I have the impression that the information displayed on the maturity ranges is increasingly buggy

Example:

This 20-year-old player has a 23-32 age range. However, he has already completed 98.7% of his training and will be finished training at 21!
Is there still any point in displaying this information if it's false?
Better no information than false and therefore misleading information.
This is particularly true for 'old players', because when you buy one, it's important to know whether he's going to decline next season or in one or two seasons' time.

I've got a few like that that have stamina and if you're not careful they'll evolve and end up before they reach maturity, especially if you buy them young

myforsans: J'ai l'impression que l'information affichée sur les plages de maturité bugue de plus en plus

Exemple :

Ce joueur de 20 ans affiche une plage 23-32 ans. Or, il a déjà accompli 98,7 % de sa formation et sera fini de former à 21 ans !
Est-ce que ça a encore un intérêt d'afficher cette info si elle est fausse ?
Mieux vaut pas d'info qu'une info fausse et donc trompeuse.
C'est notamment vrai pour les "vieux joueurs" car quand on en achète un, c'

He will not have finished his progression by the age of 21, and will still have 0.1% to go. The maturity range does not glitch on players who came out fairly young, like the one in the example.

You shouldn't play on words.
If, as you say, he still has 0.1% of training left next season, or 0.08 pt of NG to acquire in 2 years (the season when he turns 21 and the season when he turns 22), I think he's a player who has reached his maturity now and not at 23 and that this 23-32 display is therefore totally misleading.

It would be awkward the other way round, but here? What's wrong with that?
It's even great, you've got a "competitive" player much sooner than expected 🤨

But it changes things. The player, for example, will not be eligible for selection by the federation.

And I stand by what I said. The maturity range is an excellent indicator, 99.9% reliable for all players who leave at 20 or less. The only case where I found it unreliable was with a player for whom, during the penultimate season of progression, the sum of the coefficients slightly exceeded the potential. So he didn't progress in his last season. I watched him once, a few seasons ago. I never saw him again.

As for the player in the example, he's a special case: he came through the blind at the age of 17. As a result, his development curve is a little faster than that of a player from the cdf, and he's at a much more advanced stage of development than a player from a training centre.

For players aged 21 and over, it should be borne in mind that the minimum period of progression on VF is the season in which they leave + the following season. With this in mind, we can systematically predict a player's end-of-training age.

I've got two (very similar) players that are not progressing much in their last season of development.

#joueur?jid=541555&progression
#joueur?jid=548476&progression

That will probably be the case with the said player, he should gain a little more per training session than the players who finished their development with similar potential, but not by much. Just my opinion, but I could be wrong.

Magpie: Ce serait gênant dans le sens inverse, mais là ? Où est le problème ?
C'est même top, tu as un joueur "competitif" bien plus tôt que prévu 🤨

No, it's also annoying in that the year before you think you're buying a player that you're going to have to train for another 3 years, when in fact, surprise, on the first day of the following season, the 3 years of training are boosted into a single season, sometimes with progression curves approaching coefficients of 40!
So if it's not a display bug, it's a curious and misleading setting. It would be better to simply delete the display of this supposed maturity range.

myforsans: Non c'est aussi gênant dans ce sens puisque l'année d'avant tu crois acheter un joueur que tu vas encore devoir former 3 ans alors qu'en fait surprise le premier jour de la saison suivante les 3 ans de formation sont boostés en une seule avec parfois des courbes de progression qui frisent les coefficients 40 !
Donc si c'est pas un bug d'affichage c'est un paramétrage curieux et trompeur. Mieux vaudrait supprimer purement et simplement l'affichage de cette supposée plage de maturité.

And what does that mean?
Well, if he's got a huge coefficient, then you'll have to look after him during that all-important season.
And once the season's over, you'll have a player who's almost finished training. So at 20, he'll already be close to his final NG! That gives him at least 10 seasons of competitiveness, which is a huge advantage!
There's just one caveat: yes, there can't be any injuries during this season. But the MDJ said during the audio that injuries don't affect player progression........... 🤌

And he won't be selectable in the federation as long as he has residual progression, as Demi said.
I really don't see the problem.
The coefficient is random at the start of the season. If you get a huge player, then the following seasons they'll be very weak. Nothing shocking about that?

Forget it, you're missing the point 😀
I'm not complaining about one of the players

Myformans is right, sometimes there are bugs,
Personally, I've noticed it with older players, where some 24/33 players start to regress at 32
The answer was that it could happen
But this data isn't very useful if you can't rely on it when recruiting a player
personally, if I recruit a 24/33, it's not so that he regresses to 32 ^^

I'd be interested to see an example, if anyone has it to hand.

I. Alemayehu

The opposite R. Aguilar

lens59: La l'inverse R. Aguilar

Hi there,
Like you, I have several players in this situation... And it's a shame, they're stagnating and hardly developing at all... Because they came out of the cdf too late :/

Hello
Personally, I have this player:
V. Bērziņš
He came out this season and matured at the end of the season.
He will never have a MG equivalent to his potential! I don't understand because he's been playing and training all year.
I hope he continues to progress on the flat and that it's a display bug.

