wardog Posted November 7, 2018 Share Posted November 7, 2018 Every year I put hundreds of hours into football manager and I want to start this thread by saying I only want to make a great game the very very best it can be. My opinion may not be agreed upon either thus starting this thread offers constructive debate. Potential is one thing I think we can make leaps on. And I want to say I love the system we currently use but a few tweaks could make it even better. The addition of the -X5 has helped that although not a recent addition. My concern is when it comes to minus number the gap can sometimes be too wide. I was in data errors forum last week discussing what I felt was inconsistencies based on pa of a few players based on their current achievements. The researcher said it would be looked into but also highlighted why that range was correct at least at the top end for a specific player - I can have no arguements with that opinion. But it highlighted something to me. And something I've thought about since. In the instance of this unnamed player -7 has to low a potential range. While -75 has to high as the top end would be over what we believe he can hit. The alternative was to give a fixed potential like many others - and intially why I questioned the player along with some others of similar presence who had a fixed pa. Researcher in question was very understanding of my point and replied with his. A minus pa means that every save is different. Especially if you play as the same club. And I think that's something that fm should be applauded for while also offering different levels a player could achieve. The problem in question for the players I had was they were already just about at the lower end of the potential window given. Meaning a bad roll of the dice meant that a player at 18 was virtually in his peak with only minor improvements possible. Of course this could be the case in real life but for a player who's knocking on the door of the first team for his club, which in turn could open door to country doesn't seem right. Solution would be a smaller pa window imo. I don't know how easy this would be to do. But to change a window from say 110 to 140 to say 120 to 140 and adding extra windows to suit would be a far stronger idea. Would still offer the variation. While also offering more consistent windows making it easier for a researcher to pick one and protect a player from hitting prime before 20 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellis_D Posted November 7, 2018 Share Posted November 7, 2018 I would agree with that, but I also thought it was already possible. I think it should be fairly easy for FM to do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Neil Brock Posted December 27, 2018 Administrators Share Posted December 27, 2018 Rewviewed so locked. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.