Jump to content

Same old quality coaches!


Recommended Posts

This is because you're not understanding what these stars mean.

When you do the assistant reports thing it compares the qualities of only your players so to get a 5 star player at Real Madrid would require them to be a lot better than every other Real Madrid player which is clearly not the case which is why you see 3.5 stars for these players as they are above average in your squad but not massively better mostly due to your squad being very good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

See the same old issues popping up again and again. Just took over Real Madrid and went to assistants report. None of my players are rated more than 3 and a half stars! Yes that's right Casillas, Ronaldo et al are apparently only ok!

Can't they ever get this right?

If you're so concerned with having your assistant rate Casillas and Ronaldo as 5 star players then sell everyone else and sign some useless players as frees. You will be pleased with the results.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Englandmanager, how can it be knowledgeless when the info on this is knowhere in the official instruction book oh wise one? Lack of information does not mean i'm knowledgeless. Other than this clown, cheers for the info. My bad, i just assumed it mean't howgood a player was.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

As someone who hasn't played FM10, (FM09 kept me going to FM11) I have two questions regarding this as in FM09 your assistants report was based on the skills worldwide so eg CRonaldo would get a high star rating due to his skills.

1. When scouting for a player and I'm say Real Madrid, will Messi just come up as 3/3.5 stars as relative to my team his ability is similar or is this different for scouting?

2. Regens - how do you know you have an actual quality player on your hands if it's only stars ranking relative to your other players?

Can someone inform me why this changed from worldwide skill comparison to comparison to teammates?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its really stupid, when youre at a top club, everyone has to be a 1-3 star so the ratings are useless as everyone in the world is compressed into those ratings.

You cant differentiate players easily that way.

5 stars should be used used always

5 - top player

4 - very good player

3 - average player

2 - poor player

1 - terrible player

If Messi is a 3 then everyone else in the world has to be a 1-2 star player.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This was in FM10 too.

Essentially if you're the likes of Barca, Real etc... then Messi, Ronaldo will be 3 or 3.5 stars because relative to the players they're playing with and the team they are playing for that is accurate.

For example, if Messi or Ronaldo were snapped up by an average Premiership side then they would be rated much higher.

Personally I preferred the old system but I can see the logic of the newer system. It's also important to consider that assistants / coaches sometimes get things wrong (it wouldn't be much fun if they were 100% accurate) so there is value in occasionally ignoring them and not relying on them so much.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't it also linked to expectations.

som if Manager says, we are expecting to avoid relegation this year, then Ronaldo would be 5 stars, because he is well over qualified to help reach that goal.

But if its to win the league, well, tahts a harder goal, thus Ronaldo, though still great, isnt as overqualified.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume that the stars are related to my team's numerical rating. As my team got better the players' stars slowly reduced. I signed Gourcuff as a five star player at age 26 when my team had just finished 10th in the english premier league. After I won the league two years later he was only 4 stars. He dropped to 3.5 stars the next season after I nearly won the champions league and had wont the league a couple more times. TWo years later (after more in country and continental success) he went to 3 stars where he remained until he started to get old at age 34.

I experimented by applying for a job with a weaker premier team and then scouting my old team and virtually all my players were 4 to 5 stars. Gourcuff was five stars even though my old team saw him as 3.5 stars. Of course, then I reloaded the earlier save because it was just an experiment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its really stupid, when youre at a top club, everyone has to be a 1-3 star so the ratings are useless as everyone in the world is compressed into those ratings.

You cant differentiate players easily that way.

5 stars should be used used always

5 - top player

4 - very good player

3 - average player

2 - poor player

1 - terrible player

If Messi is a 3 then everyone else in the world has to be a 1-2 star player.

That doesn't solve the problem. Because arguably everybody else in the Barcelona team is also a top player, if not, Very Good player.

The star rating system is tied to the reputation of the club as far as i know. So if you take 3 star as being "average", Real Madrid expect to have world class players in every position, therefore, subjectively, a world class player is average.

At 3.5 stars a player is better than average, or better than the rest of the team. But again, objectively, how much better is Ronaldo than Higuain, Kaka, Ozil.

