Quote:
Originally Posted by kq76
Actually, OFG, I wonder if by this check on the player you mean each player has a say likelihood of potential being seen rating whereby it's difficult to see the future potential of great players like Albert Pujols or Mike Piazza. Because if it's just a matter of how good the team's scouts are then those players might be totally missed by some teams, but seen for how good they really are by some teams and taken in the 1st rd which is rather unrealistic. A lot of teams miss out on some great players, not just some teams. Or, we could just continue seeing these players as those 1 star players who become 5 star players that Erik talked about.
|
Unfortunately, I'm not very good at explaining what I mean to others cause I know what I mean and I don't know that others don't know what I mean, you know what I mean?
For any RPG gamers out there, maybe they could help. For example, before an attack, the defender might do a perception check. If he passes, he's able to better defend himself. If he fails this check, he's caught off guard and his defenses suffer.
Well, I just think it would be neat if each scout had to do a perception check, say once every other month (3 times a year), BEFORE he reported his findings on EACH PLAYER he's asked to scout. If he passes this "perception" check or "scout" check, than he gives his normal ratings based on his abilities, but if he fails this "perception" check, he's way off, even on current ratings, ON THIS PLAYER ONLY.
To me that would do a couple of things, at least in OOTP8 because I'm not sure just how different scouting will be in OOTP9. It would provide for the possibility that you might be misjudging the current abilities of the guy you've got riding the pine (or the one you've got starting everyday) AND it would provide incentive to have more than one scout actually scout players. I know I've found myself more or less relying on one or two scouts exlusively (the best "Scout hitting and hitting potential" scout and the best "scout pitching and pitching potential" scout). If you knew there may be a player who's being "missed" by one of your top scouts, you may be more inclined to scout him with more than one scout.
To me it would add "realism" because even the best scouts miss some players. And to take it to a higher degree of realism, it would be cool if some PLAYERS were marked such that NO scout passed the perception check, thus the possibility of the next Albert Pujols.
There, I did it again. I have no clue how to be brief. Not sure if its an old age thing or a plain lack of intellect, but I can't do it.