Community - American Football Management Simulator
AdBlocker active? It seems you are using software to block advertisements. You could help us if you could switch it off when visiting redzoneaction.org. The reason is very simple: Advertisements help us running the site, to offer you the game in a good quality for free. So if you like the game, please support us by purchasing a Supporter Account or disabling the AdBlocker on this site. Thank you very much!
Main / Rookie Area / Player ratings Search Forum
Navigation: |<   <   1  2  3  4 >|  
Poster Message
talbot68
posted: 2013-07-22 09:34:28 (ID: 100001262) Report Abuse
Player ratings are what they are - this game is all about striving for improvement and gradually eliminating the successive weakest links in your setup, understanding what is good enough to get you to both your short and long-term goals.

Statistically, if you have a display range of approx 10 increments, (up to 5 in half-steps), you'd expect to see a bell curve, which would give you most players somewhere in the range of 2-3. That ties in with my experience of the game.

Look at soccer - there aren't too many Messi's around. It's incredible that Ronaldo is around at the same moment in time, that rarely happens in the sport. If I rated them as 5 stars, I'm not too sure I'd give anyone else in the world 5 stars...
Quote   Reply   Edit  
mrrich
posted: 2013-07-29 16:18:46 (ID: 100002030) Report Abuse
Well, I imagine to have a 5 star Linebacker, you're going to have to have near perfect strength and speed, 48+ agility, 50 positioning, 50 tackling, 50 vision. It's possible to do it.

I think you have to take someone who is 16 in the youth academy, maximise everything you can in there and be hopeful of the physical statistics. This will mean they come out with everything 35? Maybe by their late twenties they will reach 50.

Thing is, do you want to have a bunch of 4 star players or one 5 star and a couple of 3.5?
Quote   Reply   Edit  
mrrich
posted: 2013-07-29 16:27:02 (ID: 100002031) Report Abuse
talbot68 wrote:
Look at soccer - there aren't too many Messi's around. It's incredible that Ronaldo is around at the same moment in time, that rarely happens in the sport. If I rated them as 5 stars, I'm not too sure I'd give anyone else in the world 5 stars...


I'd have to agree with that analogy. 5 stars means the best there ever is/was.

How many players as good as Ronaldo and Messi have ever played the game? 10?

Going to start an argument over the greatest players of all time now.

But you know what I mean. If you go go by the Daily Telegraph in the UK, the greatest team ever would be (and I agree, I would give these guys and not many more 5 stars)

Dino Zoff
Cafu
Bobby Moore
Franco Baresi
Paolo Maldini
Franz Beckenbauer
Johan Cruyff
Michel Platini
Diego Maradona
Pele
Ferenc Puskas

You would only really put Messi, Ronaldo, Zidance, Schmeichal and maybe a handful of others in that list.

I think people will get 5 star players, but not many.
Quote   Reply   Edit  
bwadders76
posted: 2013-07-29 19:29:55 (ID: 100002056) Report Abuse
mrrich wrote:
talbot68 wrote:
Look at soccer - there aren't too many Messi's around. It's incredible that Ronaldo is around at the same moment in time, that rarely happens in the sport. If I rated them as 5 stars, I'm not too sure I'd give anyone else in the world 5 stars...


I'd have to agree with that analogy. 5 stars means the best there ever is/was.

How many players as good as Ronaldo and Messi have ever played the game? 10?

Going to start an argument over the greatest players of all time now.

But you know what I mean. If you go go by the Daily Telegraph in the UK, the greatest team ever would be (and I agree, I would give these guys and not many more 5 stars)

Dino Zoff
Cafu
Bobby Moore
Franco Baresi
Paolo Maldini
Franz Beckenbauer
Johan Cruyff
Michel Platini
Diego Maradona
Pele
Ferenc Puskas

You would only really put Messi, Ronaldo, Zidance, Schmeichal and maybe a handful of others in that list.

I think people will get 5 star players, but not many.


Some fine players there but many many top players missed off that list who you could argue a case for.
Quote   Reply   Edit  
mikemike778
posted: 2013-07-29 19:59:13 (ID: 100002062) Report Abuse
Agree 100% with no extra detail on the star ratings.

I would be tempted re the CB issue is not have ratings per position - just have maybe an offense, defense and kicking (inc punting) rating so people don't get hung up on why CB have higher rating.

So you could see easily which are your best defensive players overall and then its up to you to decide where to put them.

As I said in an earlier thread. I think new teams should have all players with a physical cap and in sensible positions from the start to make it easier for them. At the moment they might see a player with strength 36 and think that is really good so put him at OL (and waste training on blocking) when it may cap at 36 but he has speed of 50.
Quote   Reply   Edit  
mrrich
posted: 2013-07-30 08:37:05 (ID: 100002099) Report Abuse
Or just actually tell people, train 90% physicals on speed/strength and 10% on positioning until they are capped, then work out where they are.

I think every new person should be told that in plain English. Otherwise with this game you are lost. Get the fundamentals right and then learn the game.
Quote   Reply   Edit  
reply   Mark this thread unread
Navigation: |<   <   1  2  3  4 >|  
Main / Rookie Area / Player ratings