Īs 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. can't be that crucial a stat for strikers. That's 1255 goals in 12 season for me with 4 for one on ones.
This is a CM Scout for the striker in my current save. So, we need new ways to infer if one-on-ones is GK-only or also apply to strikers.
The only meaningfull value of one-on-ones is the intrinsic. As CMScout is open source, all further authors of scout tools copied this behaviour assuming it was accurate.Ĭonclusion: 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 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. exe.Īnd in the savegame file, there is only the intrinsic value of it, not the cosmetic. This can be seen in offset 00543540 in the. 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). 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: 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. As its a hidden attribute, we use scout tools to be able to see the value of One-on-ones.
0 kommentar(er)
