Numeric values are often obfuscated with words and/or strange graphical elements

[Murdre Dukc]

This is a grab-bag of similar issues. I've seen this improve for the youth intake preview feature, so hopefully more progress can be made on the front. I'll try to list them all:

• Facility quality description. They are described as average, below average, adequate, basic, poor, etc. What is "adequate"? What's the point of using words here? I would much rather have a number here (I believe the range under the hood is 1-20). On top of that, academy coaching and youth recruitment seem to use different sets of words.
• Player physical condition. It used to be a percentage, then a few fairly readable graphical elements on top like circular or straight bars, but now it's a strange heart shape (variable width makes it hard to parse visually) which doesn't display a percentage ever. The most reliable information here seems to be "Tired" or "Match fit" when inspecting the full profile. What's the gain here? Is this obfuscation intentional? It adds friction to the basic squad selection process.
• Player morale. There's a word, there's a colour, and there's an arrow which is an interesting choice. The arrow never helps until I can compare it with another player side by side and the word suffers from the usual issue - is "Excellent" better than "Superb" or "Extremely good"? I've never managed to instinctively remember it, instead I just ignore the words. When a player is unhappy I usually know from other sources anyway. Using a different set of words to describe factors contributing to morale (playing time, treatment, contract etc) adds further friction.

These will be the worst for non-native speakers, but I believe native speakers (of all languages, when playing that language in FM) will experience the issue. From my personal experience, having lived in the UK for a long time I still can't intuitively put those adjectives in order, and I can't imagine it being easier in my native language. Perhaps the "range" used to be "very bad/bad/average/good/very good" so it still made sense but expanding it made it blurry.

 

Edited August 31, 2022 by Murdre Dukc

[JAwtunes]

Good points. The change in the second bullet point was intentional but has made physical condition very fuzzy. I can now see the decision making of a 16yr old Mongolian kid is 11 but my physios and coaches are not able to track my players physical condition against their fairly easily quantified baselines.

Also on point 1, I'm pretty sure average and adequate (I think it's these 2) are still switched for youth and training facilities. So average is above adequate for one and below for the other. This has been raised before and SI said they would review.

[Murdre Dukc]

Do you know if Basic is better or worse than Poor? Half of these words look like euphemisms to me. Wouldn't make a difference to me if it said "probably not the best" or "could pass on a good day" (pretty much how the youth intake preview looked like at first)

Edited September 4, 2022 by Murdre Dukc

[Zachary Whyte]

We appreciate the feedback. This is will be reviewed and may be rejected or end up in a future FM.