    However, very recently I made a new discovery that proves that all the scout tools are displaying the value of one-on-ones incorrectly, which I will reveal now:

    The only value of One-on-ones used by the game is the intrinsic value (the game doesn't display the One-on-ones value to the user, so it never converts from the intrinsic into a cosmetic value). This can be seen in offset 00543540 in the .68 .exe.

    And in the savegame file, there is only the intrinsic value of it, not the cosmetic.

    The author of the CMScout tool, in need to display a cosmetic value to the user in a 1-20 range, assumed one-on-ones is GK-only and applied to it the same reduction factor that the game applies to handling and reflexes. This can be seen in CMScout source code. As CMScout is open source, all further authors of scout tools copied this behaviour assuming it was accurate.

    Conclusion: we need to ignore this value of one-on-ones that the scout tools show to us, because its just an assumption, and its meaningless to the game. The only meaningfull value of one-on-ones is the intrinsic. So, we need new ways to infer if one-on-ones is GK-only or also apply to strikers.

  6. #31

    Join Date
    08-03-12
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    762
    Very interesting, and I tend to agree - it is relevant to forwards. It is not a surprise to find it relatively high in all my intrinsically valuable forwards

  7. #32

    Join Date
    15-12-11
    Location
    Your Mother
    Posts
    29,770
    The intrinsic's for outfield players are awful though, even with 20. It would take a LOT of other CA atts heavily reduce to boost this figure


  8. #33

    Join Date
    15-12-11
    Location
    Your Mother
    Posts
    29,770
    Slightly better but still borderline useless in terms of intrinsic values. Maybe it's broken and 211 is amazing because the scale is 0-255 instead of 128-127


  9. #34

    Join Date
    15-12-11
    Location
    Your Mother
    Posts
    29,770
    For keepers it's definitely showing better intrinsic values in the traditional / regular sense. 43 is great






    It could be a bit bugged like Flair. Flair can't be filtered in the Editor. Even though that's likely to be the editor rather than the exe or game mechanics.

  10. #35

    Join Date
    15-12-11
    Location
    Your Mother
    Posts
    29,770
    I've killed some of Jorge Molina's other CA attributes to get this up to a good intrinsic value. (Can't test him at the minute though). Maybe One-on-ones is incredibly powerful and 211 is like a 50+ for Finishing, Passing, Movement etc.


  11. #36

    Join Date
    26-09-18
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    878
    Very interesting screenshots Dermotron! It made me notice one very weird thing:

    The bug seem to be with the editor value of 20 only. Any other high values (below 20) seem to result in very high intrinsic for strikers.

    For example, Vinícius Júnior has an editor value of 18 for one-on-ones in mar2019 DB, and he receives a 29 intrinsic for one-on-ones: thats his highest intrinsic attribute! And he is a goal machine in the game.

    An editor value of 0 works too! For example, you gave 20 to nemanja maksimovic and his resulting intrinsic was 211. If you give a 0 to him his resulting intrinsic will be much higher than 211 and will be his highest intrinsic attribute!

  12. #37

    Join Date
    15-12-11
    Location
    Your Mother
    Posts
    29,770
    Very bugged then since 0 is meant to be random for any field in the database (except estimated wage)

  13. #38

    Join Date
    15-12-11
    Location
    Your Mother
    Posts
    29,770
    DROPPING it 5 points made it stronger . . . .


  14. #39

    Join Date
    26-09-18
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    878
    Quote Originally Posted by Dermotron View Post
    Very bugged then since 0 is meant to be random for any field in the database (except estimated wage)
    0 is random but it is a weighted random based on player position. For example, an striker with 0 in finishing and 0 in marking will much more likelly receive a high value for finishing and a low value for marking, and for a DC it will be the inverse.

    I've just checked and the game gives a very high intrinsic value for any strikers with 0 in one-on-ones. While for DCs it tends to give low intrinsic values from a 0 in one-on-ones.

    While giving a 0 for handling and reflexes results in very low intrinsic for strikers in handling and reflexes as expected.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dermotron View Post
    DROPPING it 5 points made it stronger . . . .
    Indeed! The bug seem to be with 20 only. Any other values (including 0) result in an intrinsic value as if it was an important att for outfield players.