The star system is a brief summary of ability, each player has an entire page full of stats for you to compare to make a choice of which is better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Read the post above yours - it explains it perfectly.

Managers don't have some system that tells them conclusively which player is better than another - they have to judge it for themselves. That's what the game is making you do...:)

A 5* player, no matter what country, league or division you are in - is a player who's going to be a star in your current team. If 5* just meant "Premiership player" - how would you have the faintest chance when taking over in the Blue Square South - where by default every player would be 1*?

Quite logical when you think about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Read the post above yours - it explains it perfectly.

Managers don't have some system that tells them conclusively which player is better than another - they have to judge it for themselves. That's what the game is making you do...:)

A 5* player, no matter what country, league or division you are in - is a player who's going to be a star in your current team. If 5* just meant "Premiership player" - how would you have the faintest chance when taking over in the Blue Square South - where by default every player would be 1*?

Quite logical when you think about it.

Couldn't this problem be solved by making the star rating system relative to the division you are currently playing in? So you could have 5* premiership players, and 5* blue square players. As an option it would seem to be welcomed I guess.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't this problem be solved by making the star rating system relative to the division you are currently playing in? So you could have 5* premiership players, and 5* blue square players. As an option it would seem to be welcomed I guess.

... But that is pretty much exactly how it works now.

The reputation of the team is dictated, to a large extent, by the division they play in.

That is why your 4-star midfield dynamo that you bought in League 2 suddenly becomes a 2.5-3 star player in League 1.

There is no absolute star rating system, it is relative to the team reputation (which, in turn, is dictated by the competitions they play in).

For example, if you took Michael Carrick, he's a pretty decently average Premiership player, he's probably somewhere between 2-3 stars in the Man Utd team. He's solid, reliable but not amazing (assistant reports probably say something along the lines of "Good Premiership midfielder). You put him in the Blackpool team and he is head and shoulders a better standard of player than what they currently have (or that they could reasonably hope to attract due to reputation, predicted success, finances etc) and would suddenly become a 4 star player in their team.

3 star = Player is of the skill we would expect to have at our club given our standing

More than 3 star = Player is above and beyond the level of skill expected for a club our size.

At a top team such a Real Madrid this is hyper condensed, since they expect to have all top quality players in every position. 3.5 stars is still better than average, but you could really rate any of their stars higher than that, because realistically they are not that much better than the other players in the team.

Link to post
Share on other sites

... But that is pretty much exactly how it works now.

The reputation of the team is dictated, to a large extent, by the division they play in.

That is why your 4-star midfield dynamo that you bought in League 2 suddenly becomes a 2.5-3 star player in League 1.

There is no absolute star rating system, it is relative to the team reputation (which, in turn, is dictated by the competitions they play in).

That's right, but star ratings can change within divisions. Some people might just want to know the quality of their player compared to the rest of the division, rather than look at a rating relative to their team's reputation. I was suggesting both be available.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's right, but star ratings can change within divisions. Some people might just want to know the quality of their player compared to the rest of the division, rather than look at a rating relative to their team's reputation. I was suggesting both be available.

But that would allow for even less granularity in the rating system.

Say Nani is a top premiership winger, that gives him a 5 star rating on your system. Messi would also be 5 star. So by your system at a quick glance, the two would be equally good.

Surely the only metric people need to know when buying a player is "is he better than what i have". The current system allows that to be shown more clearly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But that would allow for even less granularity in the rating system.

Say Nani is a top premiership winger, that gives him a 5 star rating on your system. Messi would also be 5 star. So by your system at a quick glance, the two would be equally good.

Yep and immediately the manager would know that the player will be a real star in the division. Success.

Going by the reputation based rating system, if you're managing a recently promoted team, two good premiership players could both be rated 5 stars without necessarily being 5 star premiership players. Similarly, you would be unable to tell any real difference between the two if they've both hit 5 stars - you run into the same problem.

I'm not suggesting one replaces the other, but rather that they can complement each other.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep and immediately the manager would know that the player will be a real star in the division. Success.

