Would using genie scout ONLY ON YOUR OWN TEAM be cheating? I think not...

[Maidel]

I don't see it as that much of an overreaction - more like using a tackle to bring down Drogba when a touch to the shoulder will suffice.

Sorry, that's being utterly disingenuous and you know it. You are fixing a small omission by adding 100s of bits of information that you shouldn't have. That is not a proportional reaction.

[Gandy]

I don't see it as that much of an overreaction - more like using a tackle to bring down Drogba when a touch to the shoulder will suffice.

I like this example better

[x42bn6]

Sorry, that's being utterly disingenuous and you know it. You are fixing a small omission by adding 100s of bits of information that you shouldn't have. That is not a proportional reaction.

No, I'm saying we should know something about personalities, possibly extremely granular, and Genie Scout perhaps gives a little too much away. I don't think it does give too much away if you have been at the club for a long time because you should know player personalities by then.

I'm also saying a manager should be able to roughly predict where PA is outside of watching games, and this is an area where it possibly gives too much away.

Overall, I don't think it's too overkill.

Let's not forget that these attributes are not the be-all and end-all of everything - knowing too much may not really have much of an effect.

As for the bold part, there is no need to assume bad faith on my behalf. I can do that myself if necessary, thanks.

[Maidel]

You can honestly tell me, hand on heart, that you think genie scout DOESN'T give away too much information??

I'm sorry, that's just plain ridiculous. Using genie scout on just your own team allows you instantly assets if your youth players are worth keeping. No young player would ever slip through your grasp again.

It is 'cheating' plain and simple (or cheating yourself or whatever phrase you want to use). There is utterly no justification based on 'the game should give u's a little more information'. You go from missing a little bit to having EVERYTHING.

[x42bn6]

You can honestly tell me, hand on heart, that you think genie scout DOESN'T give away too much information??

I'm sorry, that's just plain ridiculous. Using genie scout on just your own team allows you instantly assets if your youth players are worth keeping. No young player would ever slip through your grasp again.

It is 'cheating' plain and simple (or cheating yourself or whatever phrase you want to use). There is utterly no justification based on 'the game should give u's a little more information'. You go from missing a little bit to having EVERYTHING.

The game not giving too much and the game giving too little are both issues.

I just think having Genie Scout's information is closer to reality.

-------|--------------------|-----------|---------> Information
  The Game              Reality   Genie Scout

You could argue there's too much information for the already-present attributes anyway. You won't know how determined a player is until you go behind in a match, you won't know how influential a player is until you see him several times on the pitch and in the dressing room, you won't see how good a player's crossing is until you see him in a game being closed down. I would argue this is flawed reasoning - you roughly know these, and you roughly know potential and personality - so why is one shown but the other two hidden from a pure manager's perspective?

[Maidel]

You could argue there's too much information for the already-present attributes anyway. You won't know how determined a player is until you go behind in a match, you won't know how influential a player is until you see him several times on the pitch and in the dressing room, you won't see how good a player's crossing is until you see him in a game being closed down. I would argue this is flawed reasoning - you roughly know these, and you roughly know potential and personality - so why is one shown but the other two hidden from a pure manager's perspective?

My issue is not with those attributes, which are marginal at best - but rather that genie scout will give you not only a players potential, but also his potential within each given position and is all but perfect. That is the issue, not whether or not a players definately loyal or not.

[x42bn6]

My issue is not with those attributes, which are marginal at best - but rather that genie scout will give you not only a players potential, but also his potential within each given position and is all but perfect. That is the issue, not whether or not a players definately loyal or not.

I don't think this is a problem. Genie Scout extrapolates a player's attributes if weighted to their potential, and a player will not change his best potential position as a result. This means that if a player is best at left-wing right now, he will be best at his potential at left-wing.

And it all depends on how you use Genie Scout. Clearly not all the functions of Genie Scout will be "realistic" - i.e. it is possible to sign a player, save under a different name, Genie Scout him and if he's not good enough, open the other save - for example.

[Maidel]

Right, so you are saying its all ok based on the fact that once in a while a player might just happen to be better as a AMC rather than the AML that they currently are and thus it means that GS is all ok to use.

Im sorry - this is getting farsical now. The game is set up in a certain way, with certain attributes hidden so that the game is not ridiculously easy. If you use GS you basically say 'SI dont know what they are doing, this is how I will play the game'

Thats fine, go ahead and play the game however you want to, but if you are using additional tools to play the game - you ARE cheating yourself, irrelavent of how you want to spin it or whatever semantic arguement you want to make about it being 'closer' to reality.

[x42bn6]

Right, so you are saying its all ok based on the fact that once in a while a player might just happen to be better as a AMC rather than the AML that they currently are and thus it means that GS is all ok to use.

Im sorry - this is getting farsical now. The game is set up in a certain way, with certain attributes hidden so that the game is not ridiculously easy. If you use GS you basically say 'SI dont know what they are doing, this is how I will play the game'

Thats fine, go ahead and play the game however you want to, but if you are using additional tools to play the game - you ARE cheating yourself, irrelavent of how you want to spin it or whatever semantic arguement you want to make about it being 'closer' to reality.

