Jump to content

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Giangy said:

A problem that I'm picking up every year. Football Manager that scale of ratings has, compared with those whose we are used to seeing attributed by the press?

sufficiency = 6,7?

good? 7?

poor? 5 or more?

You can usually warn/fine a player for less than 6.4 so thats a poor game.

6.6/6.7 is average.

6.8-7.00 is the min I try to aim for over a season from a player.

7+ is good performance.

 

It also depends on position though.  For FM17 it was tough for a GK or DM to average more than around 7 even on a good season.  For a striker who scored goals though they would be much closer to a 7.5 average.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Cougar2010 said:

You can usually warn/fine a player for less than 6.4 so thats a poor game.

6.6/6.7 is average.

6.8-7.00 is the min I try to aim for over a season from a player.

7+ is good performance.

 

It also depends on position though.  For FM17 it was tough for a GK or DM to average more than around 7 even on a good season.  For a striker who scored goals though they would be much closer to a 7.5 average.

OK, all right. Also I have always done this consideration. 

But it doesn't seem right that the rating of a player can be so different depending on the position on the pitch. Furthermore, the count of assist is terrible. Players who touch the ball for the last several seconds before, that become assist man because then the striker score on a ground stroke. And that assist goes to give a bonus to the player's rating.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Balanced player ratings have been a big issue for me since FM17. In my opinion the ME favours back four defenders, therefore GK and attacking players on average score lower ratings. (especially GK's and wingers)

Apparently this issue has been better balanced when you are running leagues in full match detail, however.... the balance issue is still there with simulated leagues.

I believe the problem has been acknowledged by SI and is under investigation pending a fix (I hope so)

Edited by Weller1980
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the biggest issue is that we're used to see player ratings in the press, and that those, although on the same 1-10 scale, differs from what we're given in FM. Technically, I believe that those in FM are more accurate, as they're solely based on computed stats from the game, while those in the press are the subjective opinion of 1-2 journalists/"experts".

What could be done in FM, is to make the game use a wider portion of the scale more often, and clarify what's really considered "abysmal"/"bad"/"below average"/"average"/"above average"/"good"/"great", and also try to tune the scale so that a similar rating for different positions reflect the same level of performance, and not that 6.9 is "good", while 6.6 is "average" and 6.3 is "bad".

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Cougar2010 said:

You can usually warn/fine a player for less than 6.4 so thats a poor game.

6.6/6.7 is average.

6.8-7.00 is the min I try to aim for over a season from a player.

7+ is good performance.

 

It also depends on position though.  For FM17 it was tough for a GK or DM to average more than around 7 even on a good season.  For a striker who scored goals though they would be much closer to a 7.5 average.

Not quite completely true regarding defender ratings

FM17 was giving back 4 defenders high ratings to the point that they were dominating the top 20 averatings in the leagues. My repeated soaks in FM2017 appeared to highlight that DL's were getting high ratings

This was also true of FM18 prior to launch but has been resolved at launch but only for leagues where the full ME is being run. This issue currently persists for simulated matches and is being investigated by SI

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, MrPompey said:

Not quite completely true regarding defender ratings

FM17 was giving back 4 defenders high ratings to the point that they were dominating the top 20 averatings in the leagues. My repeated soaks in FM2017 appeared to highlight that DL's were getting high ratings

This was also true of FM18 prior to launch but has been resolved at launch but only for leagues where the full ME is being run. This issue currently persists for simulated matches and is being investigated by SI

Interesting, I can't say I look much at league stats but now you mention it I think there was a few threads on the subject.

My experience from playing is that a DC will score around 6.6-6.9 if the team concede and 6.9-7.2 if they keep a clean sheet on average.  Without gaining a goal or assist its rare to see a defender score 7.5+ but much easier for attacking players.

I'll have a look at my save later.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The key bit is that currently the adjusted ratings element will only work for leagues where full ME simulation is being run. You can  change this from preferences e.g. if you are running the top 4 english leagues its likely that full ME is only being run for the league you are managing in.

When you complete a season where you have run the launched ME1809 for the full season have a look at the top 20 ratings for your league, I think you will see a better spread of player positions in there. It will be interesting how accurate you view the players in there but at least its not dominated by defenders currently

For simulated ME matches the issue is still under review.

I agree that match ratings do take a massive jump for players scoring a goal but isn't that true irl? That lazy strikerr you have been cussing for 70 minutes then gets a goal, or a match winning goal then he is your favorite player and had a great game haha :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't played FM18 yet (waiting for my salary of this month before I buy), but are goalies still underrated? In FM17 I could never get a goalie above a season average of about 6.85. Even with massive amounts of clean sheets. Same in earlier versions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 year later...
On 21/11/2017 at 12:38, treble_yell_:-) said:

Honesty just ignore them.  Unless a player scores a goal or gets an assist he's getting a poor rating ingame

Yes got a defender who failed to tackle twice and two goals thanks to him, still had the best points from the whole defence

Link to post
Share on other sites

I look more at average rating. 7+ I'm happy. Under, meh. Except GK, a bit under 7 can be ok depending on how we dominate.

But they don't have much room. Below 6.9 average is not enough for me.

In game, below 6.7 is not enough. Below 6.5 you get either warned, or sanctioned

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't know what a GK has to do to get over 7.2 in a game. Other than be your penalty taker I suppose...

As for what's good or bad, I just use the colour coding on the game. If it's red, it's bad and if it's green it's good. Neither of those and it's ok. I presume you can adjust at what point they change colour in Preferences or something, but I just use the standard.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
On 21/11/2017 at 11:38, treble_yell_:-) said:

Honesty just ignore them.  Unless a player scores a goal or gets an assist he's getting a poor rating ingame

Not true. I have a central midfielder in my current save who doesn't score many or get many assists. What he does do very well is break up opposition attacks and start our own attacks and he has an average rating in the region of 7.2

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...