It is pointless to implement an alternative system when it already exists.

The reports already tell you "Decent xxx dvision player" and "leading star".

Given your example, the system you are proposing offers absolutely no benefits to a lower reputation club in a bigger league. And less benefit to a bigger club in the league.

What would be the point?

In your hypothetical situation both "good" players would be rated as 4 star for a poor team, it would still not differentiate the quality between the two.

It is up to you as the player to actually put forth some effort to weigh up the individual merits of the players. The star system is a guide.

It is also no an absolute system, because i'm pretty sure the star rating given by the assistant manager is based on his judging player ability/potential stats.

If you want absolute values on player skill without putting in any effort yourself to make a decision, you might as well use FMRTE or FMscout.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest aaron70

Man, the current system is good. It makes you look at your squad and evaluate them compared to others yourself. Your Assman is comparing your own squad. How can he make real judgments on hundreds of players. Some people don't want to have to think at all. This is a football manager game!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is pointless to implement an alternative system when it already exists.

The reports already tell you "Decent xxx dvision player" and "leading star".

Given your example, the system you are proposing offers absolutely no benefits to a lower reputation club in a bigger league. And less benefit to a bigger club in the league.

What would be the point?

Lol. The report also tells you whether someone is the best, second best etc. in their position in the squad. Fail argument. The star system is and has always been a quick reference thing.

The system I am proposing does offer huge benefits to low reputation clubs in big leagues - I manage exclusively lower league clubs and have often wanted to quickly check the quality of my squad compared to the rest of the league - not a scale relative to my reputation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fail argument

What a completely re-tarded turn of phrase.

And how does it offer huge benefits? Players are pigeon-holed into even broader categories than they are now.

You haven't read the whole post.

and have often wanted to quickly check the quality of my squad compared to the rest of the league

I use the League Table for that

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a completely re-tarded turn of phrase.

And how does it offer huge benefits? Players are pigeon-holed into even broader categories than they are now.

Try to open your mind.

I holiday the first year of the game and take over a team that is promoted into the lowest playable division in Romania, this is what I did on my last FM10 save. Naturally everybody in my squad is rubbish. I therefore set my expectation as attempt to avoid relegation. By the time the season has started I have signed frees, transferred, and brought in loanees such that my assistant report screen states that my entire first team are 5 star players. What does that tell me? That my squad is good enough to avoid relegation. Should I now be aiming higher? I would know if the rating told me how my players compared to the rest of the league. But it doesn't. Just because you wouldn't find something useful, doesn't mean that others wouldn't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Try to open your mind.

I holiday the first year of the game and take over a team that is promoted into the lowest playable division in Romania, this is what I did on my last FM10 save. Naturally everybody in my squad is rubbish. I therefore set my expectation as attempt to avoid relegation. By the time the season has started I have signed frees, transferred, and brought in loanees such that my assistant report screen states that my entire first team are 5 star players. What does that tell me? That my squad is good enough to avoid relegation. Should I now be aiming higher? I would know if the rating told me how my players compared to the rest of the league. But it doesn't. Just because you wouldn't find something useful, doesn't mean that others wouldn't.

What is the judging ability/potential of your assistant manager?

You will never get a definitive rating without using an outside program, particularly with regards to the very lowest tier.

(p.s. it tells me your assistant is probably terrible).

Just because you wouldn't find something useful, doesn't mean that others wouldn't.

Likewise, just because you would find something useful in a specific situation once in a blue moon, doesn't necessarily mean others would, nor that it would be worth the development time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the judging ability/potential of your assistant manager?

You will never get a definitive rating without using an outside program, particularly with regards to the very lowest tier.

I always try to get JPA as high as possilble, typically it is 20. I prioritise it over all other assistant manager attributes.

JCA is usually high teens, sometimes even being 20 itself - depending on the quality of generated assistant managers during the first year.

It isn't hard to get an assistant manager that fits those categories if you ignore other attributes, which I choose to do initially.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I manage exclusively lower league clubs and have often wanted to quickly check the quality of my squad compared to the rest of the league

Your proposed system still wouldn't do that. Because all you're still doing is comparing your players to the static reputation of the league.

