Scouts are too good. Discuss.

Firstly, I am not a hater. I adore this game and I think Fm11 is the best of the series so far. Just wanted to clear that up. Yet there is one thing that is really frustrating me. I posted this in the wishlist thread, but then realised it was more of a discussion topic and I was interested to see if anyone disagreed.

I would like the scouts to be worse. I would like them to have preferences.

I think they are a little too accurate. If I have a great scout and and I see a player and go "wow" and send my scout toodling along he goes "meh, 2 and half stars" on the report card and I'm like "huh, why?"

but because I know the scout is excellent, with the appropriate 16-20s, and he can see things that I can not see I trust him more than myself. This is not well done. I would like, even if they scout a player for 3 or 4 matches, that the star rating given can be off by up to one and a half stars for a 20-rated scout, and more stars for a weaker rated scout. In real life, clubs scout players for a long time before beginning any transfer proceedings. Naturally, there will be players who just shine out but the attributes do this well enough for you. I would like my scouts to, yes, be good at unearthing the hidden attributes, but this should take time, and a fair bit of it. Nothing is stopping you getting him to watch a few matches, taking his first few comments and then buying the player. The scout may indeed be correct, but I would like a far, far larger margin of error and I would like the scout to always have a chance, and a fairly decent one (20 rated scout for 3-4 months @ 80 percent chance of being right about hiddens/ratings)

For example, I ask my scout for a report card on a player and he comes back a tells me "great buy, consistent performer!" - how on earth does he know that!?

Scouts should take months and months to find out things. Even if a 20 rated scout spends 3 months tracking a player, there should still be a decent chance he's not totally correct. The star rating should also be out, I find it's way too accurate, both by my coaches and my scouts. I don't like the fact that every one of my staff thinks that Okan Altuntas (regen) is 3 and a half stars with 4 and a half star potential. I want there to be a much greater discrepancy in their ratings and the scouts ratings. I want to send two scouts out and one come back frothing at the mouth about this wonderkid WE JUST HAVE TO BUY and the other being like "he's pretty good". I would also like the scouts to have hidden attributes as well (do they?).

I would like those hidden attributes to mean they favour certain qualities in players. So some scouts would watch a fast player and be really, really excited because he favours them, whilst another scout would be looking for consistency and so on and be not so keen, whilst another scout only really pays attention if his target is doing tricks. There should be a professionalism element to it. Among legions of football fans and managers and players, people still fight over whether messi or ronaldo or kaka is better because we're all looking for different things are think different things are better in a player. If I ask Vinnie Jones to be my scout, I want him to come back with a list of suggestions demanding we sign Ryan Nelsen and Alan Smith and they will lead us to the title.

I think this above anything else would vastly improve the game for me. It would mean you would create your own backroom team around you who liked similar things in players.

But above all, the point of this post is make the scouts wrong and by larger distances than they are.

Thanks for listening. Discuss.

Great post, and I agree with all the points you made. Was thinking about it the other day as well. I stopped scouting players for 2-3 games like I used to, as the report card is good enough to tell if he is a good player or not. I might stilll scout an expensive player more times, but most of the time the rating and the information that the scout give me would be the same.

My scouts are rubbish, but when I do a team report and my Assistant Manager suggests players for my weakest postion, then I always go and pick them up, if I can, they are always excellent.

I agree with this, great post. Even scouts with awful stats rarely disagree by more than half a star.

I particularly like the idea of certain scouts preferring a certain type of player, and of creating a backroom staff that suits you.

Really good post.

There have been lots of threads in the past saying scouting should be much more difficult and far less accurate.

I also like your idea about different scouts having different preferences. It could be linked to their preferred formation/preferred style (GK/Defensive/Attacking/Fitness)

Totally agreed...

It's absurd having scouts accurately returning players' attributes in 1 or 2 viewing...

Also the fact they base their evaluation on the players' PA, with no actual emphasis on the current attributes...

