I didn't see this thread before posting a thread in the Database & Research board, so my suggestion might be more appropriate here:
As someone who uses the editor and watches a lot of football, I feel the current method of determining player potential (PA) is flawed.
Firstly, there is no way of conclusively evaluating a young player's potential to a single digit number. You could make the same argument about playing ability in general, but you have a lot more information for what each player can produce right now, and as a result, can accurately rate him. As far as potential goes, not even the highest paid pros can predict which under-17 player will turn into the best player.
I'm everyone realizes this, which is obviously this is why the editor has -X ranged potential values, but this leads me to my main problem; these ranged values aren't nearly flexible enough to evaluate player potentials. For example, if we were going by Premier League standards, -10 (170-200) means the player has the potential to be anything from an outstanding player to the greatest of all time, nothing less. -9 (150-180) means they have the potential to be anything from a good player to an outstanding player, nothing more, nothing less; they have no chance of becoming the goat like the -10s do. I think this method of determining potential leaves a lot of room for error. While I don't have any clear-cut examples on-hand, I'd imagine players like Robinho, Balotelli, Ganso, Saviola, Bojan, dos Santos, Wilshere, Cleverly and Joe Cole among many many others had a very high PA rating in previous FM installments, only to be lowered in future installments.
Bearing this in mind, my suggestion is to have PA ratings that cover a much greater range of values. There are probably thousands of potential "wonderkids" in the world that could be anything from a world class player to a League 1 scrubber, so why not have a range value that covers 100-170? How about a 140-190 for the massively hyped kids like Robinho?
Obviously this system has a critical flaw; there would be far too many high-PA players, but there's a solution to this: tie the probability for higher PA to exponential decay. If a player had a ranged value between 100-170, they would be more likely to roll a number on the lower end, with the probability of a higher number diminishing exponentially. I think something like this would be particularly good because it provides another layer of unpredictability; everyone's game would different and it adds to the game's replayability.
*Official* Editor Feature Requests
in Editors Hideaway
Posted
I didn't see this thread before posting a thread in the Database & Research board, so my suggestion might be more appropriate here:
As someone who uses the editor and watches a lot of football, I feel the current method of determining player potential (PA) is flawed.
Firstly, there is no way of conclusively evaluating a young player's potential to a single digit number. You could make the same argument about playing ability in general, but you have a lot more information for what each player can produce right now, and as a result, can accurately rate him. As far as potential goes, not even the highest paid pros can predict which under-17 player will turn into the best player.
I'm everyone realizes this, which is obviously this is why the editor has -X ranged potential values, but this leads me to my main problem; these ranged values aren't nearly flexible enough to evaluate player potentials. For example, if we were going by Premier League standards, -10 (170-200) means the player has the potential to be anything from an outstanding player to the greatest of all time, nothing less. -9 (150-180) means they have the potential to be anything from a good player to an outstanding player, nothing more, nothing less; they have no chance of becoming the goat like the -10s do. I think this method of determining potential leaves a lot of room for error. While I don't have any clear-cut examples on-hand, I'd imagine players like Robinho, Balotelli, Ganso, Saviola, Bojan, dos Santos, Wilshere, Cleverly and Joe Cole among many many others had a very high PA rating in previous FM installments, only to be lowered in future installments.
Bearing this in mind, my suggestion is to have PA ratings that cover a much greater range of values. There are probably thousands of potential "wonderkids" in the world that could be anything from a world class player to a League 1 scrubber, so why not have a range value that covers 100-170? How about a 140-190 for the massively hyped kids like Robinho?
Obviously this system has a critical flaw; there would be far too many high-PA players, but there's a solution to this: tie the probability for higher PA to exponential decay. If a player had a ranged value between 100-170, they would be more likely to roll a number on the lower end, with the probability of a higher number diminishing exponentially. I think something like this would be particularly good because it provides another layer of unpredictability; everyone's game would different and it adds to the game's replayability.