Change language
This is the last discussion thread we will post about this topic, so if there are no serious arguments against the suggested design it is likely that the final product will be similar to what is outlined here. We think that a nice balance has finally been reached, thanks to an abundance of great feedback. On a personal note it's been great fun to work with the community on this nifty little feature. Really enjoyed reading all your messages in the forums, social media, chat and so on. Thank you!
The analyst will show you two strengths and two weaknesses. This was requested in the last thread, and we agree. You get a much better overview this way, and two weaknesses instead of one gives you better opportunity to weed out players that are weak in important areas. Note that in case of a tie between two or more attributes, he will choose one of them at random.
Four stars instead of three gives us better opportunity to differentiate between good and very good players, and the weaknesses also makes more sense (with a three-star system, they would often end up with one star).
The "Lowest potential" area can list any attributes (as opposed to the last version where the analyst would choose between certain key skills).
The old scout info has been fused in with the Analysis (the bit at the bottom where you see which skills the player will train if you send him to YTC). This, together with the rest of the analysis, is very useful information.
"Overall" rating has been removed. It will only lead to confusion, and we prefer that the manager him/herself make the distinction between a good and bad player.
The feature will not cost team money to use. You can freely check out reports on any youth player in your squad or the youth exchange. The Analysis would follow the player throughout his career (even as a senior). It would be visible on the player market and when a player is sold, the Analysis would go along with the player. We know that some of you wanted a fee (to add a level of decision-making) but we believe that the report in itself will lead to many interesting and difficult management decisions.
The training speed will indicate how fast the player will train as a youth. A player who train slow as a youth (compared to other youths) may train much better as a senior (compared to other seniors). Of course, this case could also be the reverse. The analyst will not be able to project how fast the player will train as a senior.
And to reiterate from last thread
Thoughts? :)