Hydilik: Bonjour
Perso, j'ai ce joueur-là :
V. Bērziņš
Sortie cette saison et plage de maturité en fin de saison.
Il n'aura jamais une NG équivalent à son potentiel ! Je ne comprends pas car il a joué et formé toute l'année.
J'espère qu'il va continuer à progresser sur le plat et que c'est un bug d'affichage.

Yes, just look at the margin for improvement

I'm not talking about bugs because there seem to be a few, but you have to realise that 1 young person who hasn't been out at 17 or 18 will often go beyond his maturity range

hazard14: Je ne parle pas des bug car il y a l'air d'en avoir quelque un mais faut savoir que 1 jeune qui n'est pas sorti à 17 18ans ira souvent au dela de sa plage de maturité

This is totally false. No player who leaves a cdf before the age of 21 progresses during his period of maturity.

For the other cases mentioned, I invite you to reread the explanation I gave earlier on players who left the club at 21 or over. It's not very complicated to understand, it seems to me.

And I repeat my request. I'd like to see the case of a player who has a range of maturity that ends at 33, and who has started to regress at 32. I looked through a few 32-year-old players yesterday and couldn't find any.

I don't think you understood a word of it, but that's okay

Hydilik: Bonjour
Perso, j'ai ce joueur-là :
V. Bērziņš
Sortie cette saison et plage de maturité en fin de saison.
Il n'aura jamais une NG équivalent à son potentiel ! Je ne comprends pas car il a joué et formé toute l'année.
J'espère qu'il va continuer à progresser sur le plat et que c'est un bug d'affichage.

That's what Demi explains: the range of maturity doesn't apply to players who left the CoF early (before the age of 20). For the acts, you just have to rely on their potential and their state of progress.

You have nothing to worry about, your player will always progress next season and probably even the season after that, until his state of progression has reached its potential.

It's not a display bug, nor a programming bug, it's simply that there are so many variables that will influence the maturity range that there's no real point in indicating it except, perhaps, for the regression age, but that too needs to be checked.

I'm just saying that a player like hydilik, who came out at the age of 19 or 20 with a maturity level of 22, will certainly go on to play beyond the age of 22

The Hydilik player, who was released at the age of 21, will make further progress next season. And this will be his last season of progression. And he will reach his potential. And it won't happen any other way, unless Aymeric tinkers with something.

You're saying the same thing.
When Hazard says that a player will go beyond his maturity range, he's talking about age, not the curve, because if the curve is flat, there's no more progression.

Absolutely lol

We are not saying the same thing. I repeat: all the players who come out of a cdf at 20 years old maximum DO NOT go beyond their maturity range.

A player who leaves the cdf at 21, if he shows maturity at 22, will not finish his training at 22 like hydillik.

Meme un joueur sorti de cdf a 23ans aura donc une maturité affichée a 24ans ( comme un de mes défenseur ) comme il faut une saison pleine de formation , il atteindra son potentiel a J1 25ans , je pense qu'avec demi on est d'accord sur ca 🙂

k3vin59218: Un joueur sorti de cdf a 21 ans , s il affiche une maturité a 22ans , ne finira pas sa formation a 22ans comme celui de hydillik ..

Meme un joueur sorti de cdf a 23ans aura donc une maturité affiché a 24ans ( comme un de mes defenseur ) comme il faut une saison pleine de formation , il atteindra son potentiel a J1 25ans , je pense qu avec demi on est d accord sur ca 🙂

A player who leaves a cdf at 22 will reach maturity on the first day of his 24th birthday. Whatever the beach.

A player who leaves a cdf at 23 will reach maturity on the first day of his 25th birthday. It doesn't matter which beach.

A player who leaves a cdf at 24 will reach maturity on the first day of his 26th birthday. It doesn't matter which beach.

A player leaving a cdf at the age of 17, 18, 19 or 20 will reach maturity no later than the first day of age in his maturity range.

A player leaving a cdf at 21 will reach maturity on the first day of his 23rd birthday if he has a range starting at 22 or 23, otherwise he will reach maturity on the first day of his 24th birthday if his range starts at 24.

Demi-cerveau: Un joueur sorti d'un cdf à 22 ans atteindra sa maturité au premier jour de ses 24 ans. Peu importe la plage.

Un joueur sorti d'un cdf à 23 ans atteindra sa maturité au premier jour de ses 25 ans. Peu importe la plage.

Un joueur sorti d'un cdf à 24 ans atteindra sa maturité au premier jour de ses 26 ans. Peu importe la plage.

Un joueur sorti d'un cdf à 17, 18, 19 ou 20 ans atteindra sa maturité au plus tard au premier jour de l'âge de sa plage de maturité.

Un joueur sorti du cdf à

Put like that, it's even clearer 👍

It does make an effort to be clear
Thank you half-heartedly for taking the time to explain this subtlety to those who were unaware of it

Over a maturity range of 24/32, will the player regress from age 33 or 32?

From the moment he turns 32.

Thanks to all for the information

Fine by me
I thought it was 33