20 isn't enough

Don't some people think that 20 in stats is too easy to get? lets see how many players have 20 dribling in the game, but in real-life right now, for anyone that watches a lot of football, can see that players like messi, are just on a different level.

I swear there should be like an extra attribute stat, like upto 21, but the difference between 20 and 21 should make a huge difference. This should also be very rare, that only very few players can have it, in recent times, only legends have had that ability, yet in football manager, there seem to be many players with 20 dribbling. T'm sure people would agree, that some players look impossible to stop in real life, but in the game, they become any other player.

Don't some people think that 20 in stats is too easy to get? lets see how many players have 20 dribling in the game, but in real-life right now, for anyone that watches a lot of football, can see that players like messi, are just on a different level.

I swear there should be like an extra attribute stat, like upto 21, but the difference between 20 and 21 should make a huge difference. This should also be very rare, that only very few players can have it, in recent times, only legends have had that ability, yet in football manager, there seem to be many players with 20 dribbling. T'm sure people would agree, that some players look impossible to stop in real life, but in the game, they become any other player.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JCx:

Don't some people think that 20 in stats is too easy to get? lets see how many players have 20 dribling in the game, but in real-life right now, for anyone that watches a lot of football, can see that players like messi, are just on a different level.

I swear there should be like an extra attribute stat, like upto 21, but the difference between 20 and 21 should make a huge difference. This should also be very rare, that only very few players can have it, in recent times, only legends have had that ability, yet in football manager, there seem to be many players with 20 dribbling. T'm sure people would agree, that some players look impossible to stop in real life, but in the game, they become any other player. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

20 is plenty - if you have it like pro evo -with 0-100, then it just gets silly as who can really spot the difference between a 90 and a 91?

20 allows enough resolution and still allows the players to be scouted with a good degree of accuracy.

Also remember that the stats should not be taken individually - take finishing for example - there are a number of stats that control the quality of a shot in FM, hence the actual number of possible combinations are substantially more than 20.

NB: 20 is a substantial improvement over 19 - hence the likes of messi and ronaldo do perform as well as they wold IRL.

well maybe not ronaldo - because IRL he's starting to take the **** out of the rest of the premiership

*insert spinal tap joke here*

20 is enough, but 20s need to be made rarer

I totally agree Kill Rock.! (wow @ being first team.! I've never seen you post before)

There was talk about a year or so ago the a "special talent" 20 could be rewarded with a * -(I.E - Walcott Pace = 20*) - but you may just as easily put 20's rare.

20 is well enough.

I 100% agree with this. Its easier to state it like this. The difference between a superstar and a worthless youth is a lot more than 20 times in any one category. Even 100 really isn't enough, but it's a lot easier to properly represent with a 1-100 scale than it is on a 1-20. Even if the devs simply multiplied the current modifiers by 4 and left it up to the fan-base to make a more accurate playerbase it would be enough. This is something that HAS to be done for 2009 - it should have been done for 2007, and than 2008. I know there are lots of "old-timers" who like the exisiting system. But i'd wager that the vast majority of players would like to see a bigger, and easier to identify with scale.

On the same subject, perhaps a compromise could be reached. There could be an option for "advanced" or "basic" stats - the advanced would allow for the 1-100 stats, while the basic would only have a 1-20 sheet set. Lots of extra work for the developers, but would help the fans out immensely.

The game stores it between 1 and 100 and probably processes it as such. Between 1 and 20 is just what's visible.

I have a vague recollection of someone from SI posting on here that their user research and feedback indicated that the majority of gamers were comfortable with 1 to 20 and anything more just leads to overload (don't quote me on this though as my memory isn't what it used to be )

In any case in the majority of scenarios it isn't one attribute acting in isolation. For your example it isn't a case of 20 dribbling = top class dribbler.

It's dribbling + balance + agility + technique + flair (just my opinion on it).

Small database, English leagues, start of game, Arsenal's scouting knowledge yields 4003 players:-

dribbling >/= 17 => 164 players

(dribbling >/= 17)+(balance >/= 15) => 33 players

(dribbling >/= 17)+(balance >/= 15)+(agility >/= 15) => 21 players

You see as the combination of attributes that makes a good dribbler increases, the number of players that meet those criteria decreases.

It wouldn't hurt them (and prolly would help them) to try it for a year and see what happens -- worst case they release a "reduction" patch that puts it back to 1-20 -- best case they have a lot of happy fans.

It's already out of 200, 1-20 is just much easier on the eyes.

20 is enough. What sets the Messi's and Ronaldo's apart from the pack is flair, pace, acceleration, creativity, decisions... not one more single attribute taking their dribbling to 21.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NepentheZ:

I totally agree Kill Rock.! (wow @ being first team.! I've never seen you post before)

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Its that little thing named off topic forum

In terms of attributes, I feel 20 is more than enough, yes 0 - 100 would show a more exact stat rating, but as someone said earlier it just makes it overkill.

Whatever way you look at it. It's still 100%

It's relative as been mentioned many times.

20 is more than enough for me. Like many others have said, it's a combination of attributes as well as hidden ones that make up a world class player, not a single individual attribute.

I also think 20 is enough. but less players should have it. I would give 20 for dribling only to cristiano.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mitja:

I also think 20 is enough. but less players should have it. I would give 20 for dribling only to cristiano. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So Messi wouldn't get a 20 in dribbling?

As has already been said it already is out of 200 but only shows up as 1 to 20. Hence that is why if you look in training it will say a person has improved in an area even if the number hasn't necessarily changed.

I personally think this is right, otherwise it would be too detailed and make it too easy to work out how good people are compared to others.

Perhaps the optionof having either 1 to 20 or 1 to 200 should be in there though so people can make their own choice.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> But i'd wager that the vast majority of players would like to see a bigger, and easier to identify with scale. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'd take that bet

20 is spot on. We all know it and let's be fair, there is alot of room for different talents. I thinks it's fine as it is.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NepentheZ:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mitja:

I also think 20 is enough. but less players should have it. I would give 20 for dribling only to cristiano. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So Messi wouldn't get a 20 in dribbling? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

not in dribbling (19). technique 20, flair 20. his dribbling isn't based on tricks like ronaldo. he just runs with ball

if the game use 1-100, most people would ignore the last digit anyway. So in effect you are actually limited the range to 0-9 (or 0-10 in some rare cases)

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mitja:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by NepentheZ:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mitja:

I also think 20 is enough. but less players should have it. I would give 20 for dribling only to cristiano. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So Messi wouldn't get a 20 in dribbling? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Would tricks not come more under flair combined with dribbling?

not in dribbling (19). technique 20, flair 20. his dribbling isn't based on tricks like ronaldo. he just runs with ball </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Neji:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> But i'd wager that the vast majority of players would like to see a bigger, and easier to identify with scale. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'd take that bet

20 is spot on. We all know it and let's be fair, there is alot of room for different talents. I thinks it's fine as it is. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

PureSim Baseball made this an option, actually.

You could choose 1-100, 1-20, 1-10, and 3-8.

As you might expect, the game got harder the narrower you made the range.

I mean, by the 3-8 range it was really tough to tell the difference between two players "just by looking at them", you really did have to look at their performances on the pitch (pun intended) to pick out who was better than who.

Where at the 1-100 scale, while you couldn't spot the difference between a 91 and a 90, at least you could spot a very big difference between a 95 and an 85, where both would have been "8's" in the 3-8 scale.

It was an interesting wrinkle, I thought - so don't be too quick to discard the idea!!

20 represents 100(%?)

If you use the FMM editor you'd see this