Thanks a lot for the info!
Was wondering if there is any indication of how accurate the report will be with below-par managers and HR not at level 15. As in if my report says for example B - what is the deviation with level 7 HR?
Wybierz kraj: | USA |
Lvl 15 HR and 100% efficient scouts gives perfect scouting.
You can easily test how accurate yours are by going to the market, finding a player whose Qs are in the chat, and comparing with what you see. Do this 3-4x and you'll quickly get an idea for the range that your unscouted Qs can be off.
You can easily test how accurate yours are by going to the market, finding a player whose Qs are in the chat, and comparing with what you see. Do this 3-4x and you'll quickly get an idea for the range that your unscouted Qs can be off.
How good would a C player be? OR? Quality?
Lets say for academy 15 and youth training 100%.
Lets say for academy 15 and youth training 100%.
C quality players might be better than they have been in the past for future drafts, but in the past, they were worthless, and there were very few players (about as many as there were A caliber players) that had a quality of D.
B caliber players were often worthless as well, though it is possible that the most recent change render B caliber players into worthwhile players with ~70 AVQ and generally good individual qualities.
I believe that the grades now better reflect a player's EQ (relevant qualities) rather than the AVQ, so you won't pull an A with a quality of 90 in goaltending, defense, midfield, and forward and 40 in everything else.
In the past, A's and A+'s were the only worthwhile players, so it was best to draft them and then draft random unscouted players, hoping that they might turn out to be good. Now, it might be worth drafting players that have a rating of B or better.
As for OR, this is somewhat independent of quality, so you can get a decent OR C quality player with good facilities and a very poor OR A quality with bad facilities, though the quality is said to correlate somehwat with the OR (if not as much as OR correlates to facilities).
B caliber players were often worthless as well, though it is possible that the most recent change render B caliber players into worthwhile players with ~70 AVQ and generally good individual qualities.
I believe that the grades now better reflect a player's EQ (relevant qualities) rather than the AVQ, so you won't pull an A with a quality of 90 in goaltending, defense, midfield, and forward and 40 in everything else.
In the past, A's and A+'s were the only worthwhile players, so it was best to draft them and then draft random unscouted players, hoping that they might turn out to be good. Now, it might be worth drafting players that have a rating of B or better.
As for OR, this is somewhat independent of quality, so you can get a decent OR C quality player with good facilities and a very poor OR A quality with bad facilities, though the quality is said to correlate somehwat with the OR (if not as much as OR correlates to facilities).
Like capsaicin said, they used to be worthless which is why PPM adjusted the letter grades.
I'd expect in the mid-60s. Bs in the high-60s low-70s, As in the mid-70s and A+ in the 80+; all AQ.
OR depends, like your youth pulls, what your SA and level are. It is highly variable even within a given level.
I'd expect in the mid-60s. Bs in the high-60s low-70s, As in the mid-70s and A+ in the 80+; all AQ.
OR depends, like your youth pulls, what your SA and level are. It is highly variable even within a given level.
I've been scouting all the 6/6 players that play one of the positions, and there have been no A's so far. I should be finished in a few days.
yeah . As and A+ will be 5/6 so technically reducing their worth. How good that would be since it has been already very hard to find one A!
so disappointed that for bbal i am not even caring much about SA since I know the first draft has great potential to be worthless.
so disappointed that for bbal i am not even caring much about SA since I know the first draft has great potential to be worthless.
I know I missed a few days of scouting...but out of 57 scouted players, I managed to find 2-B's, 4-C's and 4's (and one I can't seem to account for). That is really depressing...
I kind of wish that the "random factor" that determines the draft order were weighted.
It seems kind of stupid to me that my sports academy is 3 levels higher than the guy who is picking in front of me.
I mean I get it if there's a 1 level difference, or if the difference is limited to the quality of your staff members... but come on.
The way it's laid out, you could technically get 2nd pick even if you have a SA level 15, and no one else in the league is better than level 5. That's not right in my opinion.
It seems kind of stupid to me that my sports academy is 3 levels higher than the guy who is picking in front of me.
I mean I get it if there's a 1 level difference, or if the difference is limited to the quality of your staff members... but come on.
The way it's laid out, you could technically get 2nd pick even if you have a SA level 15, and no one else in the league is better than level 5. That's not right in my opinion.
So we've finished 3 weeks of scouting.
Out of 63 scouts, 47 have been Ds.
I did find 1 A, so I guess I can't be too upset... but still. This is a lot of work for THE CHANCE of getting 1 prospect. Hopefully in the new rating system, A's and even B's are much better than they were in the old one.
Out of 63 scouts, 47 have been Ds.
I did find 1 A, so I guess I can't be too upset... but still. This is a lot of work for THE CHANCE of getting 1 prospect. Hopefully in the new rating system, A's and even B's are much better than they were in the old one.
What's your luck with scouting been like? How many A's and A+'s have you found?
Twoje ulubione wątki
Najnowsze posty