You would have no innate knowledge of how other teams players compare to the same star system. Unless you are proposing some sort of bizarre metric where an average of player ability is calculated from every player in the league. Which would be inaccurate and flawed because it would be thrown out of kilter by recently relegated teams, recently promoted that haven't strengthened. Teams with large quantities of poor Youth players on top of the first team squad.

The only way you could comprehensively do it would be to scout every single team and compare the results.

I therefore set my expectation as attempt to avoid relegation. By the time the season has started I have signed frees, transferred, and brought in loanees such that my assistant report screen states that my entire first team are 5 star players. What does that tell me? That my squad is good enough to avoid relegation. Should I now be aiming higher?

Are you totally incapable of interpreting ant of the information yourself? If i was given the task of avoiding relegation given the size of the club, but then managed to strengthen the team to the point where it was full of 5 star players, then one would assume that it would be probable that you could exceed those expectations.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you totally incapable of figuring anything out for yourself. If i was given the task of avoiding relegation given the size of the club, but then managed to strengthen the team to the point where it was full of 5 star players, then one would assume that it would be probable that you could exceed those expectations.

I'd just like to point out that everything the star system does could be figured out by the player independently. It's a quick reference - as I already said. The majority of your arguments invalidate the current system as much as the one I am talking about. Nice dig though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having read this thread there is only one conclusion, people are a bit lazy and reflect too much on visual stars. If you read the coach/scout reports it tells you loads of information comparing to both a similar player in your team and the league average. Is it really that hard to figure out? Why do we need stars when we have actual written language?

Next you'll be telling me that Sean O'Driscoll asks his chief scout at Doncaster not about the player but his star rating out of five. Using the stars how will you figure out the type of player? Does he fit your style of play? Is he quick, slow? Strenghts/Weaknesses? think of it realistically and you'll perform much better. I play a style where I use the CM breaking into the box with pace and flair, therefore they are hugely important attributes. I don't judge him solely on his 'star rating' as a 4 star player may not suit my team. Think logically and you'll get better results.

Think of it in real life. Lee Cattermole, hard tackler but quite a simple player. He will break up play etc but would you sign him to replace Brian Stock at Doncaster who's a playmaker with passing ability and the ability to control tempo etc? No, you wouldn't but the scout would argue he's better. He wouldn't fit my team though as he couldn't do that job. Think more about real football rather than beating the statistics and you'll find not only a better performing team but it's more enjoyable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having read this thread there is only one conclusion, people are a bit lazy and reflect too much on visual stars. If you read the coach/scout reports it tells you loads of information comparing to both a similar player in your team and the league average. Is it really that hard to figure out? Why do we need stars when we have actual written language?

Next you'll be telling me that Sean O'Driscoll asks his chief scout at Doncaster not about the player but his star rating out of five. Using the stars how will you figure out the type of player? Does he fit your style of play? Is he quick, slow? Strenghts/Weaknesses? think of it realistically and you'll perform much better. I play a style where I use the CM breaking into the box with pace and flair, therefore they are hugely important attributes. I don't judge him solely on his 'star rating' as a 4 star player may not suit my team. Think logically and you'll get better results.

Think of it in real life. Lee Cattermole, hard tackler but quite a simple player. He will break up play etc but would you sign him to replace Brian Stock at Doncaster who's a playmaker with passing ability and the ability to control tempo etc? No, you wouldn't but the scout would argue he's better. He wouldn't fit my team though as he couldn't do that job. Think more about real football rather than beating the statistics and you'll find not only a better performing team but it's more enjoyable.

This is probably the conclusion that anybody would reach from reading my posts. I don't solely rely on the star system at all - but to the extent I do use it, I feel it could be changed or extended. That is all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

that is why your 4-star midfield dynamo that you bought in league 2 suddenly becomes a 2.5-3 star player in league 1.

There is no absolute star rating system, it is relative to the team reputation (which, in turn, is dictated by the competitions they play in).

