Forum » Suggestions » school ratings | Date | |
---|---|---|
Username
115 msgs.
Substitute
|
Hi all, i think the country rating when purchasing schools should be updated. i don't understand how the best south american nation at the moment ( uruguai ) has only 3 balls, the same as the mediocre columbia and chile. i agree that all the 3 of them don't have the history of argentina and brazil, but at the moment neither of those countries should have a 5 ball rating. if uruguai has a 3 ball rating, then argentina should have 4 and brazil maybe 4.5 balls. In europe it's even worse. The current World and Europe champions Spain has only 4.5 balls, the same as the fragile france and england. i agree that in england the football is what it should be everywhere, but rating their footballers with 4.5 balls is a little bit too much. If the rating is based on international trophies, then i totally agree that germany is a 5 ball country when it comes to football consistency as they are always favorites to win any competition they enter, and always finish top 3, but cannot say the same about italy and netherlands. i would rate italy with 4 stars and netherlands with 4.5 stars altough neither of their leagues and football are very exciting. Also i think portugal should have a little bit more credit because although they never won an eurocup, they're the country with the most golden boot players in europe ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Golden_Shoe#By_country_of_player_nationality ), and some of the non-portuguese players that also won the golden boot, used to play for portuguese teams. Since mid 1960's portugal gave on average 2 or 3 amazing talented players to the world per decade and that's more than france, germany, netherlands, spain or england. From the top of my head.... Eusebio, Nene, Fernando Gomes, chalana, paulo futre, fernando couto, vitor baia, nuno gomes, rui costa, sergio conceicao, joao vieira pinto, luis figo, ricardo carvalho, ronaldo, nani. i would like to finish saying that i think the schools are an amazing feature but if the idea is to make the game more realistic, you would have to consider the nationality of the players that play in some of the most important nations in the world and championships. you would realize that there are very little germans playing in the german national team and there are very little french playing in the french national team, which would render german and french schools obsolete. French national players are in majority from african countries and german are a mix of polish, turkish and south americans, which would boost african, polish and turkish schools. The same line of thought would go to england, where although the football is amazing, the best players there are foreigners. |
16/11/2011 03:36 |
- Div/Gr | ||
3547 msgs.
Best scorer
|
I totally agree on the Uruguay part . 5 stars for them, they just beat Italy today | 16/11/2011 04:16 |
- Div/Gr | ||
Username
715 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
I've "complained" and made quite a few suggestions about this in the past. Nothing changed The fact is, people have a lot invested in schools already, to change the rating of just one school would mean revamping everything. Add your voice to the complaints though! Maybe we will be heard. http://uk.strikermanager.com/foros/hilo.php?id=266709 |
16/11/2011 04:19 |
- Div/Gr | ||
395 msgs.
First-team player
|
This one has been covered a bit. THe problem with adjusting school ratings is that people have already paid money for them. You are giving bonuses to people who paid less for a school which gets a bump, and penalizing those who lose points. | 16/11/2011 04:23 |
- Div/Gr | ||
3547 msgs.
Best scorer
|
mudetroit said: This one has been covered a bit. THe problem with adjusting school ratings is that people have already paid money for them. You are giving bonuses to people who paid less for a school which gets a bump, and penalizing those who lose points. Yup, that's what they deserve , haha |
16/11/2011 04:44 |
- Div/Gr | ||
Username
3363 msgs.
Best scorer
|
Fun > Realism This game is addictive because its fun to play, not because its "almost like real life". mudetroit is correct - the schools ratings were decided before season 1, and everyone will have a different opinion about the country quality - they have to start somewhere and you cant change it now. Personally I think they have most schools pretty close, so its good enough. How would you feel if you paid 71M for an excellent Italian school and it gets downgraded to a 4 star. All I'm saying here is this suggestion keeps coming up and I guarantee you it wont be changed so dont waste your time. |
16/11/2011 10:35 |
- Div/Gr | ||
Username
959 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
The school function doesn't implies on how good a country is at playing football, it implies on how successful schools are in that country | 17/11/2011 07:49 |
- Div/Gr | ||
Username
81 msgs.
Rookie
|
squallzell said: Hi all, i think the country rating when purchasing schools should be updated. i don't understand how the best south american nation at the moment ( uruguai ) has only 3 balls, the same as the mediocre columbia and chile. i agree that all the 3 of them don't have the history of argentina and brazil, but at the moment neither of those countries should have a 5 ball rating. if uruguai has a 3 ball rating, then argentina should have 4 and brazil maybe 4.5 balls. In europe it's even worse. The current World and Europe champions Spain has only 4.5 balls, the same as the fragile france and england. i agree that in england the football is what it should be everywhere, but rating their footballers with 4.5 balls is a little bit too much. If the rating is based on international trophies, then i totally agree that germany is a 5 ball country when it comes to football consistency as they are always favorites to win any competition they enter, and always finish top 3, but cannot say the same about italy and netherlands. i would rate italy with 4 stars and netherlands with 4.5 stars altough neither of their leagues and football are very exciting. Also i think portugal should have a little bit more credit because although they never won an eurocup, they're the country with the most golden boot players in europe ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Golden_Shoe#By_country_of_player_nationality ), and some of the non-portuguese players that also won the golden boot, used to play for portuguese teams. Since mid 1960's portugal gave on average 2 or 3 amazing talented players to the world per decade and that's more than france, germany, netherlands, spain or england. From the top of my head.... Eusebio, Nene, Fernando Gomes, chalana, paulo futre, fernando couto, vitor baia, nuno gomes, rui costa, sergio conceicao, joao vieira pinto, luis figo, ricardo carvalho, ronaldo, nani. i would like to finish saying that i think the schools are an amazing feature but if the idea is to make the game more realistic, you would have to consider the nationality of the players that play in some of the most important nations in the world and championships. you would realize that there are very little germans playing in the german national team and there are very little french playing in the french national team, which would render german and french schools obsolete. French national players are in majority from african countries and german are a mix of polish, turkish and south americans, which would boost african, polish and turkish schools. The same line of thought would go to england, where although the football is amazing, the best players there are foreigners. Great detail about Portugal, I never tought about that... And the incredible part is that the striker position is always the weakest on the national side! |
17/11/2011 10:49 |
- Div/Gr | ||
Username
115 msgs.
Substitute
|
Abaxido said: The school function doesn't implies on how good a country is at playing football, it implies on how successful schools are in that country if that's the case how come most players from south american national teams came to europe when they were very young, for example messi, who came to barcelona when he was super young.... if he hadn't come to europe, would he be as gud as he is ? and in messi's case, who should get the credits, argentina where he as born, or spain where he grew as a player ? |
19/11/2011 02:30 |
- Div/Gr | ||
Username
115 msgs.
Substitute
|
CSM10 said: Great detail about Portugal, I never tought about that... And the incredible part is that the striker position is always the weakest on the national side! well... from the players i said, eusebio, fernando gomes and nene were strikers. matateu, jordao, jose aguas and fernando peyroteo were also very gud, an in more recent years we had sa pinto, nuno gomes and pauleta. at the moment is true that we ( im portuguese ) are lacking strikers, but luckily we have quite a lot of wingers that score plenty of goals, mainly ronaldo. At the moment we could have ronaldo playing up front with nani and still have quaresma and danny on the wings, we could still have simao sabrosa but he already resigned from national team, and also our side-backs as they started their career as wingers ( both fabio coentrao and joao pereira ). |
19/11/2011 02:47 |
- Div/Gr | ||