Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

Brian Shanahan

Members+
  • Content Count

    2,400
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Brian Shanahan

  • Rank
    Semi Pro

Biography

  • Biography
    Civil servant in an Irish cop shop

About Me

  • About Me
    Limerick Leader Sports section

Interests

  • Interests
    Reading, Toastmasters, FM, GAA

Favourite Team

  • Favourite Team
    Pallasgreen & Pallas Utd

Recent Profile Visitors

2,913 profile views
  1. Haven't played a game without attribute masking in yonks (since FM 07 I believe). Turning it off essentially removes scouting from the game. As regards no transfer budget in first window, it's more a case of how I feel when starting than anything else. But I'd be careful before turning it off, I'd hate to take over a team with, e.g., a shocking lack of left backs that can run faster than a giant sloth.
  2. Any way to edit in a national team having an U-23 team for olympics qualifying?
  3. After much hibernating here on the forums, I've finally come up with an idea for CA/PA. I was thinking today when trying to sleep off a boozy office party about the issue, in that some of the top players have the mold broken and one area of their game gets somewhat nerfed because of the 200 CA/PA cap. And I was thinking what if there were separate CA/PA points for each of the three main areas technical, mental and physical and maybe even for the hidden stats. You could have for example an overall rating of out of 300 CA/PA across the board with the ratings split up 100 each across the board. Also to maybe more easily simulate different types of player strengths you could give a training weighting on each stat so that, for example a player that is fast and a good headerer could get a 75% training weight on the relevant stats so that they grow more quickly and at less attribute point cost and maybe a weighting to agility and dribbling (to pick two attributes at random) of 125% so that those stats are slower to grow. Might be difficult to code for, but it would allow in my opinion for a greater variety of player type.
  4. Gameplay trumps realism every single time. And this is one case where realism in a game is just stupid.
  5. Problem is this can easily turn into the Civ 5 mode of "f**k the punters, we'll just remove core parts of the game (in Civ 5's case whole civilisations) and then sell it on to them later. Free CA$H!!!!!". In fact keeping your integrity is far harder with this model, most games with microtransaction DLC go this exact same route, holding back core characters, maps, &c. and then charging the price of the game all over again just to unlock stuff that is included in the original coding. I thought this was the route they were going when FM12 was made Steam only (as that is one of the two uses for Steam, the other being data collection). Guess to my dismay that I was right. Another year playing FM11, the last game built with integrity for me, then.
  6. Did you loan him previously? If you did then that could be the problem. A player goes to a club one season, and then the next season the only clubs interested have a lower reputation, he is very loath to go, especially if he was playing regularly for the first loan club. It's a bit of a hazard, and something I'd like incorporated into private chats, that you could persuade a reluctant loanee to go out to a club he thinks is too low for him. Edit: If it's in 2012 sorry for bringing it up. I skipped the game, half afraid that SI would go down the endless DLC route with the game.
  7. SI are a company that have morals. I'd rather have my favourite game made by a company that has morals and a lower revenue stream to the extent that I'd pay more for it, than to have it made by a company that ditches its morals for a bit of filthy lucre. But remember it is the CCP banning the game not SI refusing to sell there.
  8. The in real life appeal reason is if the player is of a quality to benefit the game in England. In the game AFAIK it is simply a CA/PA calculation.
  9. Never knew the head of Fatah was such a good goalkeeper:
  10. Just found this today, after seeing the black ribbon alongside his name on a post. Sorry to see you go Fraser, you'll be missed.
  11. I'm all out of ideas, and I'm not about to boot up the game this late to fiddle around. Sorry.
  12. Have you reloaded the skin in the game (via the preferences)? If not then that's probably your problem.
  13. Actually I reckon that some sort of numerical system is going to be used to describe physical and technical attributes of players, not so much mental. It is going to be couched more like "Billy Jones is our best tackler, on average he makes 75% of tackles attempted and only gives away fouls on 4%. In addition he is competitive in the air winning 42% of headers and disrupting the attacker a further 13% of the time. However his passing leads a lot to be desired with only a 23% completion rate reducing to 12% if the pass is longer than 10 metres." Further details would be given for further relevant stats. All the numbers are doing in the game is simplifying those probabilities down into a 1-20 system, and giving the same system to a more intangible set of attributes (the mental ones, which in real life are both hard to judge and variable). As regards real life examples, Baseball being one of the most analysed sports in reality often uses the 20/80 system to give players' statistics a context to go from and necessary simplification, for example rating batting strength from 2 to 8 based on the velocity of the ball when struck by the player and so on for the different skills. They wouldn't use that system if it didn't work. Also there is the much publicised example of Everton buying the database for FM2009 in order to get a look at the scout reports given by researchers and use it as a part of the scouting tool. I'm sure that there are a lot more clubs and managers than Everton that buy the game on release day just to mine the hundreds of thousands of data points contained within the game and use them accordingly. But the most simple reason why a numerical system is used is because it works. Look at ratings for films, they're given in stars or out of ten markings. If you get a questionnaire which asks you to make a value judgement it is invariably given on a scale where neutral is in the middle and there are equal numbers of responses on either side of the neutral one (sometimes the neutral is left out because human bias will have it over-represented). Humanity has evolved it's collective mental capabilities to be able to absorb numbers and numerical data more easily and completely than other kinds of data which say the same thing. That is why in so many walks of life numbers are used. And finally I do agree with x42bn6 and RBKalle that the problem is that it is too easy see the actual numbers of players outside the club. Inside the club you should see all non-hidden data from day one, as in real life a manager would be able to access the equivalent of this data from day one (except at the smallest clubs). But outside the club there should be a lot more uncertainty, maybe with top players excepted (we all know how good Messi is, but then again Rooney is massively overrated), after a few scout reports you could have a range wider in some areas (e.g 13-18 for pace) and narrower in others (e.g. 14-16 for heading). Some attributes will be easy to narrow down, e.g if a player consistently completes 75% of passes over 4 games then his passing is 16 (20 is not passes always go to their man). Others take longer to quantify, for example pace and acceleration are easy to get close to figures of but need some specialised equipment to get exactly and are more variable due to conditions. After say 2 months of constant looking then you could get a 90% accurate picture of a player (7 league games, 1 cup, 2 European, 1 international). But this picture will degrade over time as the player improves/worsens, changes his playing style, his mental attitude to the game and maybe even his position, so what you could have is after 6 months a historical attribute screen pops up with the exact figures already given, and a current one where the figures get more fuzzy and return to a range figure rather than an exact one. It would preserve attributes, give scouting more significance and allow for a lot more uncertainty about how the players are developing and changing away from your direct sight.
  14. I have a problem (a minor one now) with the recent games and sendings off. It's the fact that despite being sent off players ratings never change because of it. Just now I had a left back sent of with a straight red after 43" on grounds of professional foul (last man tackle from behind almost DOGSO), and he was rated as a 6.9 (performance to then was decent). Now after the game I gave him a bollocking, by way of his sending off, on his performance (I also gave him one on training, he was fine with that), and because the game still scored him 6.9 he was unhappy (despite in reality costing me a win away to Lazio with Fiorentina). Now granted there are some cases where a red or two yellows are not deserved (IRL almost never, but that's another story SI can't act on), but with a case like this where it were obvious, there should be a severe dip in the match rating for the player, personally I'd have automatically docked 2 points of the rating to 4.9 (dock 1 for 2nd yellow). It would more accurately show his performance (red card is a big negative in my book) in game and give the manager an avenue to reinforce warnings or fines.
×
×
  • Create New...