jdavidbakr wrote:
WarEagle wrote:
I have another suggestion.
It would be great if we could tell the AI to evaluate players based on potential ratings rather than current ratings.
I'd rather take a 50/80 2nd year player, but the AI wants to select a 65/65 11 year vet, for example.
jdavidbakr wrote:
Yes, I need to give a slider for that. Right now I believe it's using the halfway point for the evaluation.
Just curious.
Any idea if/when this might be implemented?
Thanks
It is near the top of the "up next" list.
I would rather see a slider with the current auto draft setting that enables you to desire a particular level of experience at each postion group. Like a 0-10 silder, zero being mostly young guys and 10 being the old vets. Of course, later on you can adjust the silders as your team starts to develop.
I dont want young or old guys. Most likely a nice blend highlighted by some core positions that depending on scheme\coaches, for me, might need experience while others positions in that scheme a young guy I may be able to get away with as they develop quickly under a proper mananged coaching staff that highlights that young players areas of maximum gain.
Being in Rnd 9 of my first allocation draft, and using the auto setting for half of that I did find my self scrolling down to find young players alot. But now I want to find some older vets for a saftey net that I know can play in my system as these big potenial guys are prone to not to living up to hype and could derail some of my current gameplans.
Having a slider at each position group would allow me to set a whole all. draft with more long term security. But really through the player postion wieghts I feel this can be simulated slightly by focusing on ahtletic ability and less on technique. As vets are well formed there but may have lost some strength or a step. I used some different player weights and found younger guys moved up the board due to the way I wieghed the position ratings.