I've had plenty of good scouts (>15JPA/JPP) recommending me some absolute lemons just because they had good potential... I mean, if you can see this 18yo guy has 2 SILVER STARS, is inconsistent, injury-prone and barely League One material, what's the point in recommending me to sign him because "he has potential to become a decent Premier Division striker".

Seriuosly... he has "potential" but he's so far behind schedule there's little point in trying to get something out of him anymore... By the time you have turned him into a barely adequate backup his original potential will be out of reach already.

Scouts should take MONTHS to get a player's profile right, and even then there might still be something they can't know... And of course the PA thing should get toned down a lot...

A scout should not be able to "see" the PA, but just base his report on what he can see at the moment, and then "guess" how much potential the guy has, according to performance/attributes and of course to the scout's "sixth sense"

As it is now, scouting is just one step away from using third party software to find good players...

I think it's a case of who you are in the game tbh. I'm Arsenal in season 2015/16 and all my scouts tell me about are superstars. Naas, Negrado etc etc. I'd rather buy cheaper and make them into superstars, than pay 40 million quid for a hit or a miss really.

The scouts potential ability ratings are alot of mince I think aswell. Any player can become good.

Completely agree with the OP and RBKalle. The fact that scouts can see a player's PA is outrageous IMO. The scout should make a guess based in current ability, mental traits, strengths, weaknesses and performances. It should be impossible to predict a player's potential, even if you have the best scouts in the world. How on earth would they know that the injury-prone, inconsistent and unprofessional 18-year-old League Two backup striker has potential to become a great Premiership player?

It would almost add a whole new dimension to the game if scouts and backroom staff favoured different types of players! SI, are you reading this?

But until they revamp the scouting system remember this:

Scouts judge players based on CA and PA. We judge players based on attributes and performances and that is what counts in a match. A player can have a high CA, meaning a great star rating, and still play horribly because of unbalanced attributes, bad mental traits or whatever, while a player with low CA (compared to your league) can play very well because of great attribute distribution, great mental traits or a tactic that suits that particular player well.

Awesome.. great OP and a thread where everyone is agreeing.

Love it all and totally agree with it.

This is actually the main argument I've made against people thinking the PA system is flawed. If scouting wasn't so easy then there's more doubt about player potential when you scout them.

They can be quite off. The silly system of comparing them to your team with 3 stars being average means they can be well out. I just scouted a guy with 200 PA and my 20/20 scout gives him 2.5 stars.

Really they just need to overhaul the whole of youth development.

They should also have some thing where you can permanently station scouts and they can just tell you when a player is looking world class. Those scouts would just watch all the local league games and see who looks good over a period of time and then every 3 months or whatever give you reports.

It's great we've got a consensus going,

What can SI do that's manageable?

I don't think Scouts should see PA, that's just wrong. They could maybe have their "sense" which could detect broad range of PAs perhaps, like 160-200 is "could be a superstar" or 120-160 is "could be great" (assuming your scout is correct). I guess its important to factor in what is possible to code. I agree with the fact that if a player is lighting up League 1, they should be more excited.

Let's not get this thread swamped by a PA discussion. let's focus on the scouts.

I'm not a programmer, but...

Easy for SI to do, and hopefully they will do, is reduce the scouts accuracy and get them not able to see PAs, maybe just CAs and then they can go from there.

More complex is maybe include another attribute which tells you how good they are at unearthing hidden attributes and reporting them to you (Judging Mentality? or something...i leave it open....) and giving scouts player preferences (these would be hidden stats) that mean they would report preferentially on players than matched their own style of play. This would be PARTICULARLY AWESOME if you signed up one of your aging players as a scout, for arguments sake say Van de Vaart (who wanted to be a scout on my game at Swansea) and knew that, by signing him up, you've got a scout who prefers the same sort of player to himself, you imagine, so you cab basically go and task him to find another version of himself. If, upon becoming scouts, they gained this raft of player preferences, this should be fairly simple.

This player judging should definitely factor into the coaches as well.

Any more ideas. What do SI think?

