retired_smsnodgrass

Only thing is, the regens are poor for everyone, putting everyone at status quo. If every player in the world had a PA of 60, winning the Premiership with a team full of players with CA 55 would be plausible, doesn't mean those players aren't poor. </BLOCKQUOTE>

granted but as I am only in 2016 there are still a fair number of 'real' players in the game for my regens to compete with. </BLOCKQUOTE>

Well I'm not in your game to check out exactly how the stats are faring (thank god, as if FM wasn't hard work enough at times!) so I have no idea if for example the superior Positioning of a regen may counteract the existing superior Jumping of a real player. Of course, arguments could always be made that certain stats would cover for others, allowing for regens to play well despite lower Physical stats, but surely the mere fact hardly anybody can take a penalty or jump higher than three feet indicates that the regens are of a substandard, regardless of what you may be able to win with them?

retired_nd4game

they may well be substandard but they are substandard for every team in my game so basically in 5 or 10 years time when there are no real players left every team in my game will have to use the substandard regens and we will all be on a level playing field. As such if the regens are poor (and I'm not saying they are) every team is in the same position.

Manchester United and Arsenal for example don't have regens available to them that only they can sign that are not available to Southampton. Obviously having a higher Reputation will mean that you will be able to sign the better regens that may not wish to sign for Southampton. This however is not different to the current situation where a Manchester United will be able to sign Rafeal Van der Vaart, who would probably not want to sigh for Southampton.

As such if every player in the world has a PA of 60 as you suggest then all this means is that we will not see a screen full of '20' when looking at stats but will have to work with lower numbers. as such the best players in the world will look ordianry and the ordianry players will look poor.

It wont make any difference to the game because there will be players who are good and players who are bad and a whole range in between as there is now, the only difference will be the numerical display in stats.

retired_smsnodgrass

Agreed with pretty much all you just said there

My only issue is you seemed to be claiming the lack of physical or set piece attributes wasn't an issue within the game, which imo it obviously is. However, it's late and I could well have missed the point

retired_nd4game

I'm not necessarily claiming that lack of physical or set peice attributes dont cause an issue. I am aware that this seems to be an issue for many people and as such across the game in general I just dont personally see it as a problem because if the best set piece taker is rated at 12 and everyne else is rated at 6 then surely this will have the same effect as him being rated at 18 and everyone else rated at 9.

I fully understand your point but I genuinely think that if every teams has the same problem then surely it is no longer a problem as I and not gaining an advantage or finding myself at a disadvantage because of it.

I would also like to say what a pleasure it has been having a well thought out and constructive debate with you this evening (or morning). It's so refreshing for a thread like this not to degenerate into nonsense as it usually would.

retired_keithfit1

Ok so I've been playing the same game using patch 8.0.2 right up to 2028, I usually only buy every 3rd or 4th version of the game so didn't play 06 or 07. Since getting 08 I played 2 previous games past the 20 year mark and I think I've got to agree that somethings wrong with the regens.

First here are the numbers, Genie scout was used for all of this, I'm ignoring value as I agree that it has no bearing on how good a player is.

The lists are for all players 20yrs old and under. Database size in both cases set to large with English Italian and Spanish leagues. For ease of comparison they are side by side, the first column is from a 27 sept 2028 Saved game. The second from a start of game save July 2007. (So all the players in the database with PA values of -10/-9/-8 etc get given a randomly generated pa.)



CA 190-200 = 0 0
CA 180-189 = 0 2
CA 170-179 = 0 1
CA 160-169 = 0 3
CA 150-159 = 0 16
CA 140-149 = 4 39
CA 130-139 = 18 73
CA 120-129 = 48 144
CA 110-119 = 103 230
CA 100-109 = 200 251
CA 90-99 = 419 393
CA 80-89 = 611 575
CA 70-79 = 897 811
CA 60-69 = 1197 937
CA 50-59 = 1386 1031
CA 0-49 = 3620 3766

PA 190-200 = 8 3
PA 180-189 = 27 23
PA 170-179 = 79 112
PA 160-169 = 44 167
PA 150-159 = 242 526
PA 140-149 = 190 484
PA 130-139 = 585 838
PA 120-129 = 378 474
PA 110-119 = 1059 1101
PA 100-109 = 706 715
PA 90-99 = 1089 1079
PA 80-89 = 490 579
PA 70-79 = 905 791
PA 60-69 = 483 424
PA 50-59 = 860 545
PA 0-49 = 1356 510

Total - 8514 8271


Not really sure what to make of PA, I did not think there would be much of a difference really, i thought the regen issue was more about CA (and physical stats) than PA. However it shows pretty clearly that in my game a large quantity of the regens are rubbish, and will always be, and although there are a few more in the top 2 groups in the 2028 save, there are a lot less from 120 to 179.