For example, if you took michael carrick, he's a pretty decently average premiership player, he's probably somewhere between 2-3 stars in the man utd team. He's solid, reliable but not amazing (assistant reports probably say something along the lines of "good premiership midfielder). You put him in the blackpool team and he is head and shoulders a better standard of player than what they currently have (or that they could reasonably hope to attract due to reputation, predicted success, finances etc) and would suddenly become a 4 star player in their team.

3 star = player is of the skill we would expect to have at our club given our standing

more than 3 star = player is above and beyond the level of skill expected for a club our size.

At a top team such a real madrid this is hyper condensed, since they expect to have all top quality players in every position. 3.5 stars is still better than average, but you could really rate any of their stars higher than that, because realistically they are not that much better than the other players in the team.

Perfect...

Link to post
Share on other sites

The majority of your arguments invalidate the current system as much as the one I am talking about. Nice dig though.

Yes they do, which is why i don't pay any attention to the star system at all really. That's the whole point.

Because the current system doesn't really provide anything really meaningful, why introduce a similar system that provides equally meaningless information?

The only way you would ever have a system that directly compared how good your squad is compared to anybody else in the league would be if there was a list that was accessible that ranked all the teams in the division in terms of an average player ability.

Getting a star rating for a player based on a comparison for the league (which up until this point has been a static figure) doesn't provide you with any relevant information about the relative strength of your squad. Because you don't know how good other team's squads are. Even with your proposed system, the star rating is pointless because all you have is a report saying that this player is a good standard of player for the division (say 4 star). That doesn't tell you anything about the relative strength of your team compared to anybody else, because they might all be full of players rated at 5 star for the division.

The only way you would know in either case, is to fully scout all the other clubs and compare them that way, in which case the scout report will compare them to your best players no matter what.

(in general the star rating is generally flawed because it is, i think, entirely based off Current Ability and potential Ability. It doesn't take in to account form, any of the actual attribute spread or anything useful - The only way you get these is via the actual reports, which give you all the information you need to know about whether they are good players for the division, leading stars, better than your current best players anyway).

Link to post
Share on other sites

... But that is pretty much exactly how it works now.

The reputation of the team is dictated, to a large extent, by the division they play in.

That is why your 4-star midfield dynamo that you bought in League 2 suddenly becomes a 2.5-3 star player in League 1.

There is no absolute star rating system, it is relative to the team reputation (which, in turn, is dictated by the competitions they play in).

For example, if you took Michael Carrick, he's a pretty decently average Premiership player, he's probably somewhere between 2-3 stars in the Man Utd team. He's solid, reliable but not amazing (assistant reports probably say something along the lines of "Good Premiership midfielder). You put him in the Blackpool team and he is head and shoulders a better standard of player than what they currently have (or that they could reasonably hope to attract due to reputation, predicted success, finances etc) and would suddenly become a 4 star player in their team.

3 star = Player is of the skill we would expect to have at our club given our standing

More than 3 star = Player is above and beyond the level of skill expected for a club our size.

At a top team such a Real Madrid this is hyper condensed, since they expect to have all top quality players in every position. 3.5 stars is still better than average, but you could really rate any of their stars higher than that, because realistically they are not that much better than the other players in the team.

I was umming and erring over which system I preferred until I read this explanation. The way it currently is is definitely the best fit. Well done Stotteh, great post. :thup:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes they do, which is why i don't pay any attention to the star system at all really. That's the whole point.

Because the current system doesn't really provide anything really meaningful, why introduce a similar system that provides equally meaningless information?

The only way you would ever have a system that directly compared how good your squad is compared to anybody else in the league would be if there was a list that was accessible that ranked all the teams in the division in terms of an average player ability.

Getting a star rating for a player based on a comparison for the league (which up until this point has been a static figure) doesn't provide you with any relevant information about the relative strength of your squad. Because you don't know how good other team's squads are. Even with your proposed system, the star rating is pointless because all you have is a report saying that this player is a good standard of player for the division (say 4 star). That doesn't tell you anything about the relative strength of your team compared to anybody else, because they might all be full of players rated at 5 star for the division.

The only way you would know in either case, is to fully scout all the other clubs and compare them that way, in which case the scout report will compare them to your best players no matter what.

