Why don’t SI show the CA and PA in the game?

[jams1234]

Just thinking, a lot of people use third-party tools. Because of this, why not SI include the CA and PA of players, but be able to hide it, just like attributes? Does no harm.

[aka.arrogantio]

Lots of people use third party tools to cheat by giving their club more money and making their players better. Maybe SI should include that in the game as an option as well ...

The fact that there are third party tools which enable them to do that should be enough.

[jams1234]

But the point is why make the need for 3rd party tools? Why not just have one built in the game and have the option to toggle it on or off.

[Deltaroad]

Why should there be a 3rd party tool?

When people play Call or duty do they have an option that makes them invincible or an option that allows them to have unlimited weapons?

[Mooks]

Yup, read it all and I still think it's an idiotic suggestion.

Well good for you. Please don't hesitate to share any other insightful and constructive opinions on this topic...

Isn’t this an issue with these forums at the moment.

This is a pretty good thread. Lots of different opinions but in general they’re being justified and backed up with a bit of thought and a degree of intelligence.

I’m really enjoying reading and being a part of it as I’m sure are the majority of other people.

It’s a shame that you feel the need to make personal attacks.

[sjm]

What you're essentially asking is "why can't I see what all other players are doing in RTS games without exploring?", "why aren't I told where my opponents are in Counter-strike?"

There's a "realism" argument to be made here too of course; there are many players touted as world beaters who never made in, and enough that suddenly come good after years of mediocrity.

But that's not the point. The attributes are hidden because it's one of those things your not supposed to know - like where your opponents are in counterstrike. Because knowing this hidden information takes away much of the challenge (and thereby fun) of the game.

Where's the satisfaction in bringing young players through the ranks that make it on the international stage if you were told all along that this was where they were heading. Or, conversely, the disappointment of letting a youngster go, only for him to run your team ragged 5 years down the line.

You are already, IMO, given enough information to make educated guesses of how much potential a player MAY have, but it's not infallible. Because you can't know for sure who's going to come good, it forces you to make contingency plans, which is partially what good management is.

Removing the fog of war in an RTS game also means you don't need to make contingency plans. You've nullified large portions of the game such as exploration (scouting in FM), unit diversity, as you don't bother building units that are weak against your opponent (similar to immediately releasing players with poor PA on FM) and so on. Part of the fun of the game is needing to explore and find your opposition, whilst preparing for a possible assault from an unknown location with unknown forces. Part of the fun of FM is going out an unearthing youngsters and developing them.

In FM, scouting, youth setups etc. would all be nullified. Imagine if when youngsters came through to the U-18s and you got a message telling exactly how good they were going to be in 10 years. Would you keep any of them that weren't going to be world beaters? Especially because you can just click on any player in the world, and just buy the 25 with the best PA right here and now?

Games NEED an element of surprise to stop them from being boring and predictable.

[Ossei]

If CA and PA was shown then, like other people have stated, the game would be far too easy. You would know exactly which youngsters to buy and therefore there would be no risk involved.

If you want to view the CA and PA of players then you can use a third-paty tool .

And therein lies the key to ending this debate. It's fine the way it is, if you wish to see more, there are tools to enable you do so. End.

[Mooks]

The reason why I asked the question in the first place was that I felt there was an inconsistency in the way information is relayed. Not that I have an issue with that. I was just asking what other people’s opinion on it was.

I wasn’t saying that you should be able to search like you can in 3rd party tool and just get a long list of all the players sorted by their PA.

I agree that you should still have to scout etc, that’s an essential part of the game.

I was saying that, one option may be that instead of a star rating and a bit of text indicating potential, why not, like a lot of the other information we’re given, isn’t it in a numerical format. Bear in mind (factoring out that a scout may get it a bit wrong), you get a pretty accurate idea of what a players PA is from the scout report.

So you may scout a player and get a 7 star rating for potential and be told that the player is a leading star for any side in the future. That’s not massively different from being told his PA is 175... is it?

Also don't forget that just because you know a players PA as a numerical value and not a star rating and explanation, doesn't mean the player by defalut will turn into a star player. It is what it says on the tin, Potential...

And of course, the new decimal point match rating isn’t very realistic is it.

But I like that, I like knowing more detail about my players and how they played, because I’m playing a GAME, I don’t think it’s real life...

Like I said in previous posts, if it’s realism you want, then maybe the attributes should also be indicated in a more general star rating, which could differ from scout to scout, as some scouts may be better at judging players fitness attribute or attacking attributes... Now that would be more realistic than knowing a player is 13 out of 20 for determination, or 18 out of 20 for tackling...

[Ossei]

Now that would be more realistic than knowing a player is 13 out of 20 for determination, or 18 out of 20 for tackling...

Ah but the marks out of 20 are an approximation, no?

The game reads them as numbers out of 100 but approximates them to a number out of 20 for the user right?