It's great we've got a consensus going,

What can SI do that's manageable?

First I would like it if a half decent scouts report card wasn't all you needed to see all their attributes. Make us have to work to see all the attributes, have to scout him 3+ games or whatever. That would give us less time to decide if we want a player during a given transfer window. We couldn't get full reports on 20 people in 2-3 days, etc. That would be much better imo.

Second, either make the PA less accurate or just don't show the stars for PA only CA and have the scout give the 'thinks x can be a good/poor/etc player in y league'.

I would say that using words instead of stars is the same just a representation change rather than a system change. Using sentences instead of stars. But I agree with the other things you said wholeheartedly.

I would say that using words instead of stars is the same just a representation change rather than a system change. Using sentences instead of stars. But I agree with the other things you said wholeheartedly.

True enough... but what I meant by words instead of stars is by stating in such a way that we sit there and wonder 'what is he telling me here?' lol. Not as well thought out no, point is just to take the hard feedback of stars and make it more questionable so we don't really know what we're getting.

Just add in more sense of the unknown with scouting and players, that's what it comes down to. Right now the only unknown I have when scouting players is if I can't get a player to his maximum potential, fully developed players there's never any question as it if they are good enough for my team because it's so insanely easy to get all the info.

isn't this the way FML did things? or at least it was when I was playing it a couple of years ago, where the effectiveness of the scouting system/scouts would determine how accurate the star rating was and how quickly the report was compiled. I'm all for something like that, but essentially the stars or some other simple graphical rating system needs to be in place

Great post

The scouting module should definitely be the next revamp for future FMs. I'd like to see the following 4 things.

1. Implement a scouting director instead of managing and assigning individual scouts. Let the player assign a budget at the beginning of the season for scouting. All players in FM will have attributes and ratings available, but the accuracy will be dependent on the ability of scouting director, the budget assigned and player reputation.

2. Star system should be absolute instead of being relative your team, league, etc. Increase the number of stars if necessary or just use a 1-20 overall rating.

3. Attributes should be based on JCA of the scouting director. Currently, the stars system is subject to scouting errors, but the attributes are absolute.

4. Restrict scouts from having access to PA or any derivative like PPA. In FM10, you can use an editor to change PA and the scouting stars will change immediately, even though there's no change to stats, CA, reputation, etc. Base scouting potential only on CA and hidden attributes.

The scouting module should definitely be the next revamp for future FMs. I'd like to see the following 4 things.

1. Implement a scouting director instead of managing and assigning individual scouts. Let the player assign a budget at the beginning of the season for scouting. All players in FM will have attributes and ratings available, but the accuracy will be dependent on the ability of scouting director, the budget assigned and player reputation.

Is this how it really happens in real life though? think it's more realistic how it is where you make board requests. CM tried this type of thing didnt they where you decided on how much to invest and where, or was that more of an academy situation as opposed to scouting?

2. Star system should be absolute instead of being relative your team, league, etc. Increase the number of stars if necessary or just use a 1-20 overall rating.

at the moment there's 9 ratings, thats more than enough for me, and as long as people understand that its relative to what you already have at your disposal then the star system itself is fine imo

3. Attributes should be based on JCA of the scouting director. Currently, the stars system is subject to scouting errors, but the attributes are absolute.

the first bit doesnt make much sense to me, do you mean with a better "scouting director" your whole scouting team becomes better? Yes the stars system is subject to scouting errors, how it should be.

4. Restrict scouts from having access to PA or any derivative like PPA. In FM10, you can use an editor to change PA and the scouting stars will change immediately, even though there's no change to stats, CA, reputation, etc. Base scouting potential only on CA and hidden attributes.

If you base potential only on CA and hidden atts then there's no room for leeway. The fact is PA is an estimate, which is why players are given a - rating until they become "established"

If SI just added the option of removing the Report Card Only scouting, I think that would be enough.

If SI just added the option of removing the Report Card Only scouting, I think that would be enough.

Good start... beginning to bigger and better things, but not that and 'we're done' type of thing. Don't think that's what you meant, but just being clear.

The scouting module should definitely be the next revamp for future FMs. I'd like to see the following 4 things.

1. Implement a scouting director instead of managing and assigning individual scouts. Let the player assign a budget at the beginning of the season for scouting. All players in FM will have attributes and ratings available, but the accuracy will be dependent on the ability of scouting director, the budget assigned and player reputation.

Not really keen on this one, we want to make scouting harder not easier.

Giving assignments to scouts is very quick now and even with 15 odd scouts it shouldn't take you longer than 10 minutes a season to hand them out.

2. Star system should be absolute instead of being relative your team, league, etc. Increase the number of stars if necessary or just use a 1-20 overall rating.

Two different options (Absolute & relative) both with pluses and minuses.

FWIW I think SI made the right choice using a relative system. We already have 10 levels but even using an absolute system at low levels all players would be less than 1* making it difficult to identify the better players.

3. Attributes should be based on JCA of the scouting director. Currently, the stars system is subject to scouting errors, but the attributes are absolute.

Attributes subject to scouting errors, not something I've seen suggested before usually people go for attributes being revealed slowly the more times a player is scouted.

Would like to see it take longer to reveal a players attributes but I have nothing against scouting errors on attributes either although I suspect this wouldn't go down that well with a large portion of the community.

4. Restrict scouts from having access to PA or any derivative like PPA. In FM10, you can use an editor to change PA and the scouting stars will change immediately, even though there's no change to stats, CA, reputation, etc. Base scouting potential only on CA and hidden attributes.

This would involve an overhaul of the scouting system which in general we would like to see but we would need a way for scouts to make a judgment and I'm not convinced CA/hidden attributes/age would be good enough.

I would like it if we could choose between three different "levels" when we want to scout a player:

1. Scout watches player for a match or two and finds out the player's strengths and weaknesses.

2. Scout watches player for 4-5 matches and uncovers most of his playing attributes but hidden attributes remain unknown.

3. Scout watches player for more than 6 matches and eventually uncovers all attributes.

Heh, probably a shock to him... but I totally agree with all Cougar's responses above.

Sometimes you get players who peform really really well consistantly, but the coaches only rate them on there stats I think, like I had a youth player who I blooded through while also going up the leagues and in the championship he got like 10 goals in 16 apperances and still only had 1 star according to my coaches which I dont think is an accurate system. Also it annoyed me that once id left the club that player hasnt been played since.

Spot on post, in particular the time it takes to get such a decent prediction from just about any scout is weak. All you need is but a single scout and you can send him snooping and investigating all over the world in but a couple of days, in-game time, no budget and planning issues intervening at all. But if this ever changed, players who spend the first twenty-four hours of each new save on random-clicking the database to eventually get their 4th tier side promoted all the way to the top-flight via the neverending shortage of solid talent hidden in between the mass of mediocrity might start complaining.

That it is even possible for any manager to hire and fire entire squads to replace them with a load of unproven youngsters without any pressure is another area that likely needs some work. It's made easier since players roughly know where to random-click at: the U teams, for example.

It shouldn't be that difficult to implement...

1) Prevent scouts from seeing the PA value... The star rating is based on

* Current attributes

* Mental traits

* Age

* In-game performances

* Negative PA (as in the pre-game editor)

Basically instead of having the scout "reading" the exact PA, it should get reconverted into one of the 10 Negative groups.

For values overlapping different -X groups, it's up to the JPA attribute of each scout...

This way the aforementioned "unproven 19yo kid with 170PA but with 100CA and horrible personality" would just get a more sensible report, something on the tune of "he's lazy and inconsistent, but he has passable skills. There's some potential in him but he's a loooong shot".

2) Different outcomes depending on how long the player is scouted

* Report card only: no attributes are visible, just the incomplete octagon (or a grade for each attribute group... E.g. Physical: C, Defending: C-; Attacking: B+ and so on).

* 1-5 matches: the octagon and the grades get more accurate, some basic attributes start to appear.

* 6-10 matches: complete octagon, accurate grades. Most attributes are shown, but still with a tolerance (depending on the scout's JCA)

Once again, there's no way a scout should be able to totally "get" a player he hasn't seen before...

Of course that process works for total unknowns and newgens... Clearly if you're managing in EPL you don't need to scout Rooney or even Rodwell over and over to get them right.

But if you want to know whether Generic Brazilian Guy is good or not, it MUST take your scout a while to get the whole picture.

I remember a while ago, in FM09 I think, I looked through all the Argentinian first division clubs looking for gems. I found Diego Buonanotte, saw which clubs were after him (biggies) and signed him to my team virtually unseen. Oh joy! 100k or something for an unknown player (for me) that my scouts didn't know about or plain missed! Good times...

Now, this is not necessary at all.

Until we know how the AI actually scouts players and rates players, it's a bit premature to make any changes to the way Scouts report back to the human user.

AI uses PPA - a perceived potential ability based on a number of variables, not the actual PA value.

If SI just added the option of removing the Report Card Only scouting, I think that would be enough.

No. If you dont like it just dont use it. SI is right to use the report card for people who have busy lives and dont have time to micromanage.

No. If you dont like it just dont use it. SI is right to use the report card for people who have busy lives and dont have time to micromanage.

TBH if you have a busy life and don't want to micromanage FM really isn't the game for you.

FM is at its best when you take your time rather than racing through seasons with one supertactic.

No. If you dont like it just dont use it. SI is right to use the report card for people who have busy lives and dont have time to micromanage.

Has nothing to do with micromanagement and everything to do with not getting all the info about a player without the scout actually scouting them at games.

Not going to slow your game down any more, just means you don't get the info about the player until they play games, hence you move the clock.

Not sure if this has been mentioned:

When a scout scouts a player I'd like his report card to be based on his recent performances and not just attributes. If he's played 5 games and scored 7 goals, then it should be mentioned in his report.

It shouldn't be that difficult to implement...

This way the aforementioned "unproven 19yo kid with 170PA but with 100CA and horrible personality" would just get a more sensible report, something on the tune of "he's lazy and inconsistent, but he has passable skills. There's some potential in him but he's a loooong shot".

I haven't played FM2011 enough to comment but FM2010 (might even have been FM2009? - it was more noticable when we got the relative star ratings cannot remember what version that came in) pretty much did this - the scouts would report the PA they think the player would get to based on circumstances instead of what they thought the players actual PA was.

Has nothing to do with micromanagement and everything to do with not getting all the info about a player without the scout actually scouting them at games.

Not going to slow your game down any more, just means you don't get the info about the player until they play games, hence you move the clock.

The problem with that is that it'll then be impossible to scout players who don't play in active competitions or are free agents.

The problem with that is that it'll then be impossible to scout players who don't play in active competitions or are free agents.

This..and the fact that the players have track records that scouts would be aware of.

You should always get data, even if they don't play - but it should be much less accurate if they don't.

You should always get data, even if they don't play - but it should be much less accurate if they don't.

Agreed.

You can loan players out to inactive clubs/leagues and you'll still see them gain stats in matches 'played' anyway. SI just have to expand that to scouting if they changed it.

Whatever the variables are that are calculated in scouting, they don't appear to include the players hidden mental traits; Professionalism, Ambition and so on.

I've edited a few players repeatedly (scouting for a mid-table German club) and the only factor regarding the player (other than CA and PA) that appeared to alter his Potential rating was his age. At aged 15, he was 4.5 stars, at 18 he was 4 stars, at 21 he was 3.5 stars, which is what i would be expecting really.

When changing his actual PA value and only this value, the Scout report picked up on this and his Potential rating was increased to 5 stars. Sneaky

Age is one of them.

I believe PA is used in some form to calculate PPA, but it really shouldnt be.

I have no issues with using CA in the PPA value though.