I'm glad that you seemed to have calmed down somewhat from the offense you took earlier, and the result is a post that I agree with.

I don't often attribute too much weight to the star ratings, but to the extent that I do, I would like a different system. That's all I'm saying.

Obviously creating such a system would be difficult, and would have to take into account player ability rather than reputation (I think it's odd that reputation is currently used - it could be totally out of proportion with the quality of your squad).

In real life, it is relatively easy to tell whether a player is above the league he is playing in, or a potential or current star in the league, and it should be easy to quickly reference that in the game. Yes I could, and currently do, go to each player's individual report and read what is said about them (in addition to forming my own perception from their performances) - but couldn't that be somewhat efficiently represented through the star system?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad that you seemed to have calmed down somewhat from the offense you took earlier, and the result is a post that I agree with.

Whatever gave you the impression i was anything other than calm. I simply abhor ridiculous 4chan/AOL speak, it doesn't take much to form a coherent sentence if you want to actually put a valid point across.

Obviously creating such a system would be difficult, and would have to take into account player ability rather than reputation (I think it's odd that reputation is currently used - it could be totally out of proportion with the quality of your squad).

I don't really know what you mean with this. You mean the current playing ability of your squad than the current reputation of your team?

The scout report will already tell you "so and so is a lot better than our current best striker", "probably be the 3rd best striker in the squad should he join".

There are all kinds of currently implemented systems that will tell you if a player is a star in the league, just like in real life. Form, average rating, goals, assists. In those situations the star rating wouldn't be needed.

Like i said, the star rating i believe is based off the players hidden Ability attributes. Now think of the players like an RPG character or something, the higher the current ability, the more points a player has to spend in their attributes (positioning, tackling), now those points might be spread throughout terrible stats given their designated position (think of a defender with no marking ability or positional sense). Now with the star system, i believe they would still be rated pretty highly, because the hidden attribute of ability is high. This doesnt really mean they would be any better than what you have, you actually have to put the effort in to compare them.

Likewise, there have been players in past games who have not great ability, but have really well spread stats and produce effort way above what their star rating would suggest.

Whichever system you wanted to implement, the current one, or a new one, if your scout comes to you and tells you about a 4 star+ player, if you don't at least take a look at them, their stats, their form then i don't really know what to suggest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Look, I do everything that you are suggesting. I would have a pretty miserable time playing the game if I didn't.

Your last post highlights why I somewhat value the star system - and anything the game tells me about my players for that matter. Regardless of my perception of a player - based on performances, my interpretation of his screen of 1-20 attributes etc - the game places a certain value on that player. If that value is limited to the player's ability alone, and not the placing of their attributes, then I am disappointed.

I may have one striker that has scored 20 in 10, and another that has scored 1 in 10. This would lead me to believe that the prior is a better player, however it may be that he is simply having a run of form that will never be reproduced and the latter is completely out of form. This is why I would like a star system that indicates to me the player's ability relative to the league standard. I have had 5* rated players, that appear to have excellently weighted attributes, perform horribly for me throughout the seasons. A rating that compared them abilitywise to the rest of the league would let me know whether they were simply never performing to their ability, or my perception of them was wrong and that in FMland they are actually bad players relative to the league.

I guess it all boils down to a feeling that what I perceive as a well attributed player, may not necessarily be the same as a player that the game interprets to be so.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A rating that compared them abilitywise to the rest of the league.

You are missing the entire point.

How do you set a figure for what you are suggesting. By what metric do you measure what the ability of the league is (that isn't already in place?).

Are you saying there should be an arbitrary system where if you are in the premier league, anybody above 170 CA is 5 star, 160-170 is 4 star 150-160 is 3-star etc etc. (presumably this is the system already in place which tells you "good player", "leading star" anyway).

How does that actually help you? At the most it gives you avery specific range that the player's ability is in (the point being that you're not really supposed to be able to tell for definite what this is), you might as well just use a 3rd party application to ascertain this information.