  15. #40

    Join Date
    15-12-11
    Location
    Your Mother
    Posts
    29,770
    1-10 produces a value of 4 (211) on load . . . 15 is (255) - the tipping point of freak territory. 20 is back to 4 (211) again

  16. #41

    Join Date
    15-12-11
    Location
    Your Mother
    Posts
    29,770

  17. #42

    Join Date
    08-03-12
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    762
    Headscratcher indeed.

    Here is the post from Intrinsically Valuable where I look at the forwards. They all have acceptable to very high values for one on ones: Forwards

    They all have 0 in the editor. It seems to me that they may be getting the value for one-on-ones inflated because of their position and unusual attribute spread.

  18. #43

    Join Date
    15-12-11
    Location
    Your Mother
    Posts
    29,770
    Interesting.

    JohnLocke created a tool to set all attributes for non GK to 1 for Handling, Reflexes and One-on-ones. It was abandoned as setting the 3 of them to 1 produced overly powerful outfield players. Now it seems we know why there is some balancing/wasting CA leaving them blank due to one-on-ones power as 0

    Also, it would be very interesting to test MCs with high dribbling, passing + vision combo with really high one-on-ones (intrinsic) to see if it helps. Looks at Redknapp69 CM Viper profile, he's a monster with those 3 really high. Like Maradona good. Could one-on-ones get even more out I wonder?

  19. #44

    Join Date
    08-03-12
    Location
    Copenhagen
    Posts
    762
    Also as an FYI, the forwards who are COMPLETELY random are the ones with the highest intrinsic value for one-on-ones. Possibly co-incidence but worth keeping an eye on as they most likely generated with low CA scores across the board, compared with someone like Blake who has low PA (35) but 20 movement and finishing in the editor.

  20. #45

    Join Date
    26-09-18
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    878
    So, I think this bug in the 20 editor value of one-on-ones (in which giving a 20 is identical to giving a 1) caused some of the experiments from the past to conclude one-on-ones is not important for strikers. I believe if the same experiments were re-done with giving a 19 instead of a 20, then the new results would conclude one-on-ones is very important for strikers.

    Also I noticed the following players, who were famous in real life for being good at one-on-ones, all of them have a 0 in-editor for one-on-ones and their highest intrinsic in game is one-on-ones indeed! (even higher than finishing and off the ball!!!!):
    Ruud Van Nistelroy, Ronaldo, Jardel, inzaghi, henry, owen, trezeguet, vieri, Romario, Klose and even ronaldinho!

    Tsigalko also has a 0, TóMadeira has 15 in-editor, they both appear with a high intrinsic for one-on-ones but not their highest intrinsic.

  21. #46

    Join Date
    08-03-12
    Location
    Angola
    Posts
    107
    Isn't one-on-one an attribute most considerate for goalkeepers' penalty saving attribute? as strikers and outfield players have penalty as their mental attribute in the same matter?

  22. #47

    Join Date
    08-03-12
    Posts
    588
    Not only for goalkeepers, One on ones - is key attribute for wingers and second strikers.
    one on ones when combined with dribbling / (both high instinc) = more driblles per/game. 👍

  23. #48

    Join Date
    07-05-20
    Posts
    168


    This is a CM Scout for the striker in my current save. Note the 4 for one on ones ...

    Then note:





    That's 1255 goals in 12 season for me with 4 for one on ones ... can't be that crucial a stat for strikers ...

  24. The Following User Says Thank You to Renitor For This Useful Post:


  25. #49

    Join Date
    26-09-18
    Location
    Brazil
    Posts
    878
    Quote Originally Posted by Renitor View Post

    This is a CM Scout for the striker in my current save. Note the 4 for one on ones ...

    Then note...

    That's 1255 goals in 12 season for me with 4 for one on ones ... can't be that crucial a stat for strikers ...
    As explained a few posts above, the developer of the CM scout tool assumed one-on-ones is a goalkeeper-only attribute and consequently the cm scout tool uses the goalkeeper formula to convert the intrinsic value of one-on-ones into the cosmetic value of 4. That results in a low value for one-on-ones being displayed in the cm scout tool.

    If the developer had assumed its a important attribute for strikers, he would have used the outfield player formula to calculate this cosmetic value of one-on-ones, and then you would see a much higher value than 4.

    So, this value of 4 doesnt "exist" in the game, it only exists in the cm scout tool. In the game, only the intrinsic values exist. So what really matters is the intrinsic value, not the cosmetic value.

    If you check the intrinsic value of one-on-ones of this player in a scout tool that displays intrinsic values you will probably find a high intrinsic value for it.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •