Is the Star Rating system broken?

T

TonyVilliers

Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2011
Messages
275
Reaction score
0
Points
0
My AssMan is telling me that my player is World Class (as it the report). They all have 19 as Judging ability and potential.

However their star rating is 2.5 stars with his black star potential going to 3.5.

How can he be world class at 2.5 stars? I don't understand this. It's the same for a lot of my players and whilst I understand (or think I do) the black star potential (a confusing an unnecessary addition in my eyes) I don't understand how a player can be rated World Class at 2.5 stars!

Any help, thoughts, would be appreciated.
 
How good is your squad? World Class?
 
If all your squad is world class, ofc, your player will be average in your squad.

If you have an average squad, a world class player will have 5 stars
 
Consider the CA/PA star system to be indicative based upon your total squad. Lets say for arguments' sake that you worst player is CA 120 and your best is CA 180. The worst player might be 0.5* and the best one might be 4.5* right?
Now if you play a team where the lowest player has CA 140 and the highest is CA 160 you still might find that the worst player has 0.5* and the highest 4.5*. (this is slightly exaggerated but it brings the point across).

What I am trying to say is: the star system is a relative scale. If all your players are world class a 2.5* player could well be a world-beater as well as a 3.5* being a world beater. In actual CA difference of your player, they might only differ 5 points in actual CA.
 
Even if his squad is world class, I don't think a world class player should be rated at 2.5 stars. What would it take to be rated 5 stars then?

This is why I disregard star ratings altogether. They can give you an impression of how talented a young player is, but that's about it. It doesn't really serve any other purpose, other than confuse people and affect them to make bad decisions. I've even had a player go from 2 stars (both CA and PA) to 3.5 stars over night. No squad changes, nothing. He just had a couple good games, and all of a sudden he gets an extra star and a half. Useless.
 
mersk said:
Even if his squad is world class, I don't think a world class player should be rated at 2.5 stars. What would it take to be rated 5 stars then?
Click to expand...
If his squad is world class, there are no 5 star players anymore. IIRC, 3 stars is equal to the player he's being compared to.
 
WJ said:
If his squad is world class, there are no 5 star players anymore. IIRC, 3 stars is equal to the player he's being compared to.
Click to expand...

Which kind of defeats the whole purpose imo, how does a rating of 1-5 help if you're not even utilizing the whole scale? Also, who exactly is the player being compared to? The best player in the squad? The average ability of the entire squad?

Every year there are questions about the star ratings and how they work. A few years back I was obsessed with these **** stars, I even sold players when their star ratings dropped to bring in new players with higher star rating. A noob move, I know, but that's just my point: New players are confused by it, and experienced players mostly disregard it. I wouldn't mind seeing it removed, or at least revamped so it actually serves a purpose.
 
Every year there are questions because people don't pay attention. You can see in the report who he's being compared to and what he's classed as - good player for English Premier Div etc.
 
"Good player for English Premier Division" tells you absolutely nothing though.
 
mersk said:
"Good player for English Premier Division" tells you absolutely nothing though.
Click to expand...
It tells you he's a good player and you can compare it to the other ratings (good, poor, excellent) in your team, surely?

In addition to the stars and the general recommendation, it's fine. IMO of course.
 
If I want to compare him to the rest of my team, or make a call on whether or not he's good enough for my team, I use my own good judgment. Which, like I said, makes the star ratings redundant. Being a "good player" covers quite a range of varying quality, I could easily list 50 players I consider "good" in the Premier League, but they'd all be completely different players with completely different qualities, and other people might agree or disagree with me.
 
You can always compare the ratings you get to the ratings of your own squad, if you want to have an idea how a player is gonna impact your team
 
gartzo21 said:
You can always compare the ratings you get to the ratings of your own squad, if you want to have an idea how a player is gonna impact your team
Click to expand...

I prefer to compare them myself rather than letting 1-5 stars give me the answer. You'd need to consider his attributes for the role intended, his mental attributes, personality, age, wages, potential and so on. Which again leads me back to my point: New players can easily get confused, and experienced players mostly ignore it.
 
His CA is 130 and his PA is 188 (for this particular player, a regen).

My point is, that if he is considered World Class at 130, then clearly something is wrong, surely.

I'm an player of around 3-4 years, so I'm not brand spanking new, but I find it odd that a player at 130 is being described as World Class. Surely that designation is not in comparison to the rest of the squad, it's compared to the rest of the world, otherwise it's a misnomer designation.
 
I'd like to see the screenshot showing that. Are you sure the AM isn't talking about his potential when talking about him being world class?
 
I've had players with CA just over 160 described as world class - are we sure that reputation has nothing to do with this classification?
 
That is strange! He shouldn't be described as that, IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

FMBase

Beta

Resources

Top