I suppose one day you could argue that all attributes should be hidden so that the game isn't too easy too? That way you will be forced to discover a player's attributes by playing them.

I suspect we'll have to agree to disagree here but I still believe a manager should know something about potential and something about personality, and hence they should be exposed in some way.

As for "cheating", I believe it's only fair in this regard considering computer managers have JPP and JPA, and that Wenger is a good judge of talent in real-life (hence it is possible for a manager to judge a player's talent). So I'm gaining an advantage I should have had in the first place.

Using Genie Scout does not imply I have to use every single function of Genie Scout, too. I could hide columns, for example.

[Maidel]

I suppose one day you could argue that all attributes should be hidden so that the game isn't too easy too? That way you will be forced to discover a player's attributes by playing them.

Well the game already DOES this - the stats are faded out until you scout them - just as it should be.

I suspect we'll have to agree to disagree here but I still believe a manager should know something about potential and something about personality, and hence they should be exposed in some way.

How can you possibly say they dont? Thats a crazy thing to say. Yes we dont have our own 'individual' ability to see potential, and I have already said that this is slightly odd - however we have plenty of ways of seeing a players potential - scouts and coach reports - its all there. And as for personality - well 99% of it IS visable through the players personal page and coach reports - you really are bending the facts with your statements.

As for "cheating", I believe it's only fair in this regard considering computer managers h JPA, ave JPP andand that Wenger is a good judge of talent in real-life (hence it is possible for a manager to judge a player's talent). So I'm gaining an advantage I should have had in the first place.

You are swaping a (possible) disadvantage for an insane and perfect advantage - As I have said before, you go from having a rough idea, to having a perfect fact down to 0.5% (PA out of 200) which is CHEATING, not redressing a disadvantage.

Using Genie Scout does not imply I have to use every single function of Genie Scout, too. I could hide columns, for example.

Well above you have already stated that you want to 'redress' the percieved disadvantage of not being able to see PA - thus you are enabling the column which is the biggest cheat.

You can say all you want about 'agreeing to disagree' and I have said you can play the game however you want, it is your money and your game after all - but I cannot agree to disagree with simple facts.

[x42bn6]

Well the game already DOES this - the stats are faded out until you scout them - just as it should be.

I'm talking about your own players.

How can you possibly say they dont? Thats a crazy thing to say. Yes we dont have our own 'individual' ability to see potential, and I have already said that this is slightly odd - however we have plenty of ways of seeing a players potential - scouts and coach reports - its all there. And as for personality - well 99% of it IS visable through the players personal page and coach reports - you really are bending the facts with your statements.

We have options to view this information, but where does it come from? Scouts.

You cannot, by yourself, judge PA - you have to be a scout. This is unrealistic, surely? You may not be a perfect scout but you can judge ability. You can ask for a report card from a scout which reveals hidden information but cannot view this yourself.

You are swaping a (possible) disadvantage for an insane and perfect advantage - As I have said before, you go from having a rough idea, to having a perfect fact down to 0.5% (PA out of 200) which is CHEATING, not redressing a disadvantage.

Well, considering PA may not definitely be reached, it's not 0.5% at all.

It's a little more information than is realistic, but like I said, I feel it's closer to realism than having no information at all.

Too much information may be better than too little information considering a player may never hit his PA at all.

Well above you have already stated that you want to 'redress' the percieved disadvantage of not being able to see PA - thus you are enabling the column which is the biggest cheat.

See above

You can say all you want about 'agreeing to disagree' and I have said you can play the game however you want, it is your money and your game after all - but I cannot agree to disagree with simple facts.

The only fact is that you don't agree that too much information can be better than having too little.

I simply advocate that it's more accurate (if not perfectly accurate) to use Genie Scout in some circumstances, and that this is an improvement on the less accurate (if not perfectly accurate) current set of circumstances.

[sjm]

We have options to view this information, but where does it come from? Scouts.

You cannot, by yourself, judge PA - you have to be a scout. This is unrealistic, surely? You may not be a perfect scout but you can judge ability. You can ask for a report card from a scout which reveals hidden information but cannot view this yourself.

I still stand by my original statement that you can to a certain extent judge this. What makes you think there are no clues?

I can't speak of FM2011 that much, as I haven't played enough seasons, but in past editions of this game there were millions of clues as to whether a player had potential or not. You just need to use the information at your disposal to form you own opinion.

If you want, I can list loads of pointers to high potential, but it'd have to be about FM2006, as that was the last version I played for enough seasons.

I can't understand what's holding you back from forming your own opinion. Why don't you just form one? Of course you won't always be right, that's the fun part. But that's also why this info is at your disposal: so you can form your own opinion. You don't have a JPA rating, because you are playing the game. If you're good at identifying talent, you'll identify them; if you suck, you'll suck. You don't need the game to perform this for you.

And as I asked before: How does being given the exact value of PA constitute "forming an opinion"?

[Maidel]

The only fact is that you don't agree that too much information can be better than having too little.

Well yes, equally I could say before taking an exam the more information about what is on the exam paper the better - but HAVING THE EXAM PAPER before hand is cheating and that is identical to using genie scout.

I simply advocate that it's more accurate (if not perfectly accurate) to use Genie Scout in some circumstances, and that this is an improvement on the less accurate (if not perfectly accurate) current set of circumstances.

No, its simply not. There is no instance (other than testing) where this is the correct and proportional answer.

And as I asked before: How does being given the exact value of PA constitute "forming an opinion"?

Everything else you said is also true - but I just wanted to repeat this question as it is the most pertinant one and one that he wont be able to answer without avoiding the question to trying to claim that genie scout is merely a rough guide as not all players will reach their PA.

[Smurf]

The game doesn't give you enough information on players to make informed decisions.

Genie Scout/FMRTE gives way too much information away.

It's completely up to anyone on how they play/approach the game. Nobody is really cheating as that would involve fooling someone else. Sit down and play the game whatever way you want and don't worry if anyone else thinks you're cheating. Enjoy the game the way you like to play it.

You can't really cheat in a single player game. It's completely up to you and your taste on how you play.

[x42bn6]

I still stand by my original statement that you can to a certain extent judge this. What makes you think there are no clues?

I can't speak of FM2011 that much, as I haven't played enough seasons, but in past editions of this game there were millions of clues as to whether a player had potential or not. You just need to use the information at your disposal to form you own opinion.

If you want, I can list loads of pointers to high potential, but it'd have to be about FM2006, as that was the last version I played for enough seasons.

How about the situation where you have no scouts and a player is generated and has played no first-team football?

A scout can form an opinion on his potential - heck, you just tell him to form a report card on him, and you get stars for potential.

I wouldn't kid myself into thinking a manager has the same amount of information to make a decision upon as a scout - a scout has the rough abstraction of "having seen him before being generated", via things like being scouted before and through previous trials when younger.

All a manager has, essentially, is "CA" abstracted through attributes.

I can't understand what's holding you back from forming your own opinion. Why don't you just form one? Of course you won't always be right, that's the fun part. But that's also why this info is at your disposal: so you can form your own opinion. You don't have a JPA rating, because you are playing the game. If you're good at identifying talent, you'll identify them; if you suck, you'll suck. You don't need the game to perform this for you.

Because an opinion without any information is nonsense.

You can form an opinion on a player without any meaningful information. The point is that we don't have the same amount of information as the scout, so our opinion is worthless.

An analogous idea is chess. Say you are playing chess against an opponent who can see the entire board, while you can only see your own pieces. You have just started the game and have made a couple of moves each. Here, the scout is your opponent, while the manager is, well, you. The scout can form a much better opinion of the game because he has all the information on the board, while you don't really have much - just your own pieces.

You are suggesting that we can go about making an opinion anyway. Which is rubbish - if I guess this player is absolutely world-class, and I get it right, it is purely down to luck and nothing else. There's no skill involved - my JPP isn't going to increase because it's nothing to do with skill. It is analogous to the chess game where I predict I'm going to win and I do - but we have only made a few moves and a few moves tells us very little about how the game is going to pan out, especially since I can't see my opponent's moves.

In a chess game where both sides can see the whole board, we may not be able to make equal use of the information (i.e. I may be rubbish at chess compared with my opponent), we still have the same amount of information on the board.

This is why I think it's not possible to form an opinion compared with a scout. You lack information compared with your own scouts, even if you are a better judger of talent. A scout has an abstract method of other information beforehand - you simply have attributes. An opinion formed with this isn't an opinion - it's a haphazard ballpark estimate, like me predicting lottery numbers. Meanwhile, the scout is predicting lottery numbers - out of a choice of 5 numbers.

It's silly to think that this is fun - you can't get better at it and you can't get worse, because you have so little information to base your decisions on.

How good a player will become is only partially dependent on how good they are now. Talent is much, much more than just how good you are now.

And as I asked before: How does being given the exact value of PA constitute "forming an opinion"?

It doesn't, but I feel it's closer to reality than having no information at all.

Too much information is not necessarily worse than having no information at all.

Undershooting is not necessarily worse (or better) than overshooting.

etc. etc. etc.

Well yes, equally I could say before taking an exam the more information about what is on the exam paper the better - but HAVING THE EXAM PAPER before hand is cheating and that is identical to using genie scout.

However, there exists another student, let's call him "Scout Boy", who already has the exam paper and is busy using this information to make his answers correct (and the exam is called "Lionel Messi scouting report, age 15").

Scout Boy may not have the whole paper, of course. He might have just the first few pages because that was all he could nick before the teachers came into the staff room. i.e. Imperfect information.

This imperfect information represents things like previous trials, previous scouting reports and agent talk - which you do not have access too.

Ignoring the logical fallacy of appeal to emotion (i.e. cheating - but there is nothing morally wrong with using an editor for a video game ()), the issue is whether you are entitled to look at the whole exam paper when Scout Boy has some of the pages.

The question is whether you the manager have access to the same amount of information as Scout Boy - i.e. do you have access to scouting reports on Lionel Messi as a youngster, or have access to various agents and contacts who would have given you information on Lionel Messi?

Do you have more information than him? It is possible that you have contacts Scout Boy doesn't have. Fergie talks to various other Premier League managers - does the head scout talk to them? It is possible Fergie knows more about a player than a scout!

So the question comes down to whether having this exam paper in your hand is more realistic (not morally worse - appeal to emotion) than having no exam paper at all, given Scout Boy (and his friends) all have bits and bobs of the exam paper already, and that having bits and bobs of the exam paper is actually the aim - because you want to use this information to know Lionel Messi's talent!

No, its simply not. There is no instance (other than testing) where this is the correct and proportional answer.

See above.

Everything else you said is also true - but I just wanted to repeat this question as it is the most pertinant one and one that he wont be able to answer without avoiding the question to trying to claim that genie scout is merely a rough guide as not all players will reach their PA.

Answered above.

[milnerpoint]

Even after all that i still think getting more info on players would make it FAR too easy to tell which young players were going to make and and which are not, there should not be definitive scouting system, even if it is your ability to judge players. The game makes it very easy as it is, anything more would make it almost pointless employing scouts for me. Using Genie scout to find out PA and CA is definitely what would be classed as cheating but in this game there really isnt cheating as your only cheating yourself in the long run and there's nothing wrong with that at all.

[x42bn6]

Even after all that i still think getting more info on players would make it FAR too easy to tell which young players were going to make and and which are not, there should not be definitive scouting system, even if it is your ability to judge players. The game makes it very easy as it is, anything more would make it almost pointless employing scouts for me. Using Genie scout to find out PA and CA is definitely what would be classed as cheating but in this game there really isnt cheating as your only cheating yourself in the long run and there's nothing wrong with that at all.

Of course not - the reality is that a manager should be able to see "star ratings" for a player just like a scout can give "star ratings". There needs to be a way that a human manager can "develop" his JPP attribute (or, of course, make it worse). This could be based on a manager's transfer business for promising youngsters - how good is he actually?

The fact that PA is easy to reach is a problem, but not because we are able to see something we shouldn't be allowed to see.

[i3rooker]

There is no justification. In real life judgements about players are all subjective. You might think your 15 year old Seamus Coleman will become the white Cafu someone else in the club might not. Knowing their precise potential as a number on a scale is completely ridiculous as you do what a mate of mine does and release 9/10ths of his youth squad immediately after they are generated because they don't have a high enough PA (150+ he wants). It's definitely cheating.

One thing that could make it easier is maybe for your own players your coaches and scouts could estimate what the fully developed player might look like. I've used FM Scout in FM10 and the ability to see what they might look like at full potential is a great tool. Something similar could be useful on your own players as like you mention the star system is far too vague.

I love how you make an argument saying its cheating then contradict yourself in the next paragraph by saying you user it do do essentially the same thing. Parred.

[milnerpoint]

Of course not - the reality is that a manager should be able to see "star ratings" for a player just like a scout can give "star ratings". There needs to be a way that a human manager can "develop" his JPP attribute (or, of course, make it worse). This could be based on a manager's transfer business for promising youngsters - how good is he actually?

The fact that PA is easy to reach is a problem, but not because we are able to see something we shouldn't be allowed to see.

to me that would make the point of scouts useless, what would be the point if you could already get that info on a player. In reality managers dont scout players, they hire people to do this, managers will then look at videos and game of players to make up their own mind but the majority of the information they recieve on a player will come from someone else, i personally feel this is reflected in the game, i would hate to have a PA or CA number on a screen of player, the stars alone i feel are almost too much, like i said i find it very easy to find very good young players in the game any more info would make it as easy as signing big name players on the market at the moment. But then thats just my feelings overall.

[x42bn6]

to me that would make the point of scouts useless, what would be the point if you could already get that info on a player. In reality managers dont scout players, they hire people to do this, managers will then look at videos and game of players to make up their own mind but the majority of the information they recieve on a player will come from someone else, i personally feel this is reflected in the game, i would hate to have a PA or CA number on a screen of player, the stars alone i feel are almost too much, like i said i find it very easy to find very good young players in the game any more info would make it as easy as signing big name players on the market at the moment. But then thats just my feelings overall.

It wouldn't make scouts useless - two opinions are always better than one, and scouts can scout players while you are managing a match (or, indeed, scouting another player).

[Maidel]

It wouldn't make scouts useless - two opinions are always better than one, and scouts can scout players while you are managing a match (or, indeed, scouting another player).

That again is a side issue, because using genie scout DOES make your scours irrelevant as their 'opinion' is useless compared to the absolute fact that genie scout gives you.

I know we are talking specifically about only using it on your own team, but that completely makes all star ratings and coach reports irrelevant.

Your posts are full of arguments around the topic, but you never actually answer the important questions, you just babble on about scout boy. Please answer these questions directly, no analogies or comparasons:

1) is it realistic for a manager to know conclusivelyhow good his players can be?

2) is it realistic for a manager to know exactly how goo his player is right now?

3) is it realistic for a manager to know exactly how their 'mind' works?

In order for all your above arguments to be valid you have to answer yes to all of those because that's what using genie scout on your own team gives you. However if you do answer yes to all those questions then you are telling us that managers are both mind readers and clairvoyant.

Therefore it is not 'more realistic' to use genie scout.

[x42bn6]

1) is it realistic for a manager to know conclusivelyhow good his players can be?

No, but Genie Scout does not imply that (i.e. PA may never be reached)

2) is it realistic for a manager to know exactly how goo his player is right now?

Perhaps not exactly, but mostly yes

3) is it realistic for a manager to know exactly how their 'mind' works?

Perhaps not exactly, but mostly yes (depending on how long the manager and player have been together)

In order for all your above arguments to be valid you have to answer yes to all of those because that's what using genie scout on your own team gives you. However if you do answer yes to all those questions then you are telling us that managers are both mind readers and clairvoyant.

I'm just going to throw this back at you...

(The alternative is that the game is wrong and not providing us with enough information to model what is happening in real-life - my argument)

Therefore it is not 'more realistic' to use genie scout.

See above

[x42bn6]

The reason I use analogies is that they are easier to understand if you step away from the problem and look elsewhere.

Contrary to popular belief, you do not have to defend SI!

[Maidel]

No, but Genie Scout does not imply that (i.e. PA may never be reached)

Perhaps not exactly, but mostly yes

Perhaps not exactly, but mostly yes (depending on how long the manager and player have been together)

I'm just going to throw this back at you...

(The alternative is that the game is wrong and not providing us with enough information to model what is happening in real-life - my argument)

See above

I knew you wouldnt be able to answer straight yes or no questions...

1) Yes, genie scout does give you the players maximum potential (how good a player CAN be) which is what I said in the question - I never said thats how good he WILL be.

But basically, you agree with me that using genie scout is not realistic? I am not going to debate with you about whether I produced a false dilema or not - that was kind of the point...

I have freely admitted that the game does not provide all the information it should do - I am not some sort of SI appologist! But you have taken the arguement so far the other way (that genie scout is more realistic than the game) that I thought the only way to make that clear was to make it impossible for you to defend your position, which I think I have done because again you have to resort to half answers and semantics.

[x42bn6]

I knew you wouldnt be able to answer straight yes or no questions...

Because they're not questions that can be answered with a straight yes or no.

1) Yes, genie scout does give you the players maximum potential (how good a player CAN be) which is what I said in the question - I never said thats how good he WILL be.

Hence me saying no?

But the sticking point is that knowing this value is closer to reality than not knowing anything.

But basically, you agree with me that using genie scout is not realistic? I am not going to debate with you about whether I produced a false dilema or not - that was kind of the point...

A false dilemma is a logical fallacy. By asking me to decide between two choices, you conveniently left out the third answer which you knew I was going to answer. So if that was the point, why are you debating me in bad faith?

I have freely admitted that the game does not provide all the information it should do - I am not some sort of SI appologist! But you have taken the arguement so far the other way (that genie scout is more realistic than the game) that I thought the only way to make that clear was to make it impossible for you to defend your position, which I think I have done because again you have to resort to half answers and semantics.

I don't agree they are half-answers. Examples and counterexamples are valid debating tactics when trying to debate logic.

I never said it was more realistic. I said it was closer to realism than not knowing at all, in the same way that knowing exactly how a computer chess AI will play is more accurate than knowing nothing about chess to begin with; in the same way that reducing attributes like crossing into numbers is more information than is realistic because we do not use an explicit numerial interpretation in our heads; in the same way that knowing computational limits of some mathematical models allows us to exploit the AI's inadequacy in any game, not just Football Manager...

Too much information can sometimes be better than too little information. I do not think that we can make up the lack of information by suspending imagination and thinking it is fun. There is no skill when estimating with no information - it is purely down to luck, which clearly scouts do not abstract from.

[milnerpoint]

Their is luck involved in real life, no body in the world can predict the future, no one can tell if a player will become good or not, doesnt matter if they are the greatest 16 year old the world has ever seen, come 21 they may be working in McDonalds. What you are suggesting is taking away the risk factor, if i can see what PA a player has then i will make my decisions based on that, what would be the point in wasting time with any player with a PA below a certain value, as i say it would make scouting completely pointless and would make finding youth very boring. It would also make youth development very predictable, yes there may be slight changes based on personality but on the whole you would be able to tell from the first second a player appears in the game if he was going to make it you the level you want or not, again why would you want to make the game so boring and predictable?

[x42bn6]

Their is luck involved in real life, no body in the world can predict the future, no one can tell if a player will become good or not, doesnt matter if they are the greatest 16 year old the world has ever seen, come 21 they may be working in McDonalds. What you are suggesting is taking away the risk factor, if i can see what PA a player has then i will make my decisions based on that, what would be the point in wasting time with any player with a PA below a certain value, as i say it would make scouting completely pointless and would make finding youth very boring. It would also make youth development very predictable, yes there may be slight changes based on personality but on the whole you would be able to tell from the first second a player appears in the game if he was going to make it you the level you want or not, again why would you want to make the game so boring and predictable?

Not really, because players may not hit their PAs.

I dispute it will be less fun and more boring - it may be more exciting for a manager to see a young talent and try and get him up to scratch - something he may have been less enthusastic about had he been less talented.

The actual gameplay simply shifts to something else.

A coach can generate a star rating for PA; a scout can generate a star rating for PA. Therefore a manager should also be able to generate a star rating for PA. PA largely influences how good a player will become, therefore knowing something PA can be considered realistic. Not knowing PA can therefore be considered less accurate than knowing PA, given that PA may never be reached. Therefore PA may be considered accurate to be looked at.

[milnerpoint]

Not really, because players may not hit their PAs.

I dispute it will be less fun and more boring - it may be more exciting for a manager to see a young talent and try and get him up to scratch - something he may have been less enthusastic about had he been less talented.

The actual gameplay simply shifts to something else.

A coach can generate a star rating for PA; a scout can generate a star rating for PA. Therefore a manager should also be able to generate a star rating for PA. PA largely influences how good a player will become, therefore knowing something PA can be considered realistic. Not knowing PA can therefore be considered less accurate than knowing PA, given that PA may never be reached. Therefore PA may be considered accurate to be looked at.

your missing the point no one in the world can predict for certain how good a player will be, no one i dont care if your the greatest manager in the world you will never be able to do this. You can think he may get to a certain point based on what you see at the moment but thats it, getting to see PA completely takes away the fun of trying your best to get your young players up to scratch. The fun part is not knowing how good your player can be and working hard with him to either succeed or fail because of his hidden stats, if i was able to see PA i would just release all of those not near the number i am looking for, where as the way it is now i can have a great regen with a poor PA or a rubbish player with a great PA, i dont know this until i spend a few years working with the player and see how they react to games and training, if you gave me the PA i just wouldnt bother with most of my youth team, there would be no point even trying to get them into your team if you knew they could only reach a level not good enough for your first team.

[x42bn6]

It sort of fits in with my idea that PA should be dynamic, but I'd like to avoid that talk for now...

PA is an abstraction of talent plus various other factors - I believe a manager can judge talent (as can scouts and coaches), and that talent is the main driver of this. Therefore knowing PA is slightly overkill but reflects the fact that talent can be judged - possibly accurately - and that knowing it is therefore not as bad as some think.

Would it make it less fun? I don't know - knowing player X is more talented than player Y doesn't necessarily make the game more or less fun - you will always tend to giving player Y more chances to make it in real-life anyway.

[Smurf]

I think the game doesn't give you a fair chance to find youngsters. And scouting youth players can be quite difficult.

It really shouldn't be that hard. Most decent clubs with a scouting network have their ways of finding players, with links through other clubs etc.

I wish the game had a better way of dealing with looking at the potential of players. Because in fairness, some players just have it naturally, Fabregas, Rooney, Ronaldo, Ronaldinho, Maldini, etc. all clubs knew they'd be stars and central to their team in the future.

But when you look at the bigger picture here, within the game you don't get enough info on players to know if they will are coming on as players and if they are improving, or if they are surpassing the player in the current position.

A nice note from the Ass Man could be, Neymar is currently playing to the same ability as your current left winger and games in the first team would be beneficial.

I know you see that from time to time but it's nowhere near as often as it could be.

I'd much prefer 100 messages regarding the improvements/decline of players than see 100 news messages about international mangers that got sacked all in the same day.

[milnerpoint]

It sort of fits in with my idea that PA should be dynamic, but I'd like to avoid that talk for now...

PA is an abstraction of talent plus various other factors - I believe a manager can judge talent (as can scouts and coaches), and that talent is the main driver of this. Therefore knowing PA is slightly overkill but reflects the fact that talent can be judged - possibly accurately - and that knowing it is therefore not as bad as some think.

Would it make it less fun? I don't know - knowing player X is more talented than player Y doesn't necessarily make the game more or less fun - you will always tend to giving player Y more chances to make it in real-life anyway.

the tool to judge talent is already there, thats why we can see stats which dont exist in real life, in real life you watch players in training and games, especially when they are young, you cannot do that in FM for very obvious reasons.

[x42bn6]

I wish the game had a better way of dealing with looking at the potential of players. Because in fairness, some players just have it naturally, Fabregas, Rooney, Ronaldo, Ronaldinho, Maldini, etc. all clubs knew they'd be stars and central to their team in the future.

I'm not sure anything was definite, to be honest... Rooney could have turned into a hugely angry man who went around booting players and getting pointless sendings-off - to the point where managers couldn't trust him in big games and he might have turned into the next Kevin Muscat instead, for example. Ronaldo could have become a one-trick pony. Maldini could have suffered a serious injury as a youngster.

I do sort of agree with the rest of your post, of course. One day I would like to be able to do a player search and have some form of abstraction of potential - be it the actual PA value or some star ratings - maybe smilies! - on the list, but this abstraction is based on the manager, not the scout. If you want scout ratings you can compare them side-by-side - if they differ vastly, and your scouts are all JPA/JPP 20, you may want to reconsider the fact you find young Titus Bramble to be more promising than Rio Ferdinand, for example. But this exposes the ability for a manager to rate a player's potential - which I don't find unrealistic nor unreasonable.

[Smurf]

I just rate my players my Ass Man rating.

Play the players with most Current ability. I play the potential ability when in cup games or non important games. And I scout players and sign them when the scouts report 4.5 or 5 stars.

All I'm going by is star ratings and comparing players from time to time. I sold Cristico for 16m because I had a young lad with more stars and he was 29. So I cashed in.

[x42bn6]

the tool to judge talent is already there, thats why we can see stats which dont exist in real life, in real life you watch players in training and games, especially when they are young, you cannot do that in FM for very obvious reasons.

The fact we cannot do this in the game should therefore be abstracted - we should have some blocks of information to make up for it. At any point in time, a manager has some information about a player - imagine this is a "block" of data. A similar sort of "block" therefore exists when a player is generated, representing the manager's own knowledge of the player. It could be a lot - it could be nothing. This should be part of the tool for looking at player's talent - not just games, which may well never happen for certain youngsters whom you are not in control of.

Yet even if the player doesn't play games, when they are generated, you see lots of "Wnt" statuses everywhere! Clubs are interested! Why? Because the scout has this "block" of information which you do not have.

[Smurf]

i'm not sure anything was definite, to be honest... Rooney could have turned into a hugely angry man who went around booting players and getting pointless sendings-off - to the point where managers couldn't trust him in big games and he might have turned into the next kevin muscat instead, for example. Ronaldo could have become a one-trick pony. Maldini could have suffered a serious injury as a youngster.

I do sort of agree with the rest of your post, of course. One day i would like to be able to do a player search and have some form of abstraction of potential - be it the actual pa value or some star ratings - maybe smilies! - on the list, but this abstraction is based on the manager, not the scout. if you want scout ratings you can compare them side-by-side - if they differ vastly, and your scouts are all jpa/jpp 20, you may want to reconsider the fact you find young titus bramble to be more promising than rio ferdinand, for example. But this exposes the ability for a manager to rate a player's potential - which i don't find unrealistic nor unreasonable.

this ^^^^^^^^^^^^

[BossAsianMafia]

I like your idea about manager having their own opinion on a player's PA (note to Maidel: I think this is his point. I don't think he's saying that PA as a number should be revealed), since it reduce our dependence on the Ass Man (I'm worried that the quality of the Ass Man has too much influence on squad management). But I think it should not be based on how successful he has been in judging youngsters as it would be a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Maybe a function of the state of the youth facilities and number of youngsters brought through to the first team over his career?

[Smurf]

If I signed 5 youth players that turned out to be world class players, I'd expect my abiltity within the game to grow and see the potential of young players for myself. Maybe not as a numerical value, but some sort of representation that I know from experience that this player will be hot.

You as the manager should have a formulated opinion on players, not just rely on reports.

[BossAsianMafia]

If I signed 5 youth players that turned out to be world class players, I'd expect my abiltity within the game to grow and see the potential of young players for myself. Maybe not as a numerical value, but some sort of representation that I know from experience that this player will be hot.

You as the manager should have a formulated opinion on players, not just rely on reports.

How would you be able to know which 5 youth players to sign in the first place?

[Smurf]

It was only an arbitrary figure.

Say if I sign players and they turn out to be crap, surely then when I scout and look at other players I can tell if they are better or worse than what I have.

And if I sign a really good youngster and do this over the years, surely my ability to pick out a good youngster should be reflected.

At the moment you only get the Ass Man Report and the Scout Reports. But your own ability to pick and buy players for the team should be reflected.

My Ass Man could recommend a player to me that is PA of 160. He gets 5 stars.

But in my track record I've been signing players with PAs of 130. So now that gets knocked back to 3.5 stars, simply because in the past I've not been good at judging players.

But if I had been signing players of 170 and my scout recommends a 160 player, then my rating of the player would affect the scout rating.

If you get me?

[Smurf]

Just saying, if you're 2 or 5 or 10 years at a club you should be able to form your own opinion on players based on your own track record.

[milnerpoint]

surely tho in order to be a manger you would have some form of an opinion from day one, no one can go into football not knowing anything about it, even if it is a game.

[Maidel]

your missing the point no one in the world can predict for certain how good a player will be, no one i dont care if your the greatest manager in the world you will never be able to do this.

Im just repeating this to hammer in the point.

I dont care about anything else in this debate - saying it is more 'realistic' to use genie scout is saying that managers are all clairvoyant.

The game is not perfect - but 'breaking' the game is not the answer.

[milnerpoint]

Im just repeating this to hammer in the point.

I dont care about anything else in this debate - saying it is more 'realistic' to use genie scout is saying that managers are all clairvoyant.

