Which Player Rating Scale Do You Use?

[statfreak]

1 - 10 for everything.

Just what I'm used to. I've tried 1 - 20 and can't stand using that scale. 1 - 100 is just insane and don't understand why it is even an option. I played in an online league that used 1 - 5 and it certainly was a challenge, but 1 - 10 fits me best.

I also tried playing stats only, but I don't have time to analyze the players as much as that requires.

[jnotrizzle]

1-10.

I used to use 1-100 in like OOTP 8. Then I took off until OOTP 11 when I joined an online league that used 1-10 and haven't switched since. I haven't gotten OOTP 13 yet though, so we'll see when I get it. Maybe try just stats.

[sdctitans]

I use 20-80 because thats what the true scouts use so I wanted to be authentic. I also vary sometimes on using stars or not.

[sjam613]

I have never really tried others beside 1 - 20.

[RonP]

One to one hundred.

[Orcin]

1 - 10

[SirMichaelJordan]

Potential and "Other" ratings only.

I use 20-80 mainly because that is what real life scouts use plus it is easy to read and compare.

[robc]

I either use 2-8 or 1-5. I haven't decided which I prefer. I don't like anything above that because it gives too much away for my tastes.

Sometimes I disable actual ratings and just use potential so I have to rely on stats more. Going totally stats only is too much of a chore for me.

In my current fictional league (FBL) I am using 2-8 for actual and potential, and using scouting at normal accuracy. If I turn scouting off I will also turn the actual ratings off too.

[kehowey]

I use 1-100 ........ probably because of my school days. Getting 47% on my final is just something I'm used too.

[TheKenoshaKid]

1-100 is the most "fun" to look at and analyze, but I prefer 20-80 because I believe that's what real baseball scouts use.

Plus, most bullpen guys seem to hover around 45-55, which accurately shows how unpredictable relief pitchers can be. A guy with 45s across the board could surprise me one year, then fall back down to earth next season. Just like real life.

[Charlie Hough]

Well, it's all cosmetic anyway, so it's not as if using one scale over the other actually changes player performance.

I use 1-10.

I thought about using a 1-5 scale, because this was closer to my roots of MicroLeague Baseball, which actually used a 1-3 scale for speed and defense. But I've never gotten around to trying it.

I tend to think that 1-20 would make it far to easy to distinguish players on a more refined basis. 1-10 creates more of a challenge. It's not as easy to distinguish a guy who might hit .240 from a guy who will hit .265.

[polydamas]

I use 1-20, but I'm considering 20-80 since that is what real scouts use.

I think it might be too much information however, so I also might just stick with 1-20 (1-10 is too little in my opinion).

[Ambermonk]

I use 1-100 because I like to know exactly where I stand.

When I know where I stand, then I can turn on my coaching strategies, such as they are, and try to win games & championships.

[luger]

Originally Posted by polydamas

I use 1-20, but I'm considering 20-80 since that is what real scouts use.

I think it might be too much information however, so I also might just stick with 1-20 (1-10 is too little in my opinion).

For what it's worth, 20-80 would be less information than 1-20 since 20-80 goes in increments of 5 (so it's almost like a 1-18 scale in that regard)

[endgame]

Originally Posted by Ambermonk

I use 1-100 because I like to know exactly where I stand.

When I know where I stand, then I can turn on my coaching strategies, such as they are, and try to win games & championships.

Curious, 'monk, what scouting accuracy do you use? Or do you use it at all?

Edit: Saw your answer in the other thread. Good luck with that.

[01010010]

1-5 on everything with not very reliable scouting. Using the most imprecise ratings gives me a rough idea of the player's skills, then if I want deeper analysis of the player I go to the stats.

[texasmame]

Originally Posted by Cras

Which Player Rating Scale Do You Use?


And why?



Be specific.


Partial credit will not be awarded.

1-100.

Feels right - just like a test score.

[akw4572]

Potential and other's only, 1-10. No scouts.

[snepp]

2-8 typically.

Just like like 20-80 scale without the additional digit, makes it a little easier on the eyes.

[Cras]

Originally Posted by luger

For what it's worth, 20-80 would be less information than 1-20 since 20-80 goes in increments of 5 (so it's almost like a 1-18 scale in that regard)

I did not know that. This makes 20-80 sounds very appealing. So does the idea of shutting off actual player ratings. I am going to switch over to that for now and see how it goes.