Whatever the variables are that are calculated in scouting, they don't appear to include the players hidden mental traits; Professionalism, Ambition and so on.

I've edited a few players repeatedly (scouting for a mid-table German club) and the only factor regarding the player (other than CA and PA) that appeared to alter his Potential rating was his age. At aged 15, he was 4.5 stars, at 18 he was 4 stars, at 21 he was 3.5 stars, which is what i would be expecting really.

When changing his actual PA value and only this value, the Scout report picked up on this and his Potential rating was increased to 5 stars. Sneaky

You are told of the players hidden mental traits in the upper left box.

You are told of the players hidden mental traits in the upper left box.

Not really since the personality descriptor only refers for 1 or 2 hidden attributes at most.

But you get a little more idea in strengths and weaknesses.

Age is one of them.

I believe PA is used in some form to calculate PPA, but it really shouldnt be.

I have no issues with using CA in the PPA value though.

Hmm...I'm trying to think of a way for this to be implemented. Realistically, scouts/coaches/managers/etc. are going to look at a player's age and where their abilities are at currently, and use that as a baseline to predict their future ability. The concept of a pre-determined PA seems to work against this, however. Should we really have any idea of how good a player can be by the age of 21 or so? The world is filled with players that never made the next step up from the youth levels, whereas there have been plenty of players that have good careers without being thought highly of at such a young age.

Perhaps one solution could be to limit the accuracy of a scout's take on PA the younger a player is? A person scouting a 30 year-old should be able to judge whether or not the player will develop much further with a fair bit of accuracy. But an 18 y.o. (or younger)? That should be more of a crap-shoot.

Do not turn this into another "replace PA" thread please (warning for everyone).

The actual PA doesn't need to come into a scout report at any point. It should work like it does in life - ability based on age and attitude.

Hmm...I'm trying to think of a way for this to be implemented. Realistically, scouts/coaches/managers/etc. are going to look at a player's age and where their abilities are at currently, and use that as a baseline to predict their future ability. The concept of a pre-determined PA seems to work against this, however. Should we really have any idea of how good a player can be by the age of 21 or so? The world is filled with players that never made the next step up from the youth levels, whereas there have been plenty of players that have good careers without being thought highly of at such a young age.

Perhaps one solution could be to limit the accuracy of a scout's take on PA the younger a player is? A person scouting a 30 year-old should be able to judge whether or not the player will develop much further with a fair bit of accuracy. But an 18 y.o. (or younger)? That should be more of a crap-shoot.

This is the basis for the whole scouting situation, you're just focusing on PA... it's too easy to know everything about a player with a quick scouting report, all the attributes, weaknesses/strengths, their PA. It's all to easy, makes me wonder why people even bother using editors to look at the stuff.

You are told of the players hidden mental traits in the upper left box.

You've misunderstood, i was pointing out that with all hidden mental traits set to positive and all traits set to negative, there was no difference in how good the Scout thinks the player can become.

Obviously the human player can look at those traits however and factor them in themselves.

Perhaps one solution could be to limit the accuracy of a scout's take on PA the younger a player is? A person scouting a 30 year-old should be able to judge whether or not the player will develop much further with a fair bit of accuracy. But an 18 y.o. (or younger)? That should be more of a crap-shoot.

This makes a lot of sense.

I agree with most of the points raised by the OP, this is a module that could use a real overhaul as it currently makes snapping up young talents way too easy.

Some similar issues raised here: http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php/249168-Poaching-youngsters-a-bit-too-easy

I partly agree, but you have to mind other side of the story too. Scouting is mostly side part of the game for many players. Often it's easier just to check forums to find talented youngsters.

I understand the desire of OP to turn scouiting to more deeper, realistic in-game feature but don't forget that so are press conferences. Once you think that it would be great idea, but after 3 seasons you understand how annoying it is that you have to ask 3-10 game match reports from your scouts to get the same result that you once got with just report card. If it ruins your game experience, it's not worth it.