Looking at the CA comparison, theres not a single player in 2028 thats 20 or under and has CA higher than 149. (highest is actually 145) You could change the 2028 players to give them 10 more CA each, and the result will still be that regens aren't as good. I think we can conclude that more younger regens need a higher starting CA. At the moment were getting no wonderkids at all from regens, and that cant be right.

Mind you this whole CA thing is only one issue that is fubar-ing regens in 08. The other one as a lot of people have said, is certain stats. Primarily the physical ones. The amount of 'world class' players in my 2028 game with god like technical and mental stats, but physical stats of a 30 stone chainsmoker is pretty silly. I will hopefully do the same comparisons with various physical stats, and post the results around here somewhere. But this was enough for one day i think.

Lastly i would agree with what Celtic said above, this has no real bearing on the game as its an issue the AI teams have to cope with as well, no-one gains or looses out because of it. But i don't think that invalidates the opinion that the regen system is flawed, and therefore needs tweaking. If all regens had for eg, a permanent hardwired stamina of 10, it would be fair... but would still need fixing.

retired_florentino

I'm going to disagree with you on the "Higher CA" suggestion, mainly because I think that the problem isn't the CA's but rather the player development model.

Basically put - training doesn't work properly and players with high PAs seem to develop as quickly as players with low PAs, so don't hit their prime until later in their careers.

An example of what I tend to see now: two 15 year old regens are introduced, one with PA 100, another with PA 170. The two players will develop at roughly the same pace until the PA100 regen maxes out. The higher PA regen will continue to develop his stats.

This is patently wrong - the higher PA regen should be developing his stats quicker than the lower PA one. There should be noticable differences between them at 17 and 18 - after all we notice 'wonderkids' or youngsters of great potential because they are so much better than their peers.

The physical attributes - I agree 100% with you. The way that 'CA points' are distributed as players get better needs to be examined.

retired_stacye23

I have 3 very good regen's in my team, 5 still under 18 and have great potential.

I bought him for 2.5mill and 5 seasons later he has improved greatly

I dont really see a problem with regens.

retired_keithfit1

Well i have to say, that idea of having different development models is a pretty good one. But after reading it a few times i think i'd have to say a compromise between the 2 would be better balanced. Mainly because regardless of your excellent suggestion im still of the opinion that the game should churn out some regens with a higher CA that it does.

To use your quote against you (sorry!) i would say that the reason 'we notice 'wonderkids' or youngsters of great potential because they are so much better than their peers.' is because they have a higher CA than their peers.

Im wondering why the idea you suggest isnt already implenented tho, its a good one, and similar to what they use on Pro Evo games.

Mostly all i can think of is that other factors have an effect on how a player gains CA - ambition, determination, simply getting 1st team games etc. However as you indicated, all youngsters do very much seem to train up at roughly the same speed so a bit of diversity here could be good. Only argument against doing it (aside from coding) i can think of is that some people wont like SI adding a stat that would quantify how well a player can gain CA. But lets face it, everything else has a stat so a few more probably wont hurt.

I think everyone agrees on the physical stats tho. Oh and Tyler42... good player, stats wise tho i think he's a bit short on physical attributes compared to todays top players. Penalty taking of 3 as well except since that particular stat NEVER increases, by 20 years in thats about an average score

retired_srflowers2002

I think Hauler24 have spot onto the issue, why do SI want the customers to have a very healthy long terms game which they will happy to stick with forever?

Even we are not game programmers we can still think of many methods to produce quality regens with static attributes according with their positions. (jumping, pace, stamina etc...). So how could this be so difficult for the professionals in SI, who cant get this area right for all those years??

SI dont have to make a "perfect" or "classic" version of FM game in history, instead, they want every version of FM incomplete therefore you have to buy/renew it every year. (I am not making this up as there are other examples in the gaming industry)

retired_smsnodgrass

Other than the physical and set piece stats being awful?