[playmaker]

The star rating is given in relation to your team. Seven stars for one team may be five for another. Which means you cannot judge exactly what their ability is, only whether they will improve your team.

The stars are not an inconsistency in display, they are a different type of display for a different purpose - comparison.

[robzilla]

Well good for you. Please don't hesitate to share any other insightful and constructive opinions on this topic...

Isn’t this an issue with these forums at the moment.

This is a pretty good thread. Lots of different opinions but in general they’re being justified and backed up with a bit of thought and a degree of intelligence.

I’m really enjoying reading and being a part of it as I’m sure are the majority of other people.

It’s a shame that you feel the need to make personal attacks.

Yeah you're right actually, this is the best thread ever.

Personal attacks :confused: :confused:

[iamweesel]

SI Dont show CA and PA in the game,as it will be too easy to get in playes then

[Mooks]

Yeah you're right actually, this is the best thread ever.

Personal attacks :confused: :confused:

Didn't say it was, I said it was a pretty good thread.

Again, did you read the post, or just make it up in your head to make a, as usual, constructive post yourself.

And you said my 'suggestion' was idiotic. Nice.

[fuzzimuzzi]

Yup, read it all and I still think it's an idiotic suggestion.

Agreed, never posted but really had to here.

Muzzi

[robzilla]

Didn't say it was, I said it was a pretty good thread.

Again, did you read the post, or just make it up in your head to make a, as usual, constructive post yourself.

And you said my 'suggestion' was idiotic. Nice.

Get over yourself. I didn't like your suggestion and I think it's idiotic, for reasons that many others have already stated. If you had thought it through before you started the thread you'd have realised that too and saved yourself the embarrasement.

I think I've already told you that I did read your post. I've read it about five times now and it doesn't seem any less idiotic now than it did the first time I read it.

I understand that you're feeling like a bit of a d*ck because of: (a) the idiotic nature of your suggestion and (b) the ridiculous contradiction in one of your subsequent posts, which I found amusing and pointed out, that was probably a bit mean so sorry about that.

If you think that for me to say that is a personal attack then... well you've got a strange idea of what constitutes a personal attack!

It's great that we've got a forum like this so that people can put ideas out there and we can all discuss them. Unfortunately that means that sooner or later you're going to come across someone who disagrees with your opinion, and you need to realise that that is perfectly normal and right. You can't have a situation where only people who agree with you are allowed to post messages. And however attractive that might sound, I reckon it would get boring pretty quick.

Anyway that's my two euro-cents worth, I hope you don't feel like that was another "personal attack", because it really wasn't.

[Themistofelis]

CA&PA are hidden because many hardcore forum members don't like the game to have options , also they don't want others to have/use options , they also want to dictate you what colour of underwear you shall use but luckily they can't .

Now leave and go make hits on their tactics/good players threads!

[robzilla]

CA&PA are hidden because many hardcore forum members don't like the game to have options , also they don't want others to have/use options , they also want to dictate you what colour of underwear you shall use but luckily they can't .

Now leave and go make hits on their tactics/good players threads!

Well done, you now have the most idiotic post in the thread

[aiston]

Why don’t SI show the CA and PA in the game?

FM is a game, and as a result, numerical values are given to players attributes and performances (amongst other things) so that the people playing the game can judge how good a player is and how that player is playing.

What I mean is, if it’s deemed acceptable to assign a value of 1-20 to a players ability to dribble, or his agility, then why not just let us also see values from 1-200 indicating the players Current and Potential Ability. And even a % rating for the players ability to play in certain positions.

It could be an option in the start up of the game, like attributes masking, so you could choose for yourself if you see the information regardless, or if the player requires scouting before his stats are revealed.

It has obviously been a conscious decision by SI not to show this information in the game, and I wondered what the justification / decision process was not to show this information, and of course what other peoples opinion of it was.

Would be far FAR too easy and would make FM pointless playing. Unless your the type of person that plays to win everything as easy and as quickly as possible.

[Themistofelis]

some hardcore forum members will even go as far as personal attacks when you post something they don't like , this also contributes to the fact that CA&PA are hidden

[GillsMan]

Can we all stop with the petty insults please? No need. I don't agree with the OP either fwiw, but it is possible to disagree and be constructive with it, too. Cheers, GM.

[Nomis07]

Hmmmmmmmmm I generally hate CA/PA debates. I don't think it should be in the game because if you want to know it you can use the editor or Genie Scout, they almost act as a tick box for whether you want to know or not, so there is no need for it to be added to the game directly.

[GillsMan]

At the OP's request I'm closing this. I think we pretty much all agree on this issue anyway. There's room for improvement on the CA/PA side of things in FM, I'm sure, but not spelling out the precise CA and PA. I'm not 100% convinced that was what the OP was trying to say however.