LightningFlik said: I've always suspected that the coach report is vibes-based, really. It makes sense to me that their current reputation (and possibly even form) influences it, as well as the relative strength of the league and team-mates. I don't for one minute think the game is telling me that a 4.5 star player is unquestionably better than a 4 star player. Expand Now I get the weird star ratings my meta team gets. Even though they have equal attributes, the star ratings are all over the place because of different CA. Setting them to 1 CA, they're all equally 3.5 stars.
For normal play, I think this means that wingers are going to be overrated by your staff (i.e. 4 star because of high CA cost for attributes), whereas DM will be underrated (i.e. 2 star because of low CA cost of attributes). Both of these players are equal quality in reality.
I came across one of my notes in regards to player reputation:
Home reputation influences national team call-ups by coaches, but not the selection of starters/substitutes at match time
I'm saving these notes for one big compendium sometime, but since it was raised, thought some of you might be interested in knowing that one.
I've done some more tests of Teamwork 8 > 20: 6th (sacked), 13th (sacked), 4th, 7th (sacked) = 7.5 position
So giving all outfield players teamwork is not good. But giving the wingers teamwork is seemingly good. I suspect this could be due to what HarvestGreen identified as certain attributes being less beneficial the more players that use them, rather than it specifically being a winger thing that Mustermann finds. But who knows.
I realized that I'm being too hasty in doing away with sprints & pressures. I got swept up in what Mustermann had to say, that I completely forgot about what the game files actually say:
| Distance run | Work Rate, Stamina, Pace | | Sprints | Work Rate, Stamina | | Pressures attempted | Work Rate, Anticipation | | Pressure completion | Work Rate, Anticipation, Acceleration |
LightningFlik said: I've always suspected that the coach report is vibes-based, really. It makes sense to me that their current reputation (and possibly even form) influences it, as well as the relative strength of the league and team-mates. I don't for one minute think the game is telling me that a 4.5 star player is unquestionably better than a 4 star player.
Now I get the weird star ratings my meta team gets. Even though they have equal attributes, the star ratings are all over the place because of different CA. Setting them to 1 CA, they're all equally 3.5 stars.
For normal play, I think this means that wingers are going to be overrated by your staff (i.e. 4 star because of high CA cost for attributes), whereas DM will be underrated (i.e. 2 star because of low CA cost of attributes). Both of these players are equal quality in reality.
I came across one of my notes in regards to player reputation:
Home reputation influences national team call-ups by coaches, but not the selection of starters/substitutes at match time
I'm saving these notes for one big compendium sometime, but since it was raised, thought some of you might be interested in knowing that one.
I've done some more tests of Teamwork 8 > 20: 6th (sacked), 13th (sacked), 4th, 7th (sacked) = 7.5 position
So giving all outfield players teamwork is not good. But giving the wingers teamwork is seemingly good. I suspect this could be due to what HarvestGreen identified as certain attributes being less beneficial the more players that use them, rather than it specifically being a winger thing that Mustermann finds. But who knows.
I realized that I'm being too hasty in doing away with sprints & pressures. I got swept up in what Mustermann had to say, that I completely forgot about what the game files actually say:
| Distance run | Work Rate, Stamina, Pace |
| Sprints | Work Rate, Stamina |
| Pressures attempted | Work Rate, Anticipation |
| Pressure completion | Work Rate, Anticipation, Acceleration |
I've got some ideas I'm going to look into now.