Correlation between database size and difficulty

[Svenc]

There is something I'm not prepared to do right now. It is something that I always wanted to give a go, but see, I'm in the thick of another save and don't want to start all over again. It has something to do with actually picking the smallest possible database at the start of the game, rather than going with the biggest one assuming it would provide the "most realistic" playing experience.

The reason I'd like to try this is related to scouting and squad management, and how easy it can be to massively bolster your squad. It can be easy even if you don't proactively go looking through the massive database you just loaded up yourself (player search: filter all players under 23 years of age and sort by value - DONE). But it can be easy if you simply opt to listen entirelly to the staff of scouts you have at your disposal. All of whom are earning little more than the caretaker. And being as average as they come.

In a game world with less players, more clubs are competing for less players. Talent becomes a commodity, not something available for free in spades the lower you go down the league tiers. In theory, loading up the smallest database than the biggest one should/could result in the following:

- Scouts finding less prospect

- Scouts finding less prospect that is unattached/out of contract

- AI managers more likely to compete for your transfer target of choice

- AI managers more likely to target players under contract (and yours, too!)

Thoughts? Experiences? Bloody anything?

[BiggusD]

You will still be better at finding the really good talents than the AI, but it will take longer time to assemble a full squad of them.