A system like that still doesn't really address the issue of comapring the strength of your players against the strength of other players in the division. It is a purely theoretical system that hold no value. (for instance, that would rate a coked up Adrian Mutu, Berbatov, a fat Adriano, Benzema, Van Persie and Frederic freakin Kanouté as all being the same skill).

As the game progresses, how do those arbitrarily set figures actually reflect the standard of player in the league? What if the standard or regen declines? What if the league becomes less popular and the good players are less inclined to play in that league?

Unless you make it a system that some how averages out dynamically all the abilities of the players currently active, it's not really useful. At which point, how do you judge which players to include or not young developing players will bring the current average ability level down, therefore skewing the results.

Do you have to break all this information down further to specifically position based? What about a league that produces sensational attackers but terrible goalkeepers and defenders. If you base it on average ability across the board, then the defender you have might look decidely poor compared to average skill, but in reality, he is the best defender in the country.

The current system works two fold, the star rating of your player is relative to the club reputation, the club reputation is tied to how successfull they are within a league (which again has a defined world wide reputation).

The system you describe is literally already in place in a round about way.

I have had 5* rated players, that appear to have excellently weighted attributes, perform horribly for me throughout the seasons

Personality, morale, determination, consistency, temperament, does he only relish the big games, are all influencing factors. That 5* player might have an ability of 180 and be rated 5* in comparison to the rest of the league. What good does it do you? It's not suddenly going to make him play well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless you make it a system that some how averages out dynamically all the abilities of the players currently active, it's not really useful.

That's exactly what I'm suggesting. You just said it would be somewhat useful. We both agree that the current system is not very useful. Yes it would be more complex to implement than the current system, I've already said it would be difficult. It's like we agree on everything.

I'm not entirely sure how to define players that would be included in the algorithm, its past 2am here and I'm somewhat tired, but I'm sure something could be arranged. Back in 2007 I remember Genie Scout rated players out of 100% based on their attributes, it was surprisingly 'accurate'. Players deemed good in real life were at the top of the list. Such a system, while somewhat subjective, could work - it would certainly be better than crudely rating players by their CA. I haven't used the program since but perhaps it has even improved.

Perhaps you would deem this too much information, I'm somewhat inclined to agree. But the initial post in this thread stated that world class players weren't being rated as 5 stars - something somewhat confusing to people that do not understand the intrasquad nature of the current rating - my suggestion could have players rated as 5* in the top flight while not causing the problem that Matt outlined.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You just said it would be somewhat useful.

Eh? No i didn't. I proceeded to explain why i thought it would be a tonne of effort for no real information gain.

Perhaps you would deem this too much information, I'm somewhat inclined to agree. But the initial post in this thread stated that world class players weren't being rated as 5 stars - something somewhat confusing to people that do not understand the intrasquad nature of the current rating - my suggestion could have players rated as 5* in the top flight while not causing the problem that Matt outlined.

Yet nearly every single other person agrees, once they understand the concept (which is basically all common sense) that the current system works perfectly fine for the purpose it is intended for.

This could go on forever, i could post more about how your particular system doesnt work, but that's about it. The current system works fine for what it is intended to represent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So when you said unless it did this it would not be useful - the bit I quoted - you were playing a cruel joke on me? I'm really sad now.

You've said you find no use in the current system, I suggest an alternative, you take no interest in it, that's fine. I would find it useful for the style of game I play, far more so than the current system which tells me everyone is 5*, but whatever. Like I said, I don't *need* it. The system for distinguishing players I'm suggesting would work, it already does in 3rd party programs, so your views on its functionailty are rather irrelevant - other than not agreeing that it could have a place in the game. Let's agree not to agree.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You've said you find no use in the current system

I make my own mind up about the relative merits of my players. I guess i like to think it's part of being a football manager

far more so than the current system which tells me everyone is 5*

Your system still would for top of the division clubs, like Real and Barca whose players do all rate in as the best in the league, but that leaves no room for the truly world class to stand out.

Like i said, current implementation works fine for what it is intended (there is more to the game than can be expressed by the big list of numbers, GenieScout works out a % value of how good a player could be in a position. It cannot predict whether he will play well or not, be successful or not)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...