[Discussion] Less Numbers

[Paulo191]

• Match Fitness and Match Sharpness of players;
• Judging Player Ability/Potencial skills of some staff members (scouts, assistant manager etc);
• The new "Magnifying Glass" that tells you how well judging a player your scout pool is.

Do these really need to receive a number of classification? What manager IRL look at one of his players on the field and think "hum, that guy is on 59%, I'd better sub him off..."? Or, before a match, thinks "this player has only 72% of match sharpness, I won't play him in this next fixture."?

Also, how can a manager IRL accurately put an exact number on his scout pool ability of judging players? "Oh, I can't really trust them on this one. They're only 39 on my 'magnifying glass'!"

I know managers IRL have their opinions about their players' conditions and their staff members' abilities of judging. Like them, we all have our opinions about the people around us as well. If one of our friends gives us some advice, we might not want to follow him, because we think he's not so good at judging the situation we're presenting to him. We might have a boss at work who thinks that project won't be very good, and we agree with her based on our knowledge of her background, formation, past experiences etc.

We don't look at other people and see a number on top of their heads telling us who is and who isn't good at something. We can qualify them as good or bad, but not 23% good as romance advisor.

So, in order to reflect this real life qualifications, I think we should at least be able to choose a different form of scale about these qualities. For example, match sharpness could be described just as this:

• Severely lacking match fitness (written in red);
• Lacking match fitness (written in yellow);
• Match fit (written in light green);
• Completely match fit (written in dark green).

There's already this kind of option when it comes to those numbers of the attributes of the players, since you can display them as bars instead. So this could be done for these other unrealistic numeric classifications too.

"But how could we ever know when to trust a scout judgement about a player or not?", someone might be asking.

Well, we're supposed to go through an absurd amount of numbers on the players' attributes trying to find the best fit for our squad needs, so it wouldn't hurt trying to correlate the staff members' qualifications, preffered tactics, past experience as footballers etc, in order to determine ourselves if their insight is good or not.

So, for example, there could be a dropdown menu for us ourselves to qualify them. (So we wouldn't forget how we see them)

I'm not against the presence of numbers in the game, after all, this is a numbers game. Those numeric classification for players' attributes can stay there. What I'm trying to say is that these kind of classifications I'm talking about here seems unrealistic in terms of level of simulation.

I don't see this being implemented in this version. So I hope that SI at least gives us the option to choose a more qualitative classification for certain aspects of the game in the next ones. Would it make the game more difficult? Perhaps it would. But it would so just because it'd be more realistic.

[tomzo_2]

I understand the logic behind your comments but physical fitness is starting to head that way in how physios do their work, all training/preseason is done using heart rate monitors and the match all players are tracked/sprints and speeds calculated. This could give you a number figure. 

 

I agree with the magnifying glass comment, mind. Would be more keen to see a change with more understanding around the tactics of the team they currently play in if they play a similar style etc 

[Neil Brock]

Reviewed so locked.