The game is not perfect - but 'breaking' the game is not the answer.

exactly! there should be no easy way of predicting how a player will develop because it does not exist in the real world.

[GerdMuller]

If Alex Ferguson, Kenny Dalglish, Carlo Ancelotti , Arsene Wenger et al could use a real life Genie Scout, does anyone really believe they wouldn't!!!. Just witness this weeks signing of Darren Bent from Sunderland to Aston Villa. Bent puts a transfer request in on Sunday and the deal is concluded and finalised on Wednesday with an unwilling selling club, anyone who believes that Bent wasn't tapped up is extremely naive. Of course cheating goes on in real life and all the people here who profess that you are a lesser manager for using Genie Scout etc are not living in the real world. Your objective as a manager is to do the best for "your" club and to use all means at your disposal in order to achieve this. There is a lot of truth in the saying, "nice guys finish last" and anyone who takes that sort of attitude into your real life career will pretty soon find it out for their selves.

That is the biggest ...i have ever read...if you think using every loophole presented to you is realistic just because IRL managers try to use every loophole then you could also edit yourself only superstar players in the first place. Because if in IRL managers could do it the yowuld, wouldnt they? You seem to miss the point , this is a game and there to provide you a challenge that is close to the real life experience as manager. Thats why i dont understand why a lot of guys find it so great to cheat. I mean i agree, if you enjoy it do it, i never will understand how you can enjoy it though because it just can tigve you a sense of achievment. If the game is all numbers to you and you dont care about the feeling of being in a gameworld why dont you play a excel spread, you can cheat even better there.

I prefer to be a "looser" in game and real life, because knowing i achieve something maybe without cheating gives me a better feeling than being the best with cheating. Yes i know todays world doesnt support that , thas why it will be ****ed up totally soon.

Alos IRL managers know nothing about the future development of their players, so seeing actual attributes and a rather good future projection is even more info than real life managers have. Real life careers are a lot LESS predictable than in FM actually.

[Maidel]

That is the biggest ...i have ever read

HAHA - I missed that post!

I couldnt agree more with you Gerd.

[Smurf]

My point is that using Genie Scout is giving you the actual rating of players.

But I think the rating of a player should be reflected by your ability. If a player is 130 CA and 190 PA and you have a bad record with signings then he's refelected as 100 CA and 160 PA.

That way it's not giving away anything. The better you get at signing world class talent the closer the ratings become and more accurate. Of course it should never show you their real CA and PA. So if i was a good manager with excellent record in signing players then that player of 130 CA and 190 PA might show up for me as being 140 CA and 175 PA

I'm not saying CA and PA number should be used within the game. It's the best way I can illustrate what I mean.

[GerdMuller]

It was only an arbitrary figure.

Say if I sign players and they turn out to be crap, surely then when I scout and look at other players I can tell if they are better or worse than what I have.

And if I sign a really good youngster and do this over the years, surely my ability to pick out a good youngster should be reflected.

At the moment you only get the Ass Man Report and the Scout Reports. But your own ability to pick and buy players for the team should be reflected.

My Ass Man could recommend a player to me that is PA of 160. He gets 5 stars.

But in my track record I've been signing players with PAs of 130. So now that gets knocked back to 3.5 stars, simply because in the past I've not been good at judging players.

But if I had been signing players of 170 and my scout recommends a 160 player, then my rating of the player would affect the scout rating.

If you get me?

I like the basic idea of you devleoping ingame skills , but how does me signing a top player after another make me good at seeing talent in my players?

All in all i still say FM talent is much too dterministic anyway, lots of players at top level dont have high talent but still made a career with good performances, other highly talented ones we neve rheard of because they couldnt put it together. Things like these never happen in FM, talent is basically future skill more or less which makes the whole game a bit boring. I never understood the need for for a PA anyway, no one has any capped potential IRL, talents are all judged by their actual performance ATM. No one says: Well this guy is horrible but you know he will devleop into somehting big one day. No, future stars are marked as those because of their performance ATM. Maybe some have that "special something" to them, but those things are all in already in mental attributes. So no one needs PA, a 17 year old Rooney is just a 17 year old that has a lot of things already in place to play at the higgest level in his attributes.

[Smurf]

I'm not sure how it could be implemented or the best way to do it.

All I know is that I sign the top star players (4.5 or 5 star) from the scout reports. And at the end of each season I sell the lowest rated stars players in the team.

It's all a bit hit and miss at the moment. I don't blame people for wanting to use Genie Scouts. In the game it's just a bit hit and miss. You don't know what you're buying into when you sign a player. You get ef all feed back from staff on players progress.

Just trying to think of a way to implement your own managerial skills into rating the players to give a more accurate in depth analysis into what you're getting.

[Maidel]

I'm not saying CA and PA number should be used within the game. It's the best way I can illustrate what I mean.

But thats what the star ratings are in the game.

[milnerpoint]

plus it would be a scewed rating, for the first two seasons 90& of players signed in the game are real players, players we already know about and who we know are good enough, very little is left to chance. So you wouldnt really be developing any skills in for the first few years.