After my last game it changed to where I see every team and player with ratings in the hundreds. Example: 586.
I hate this!

Before last game I've always had it to show up like 58.6 instead.

Can someone help me fix this?

Office > User Settings > there is a setting that changes overall ratings to player role ratings instead.

Thank you sir.

I wonder why it just decided to change on it's own. Better double check all of my other settings now.

Posted by Tiptop00 on 7/21/2018 2:32:00 PM (view original):
Thank you sir.

I wonder why it just decided to change on it's own. Better double check all of my other settings now.

It changed randomly for me too. I have mine set on overall and for some reason it decided to toggle the other way.

I would blame it on the changeover. Lots of random bugs.

I don't understand this exactly. Are you saying that you have your settings to where the attributes "aren't" in the hundreds? So your players attributes look like....

OVR 58.6

ATH 6.9
SPD 2.4
DEF 6.5.... etc

And you like this?! I didn't know they had an option to change it from (my previous example).....

OVR 586

ATH 69
SPD 24
DEF 65.... etc.

Is this what this topic is about? Or am I not understand the topic?

Posted by topdogggbm on 7/21/2018 3:19:00 PM (view original):
I don't understand this exactly. Are you saying that you have your settings to where the attributes "aren't" in the hundreds? So your players attributes look like....

OVR 58.6

ATH 6.9
SPD 2.4
DEF 6.5.... etc

And you like this?! I didn't know they had an option to change it from (my previous example).....

OVR 586

ATH 69
SPD 24
DEF 65.... etc.

Is this what this topic is about? Or am I not understand the topic?

You can either use a player's total (586) or you can assign specific roles for each position. The actual ratings will stay the same (ATH 69) but the players overall will be whatever they are in that particular role and not their total.

For example, one of my starting D2 point guards has a total of 727. But, since I like to use player roles, I see him as a 76.6. So it's not dividing the ratings by 10 to get a smaller number it's doing a completely different calculation.

Ahhhh. I never understood the player roles. I know you can use them. But aren't the standard player roles kind of "sim like"? In other words, wouldn't you have to adjust and critique your own player roles to be more successful using them?

That's something I never tried. Because I don't really know where to begin with creating one that's adequate. I'd have to have long conversations with other coaches with experience with them. But I don't know if anybody I talk to regularly, uses them.

Just percentages of how much a player fulfills certain rules. I have formulas to determine scoring roles, PER and LP but I don’t use them often. Honestly, I honestly to forget about them until someone posts about them

I just always thought player roles needed to be revamped to be usable. I'll give you an example.....

I have a guard rated 72.6 at PG with the player roles.
ATH 94, SPD 67, DEF 90, PER 79, BH 64, and PAS 70

Another guard rated 71.1 at PG is
ATH 72, SPD 89, DEF 58, PER 55, BH 82, and PAS 82.

I can see why people would argue for guard one as the better player overall. But since I need to play them both, there's no way I play the first guy at PG over the second guy. I have the first guy at SG and the second guy at PG. If you're judging by player roles, you wouldn't make the decision I did. If you would make the decision I did, why would you use the player roles? (Keep in mind, I haven't adjusted the player roles, so if that's the key here, then this discussion isn't relevant).

i'm not sure how the player roles formula thinks player 1 is better at PG. Player 2 is faster, better ball handler and passer (PG areas). Player two is better a shooter (SG areas), more athletic and better defensively, where heavy scoring comes from the opposition fairly often. He's also much slower.

I only use the player roles as a rough guideline and I never use the default player roles. The default roles include attributes that I do not want taken into account (for example Stamina and durability should not be worth 7 percent of a player's overall). Even if you used the default player roles but took out the useless stuff you would be better off.

In my opinion, creating your own player roles and tweaking them as you go provides more value than actually using the roles to set your lineups. It's something that I sometimes recommend to new players as a learning tool, but I agree they're not important if you are a veteran.

Posted by topdogggbm on 7/21/2018 7:47:00 PM (view original):
I just always thought player roles needed to be revamped to be usable. I'll give you an example.....

I have a guard rated 72.6 at PG with the player roles.
ATH 94, SPD 67, DEF 90, PER 79, BH 64, and PAS 70

Another guard rated 71.1 at PG is
ATH 72, SPD 89, DEF 58, PER 55, BH 82, and PAS 82.

I can see why people would argue for guard one as the better player overall. But since I need to play them both, there's no way I play the first guy at PG over the second guy. I have the first guy at SG and the second guy at PG. If you're judging by player roles, you wouldn't make the decision I did. If you would make the decision I did, why would you use the player roles? (Keep in mind, I haven't adjusted the player roles, so if that's the key here, then this discussion isn't relevant).

i'm not sure how the player roles formula thinks player 1 is better at PG. Player 2 is faster, better ball handler and passer (PG areas). Player two is better a shooter (SG areas), more athletic and better defensively, where heavy scoring comes from the opposition fairly often. He's also much slower.

Make your own player role forumla..

Posted by mrslam34 on 7/21/2018 9:57:00 PM (view original):
I only use the player roles as a rough guideline and I never use the default player roles. The default roles include attributes that I do not want taken into account (for example Stamina and durability should not be worth 7 percent of a player's overall). Even if you used the default player roles but took out the useless stuff you would be better off.

In my opinion, creating your own player roles and tweaking them as you go provides more value than actually using the roles to set your lineups. It's something that I sometimes recommend to new players as a learning tool, but I agree they're not important if you are a veteran.

I got ya. I'm not even saying they're unimportant. And i'm personally not interested in using them myself. I was just curious to see how people were using them to their benefit.

If there's anyone out there that uses them consistently, and is successful, I'd be willing to have discussions thru sitemail. Just for knowledge purposes. And ideas. It seems like extra work to me. But it would be interesting to see others views. And to know custom formulas that are used.

I disagree with one part tho.... stamina matters!!