Star vs numbers

[TheAlaskan]

Can I see numerical ratings instead of idiotic stars. Preferably a 1 to 10 ranking. Thanks

[Kinsella19]

Originally Posted by TheAlaskan

Can I see numerical ratings instead of idiotic stars. Preferably a 1 to 10 ranking. Thanks

A 1 to 10 ranking is what you want?

1/2 Stars = 1
1 Stars = 2
1 1/2 Stars = 3
2 Stars = 4
2 1/2 Stars = 5
3 Stars = 6
3 1/2 Stars = 7
4 Stars = 8
4 1/2 Stars = 9
5 Stars = 10

Not that hard bud.

[Savoie45]

Originally Posted by Kinsella19

A 1 to 10 ranking is what you want?

1/2 Stars = 1
1 Stars = 2
1 1/2 Stars = 3
2 Stars = 4
2 1/2 Stars = 5
3 Stars = 6
3 1/2 Stars = 7
4 Stars = 8
4 1/2 Stars = 9
5 Stars = 10

Not that hard bud.

Too much logic in one post 😂

[Tangerino]

Originally Posted by Kinsella19

A 1 to 10 ranking is what you want?

1/2 Stars = 1
1 Stars = 2
1 1/2 Stars = 3
2 Stars = 4
2 1/2 Stars = 5
3 Stars = 6
3 1/2 Stars = 7
4 Stars = 8
4 1/2 Stars = 9
5 Stars = 10

Not that hard bud.

[TheAlaskan]

I'm not sure you understood my question but perhaps I wasn't clear enough. What I'm talking about is not what they represent (you're right, not that hard, bud), but the visual aspect. Please give someone the benefit of the doubt before you jump in with that nature of a response even if I my issue was about what each star means

The stars aren't always easy to differentiate from a cursory glance like it was in FHM2014. Give me 5 5-stars and 5 4.5-stars and it's hard (for me) to see where the 5's stop and the 4.5's begin. Maybe my eyesight is bad, but I prefer FHM2014's visual system for player abilities/potential. The stars are just a pain, so I wish I could at least toggle that.

Wonderful community we have here - every time I've ever come to these forums it's asinine, cynical responses from both community members and administrators. Reminds me why I'm hesitant to buy FHM and support OOTP.

Edit: just wanted to clarify a couple statements.

[TheAlaskan]

Sorry, one more clarification.

The reason I requested 1-10 instead of 1-5 is because I like to play Juniors a lot, and there is a lot more nuance of the players at the lower end of the skill spectrum. A 3.5 and a 4 in a 1-10 system can make a big difference.

[Aube]

While I have no issue with stars, if time, resources, and desire ever line up for the devs in the future it never hurts to have more display options in the future, provided it doesn't interfere too heavily with the game's display formatting. Even if it all adds up to the same thing statistically, some find attributes easier to process on a 1-5, 1-10, 1-20, or 1-100 scale. Even if it's meant to be a much less specific general indicator, I'm sure TheAlaskan wouldn't be the only one out there who would appreciate multiple display options for the general ratings as well.

And just for the future, if you're not looking for asinine, cynical responses you could think of a better start to your topic than asking for an alternative to "idiotic stars". You can make a request for something without coming off like you're just trying to attack the game, which will cause the kind of replies you're getting in ANY forum. If your first clarification post was your INITIAL post (minus the comments on the community of course), you likely would have received responses that matched the thought and consideration you put into THAT post. Just something consider.

[TheAlaskan]

Agreed on the first paragraph, and somewhat agree on the second. I'll leave it alone now since obviously this suggestion will either be taken and implemented or it won't.

[dave1927p]

To each their own. It's a personal preference OOTPs strength is allowing the option. I prefer numbers in ootp but have grown used to the stars in FHM. Hopefully one day it will become an option but I don't see that happening anytime soon.

In a way, it could potentially help grow the fan base giving an option of 1-99 one day bringing an aspect of familiarity for the EA crowd. More options the better in my mind.

[Adam B]

Originally Posted by TheAlaskan

Sorry, one more clarification.

The reason I requested 1-10 instead of 1-5 is because I like to play Juniors a lot, and there is a lot more nuance of the players at the lower end of the skill spectrum. A 3.5 and a 4 in a 1-10 system can make a big difference.

I mean, I'm sure Jeff will chime in on this later, but the star system I actually prefer. Granted you can still see some very important ratings on different scales, but Jeff reworked the whole rating scales.

It's not fair to say a 1 star player is equivalent to 2 out of 10 player. We've moved far, FAR away from that.

I mean, if we rated players the way people rated most things, you'd think 3/4s of hockey players were terrible at a glance .

The star rating system changes depending what league you're in. So a guy whose playing in the OHL could show up as a 3 star player, but when he's in the NHL could only be a 2 or 2.5 star.

In fact, the much better thing to think of (which I wrote on the FHM3 board last year) is more to think of it in terms of where a player should play.

The star ratings are relative to the league you're currently employed in (or the NHL if you're unemployed), so the same player will have different star ratings from different perspectives (e.g., an NHL team may see him as 1-star, where he might be 3-star in the ECHL.) Typically, think of it like this:
0.5 - Below level - Don't start this player unless you have to.
1 - Emergency Call up - Start this player when you have to.
1.5 - 13th man/7th Defenseman. - Good to have around and will play some - can play better than expected.
2.0 - Depth - A league-ready player who will contribute when the matchup is right.
2.5 - Bottom 6 forward/low pairing D - Can contribute when necessary.
3.0 - League ready players. Will contribute nightly.
3.5 - 5.0 - Top league players.
Please note though: It's also good to note (Current) Ability vs Potential. A Five star potential with a one star current ability is much better suited for a lower level than playing on your 4th line.
Potential is just the maximum star rating he's expected to reach in the future; he may or may not actually reach it (and there's a small chance he could exceed it as well.)

The thing is as well, you have to remember that FHM4 that their are even more factors with how well a player will play, such as who as he has chemistry with. For instance in our Week 1 launch week Vegas franchise, you would have seen 2 star Michael Grabner (and later 1.5) playing top line minutes - but the reason we didn't move him down was because he was scoring because he had Chemistry with Tavares. It's a delicate balance.

[Aube]

Not to put words in his mouth but if I understand TheAlaskan correctly, his issue wasn't what the stars represent but how visually clear they are to differentiate from one another.

I can understand that stars are specifically used as opposed to numbers to emphasize the fact that that they're NOT straight mathematical comparisons so that for instance you don't make a logical leap that a 2 star player is exactly half of what a 4 star player's capability, but he was just asking for an alternate display method that's easier to distinguish on a draft page with a dozen players listed. For my part, I don't have a TON of trouble reading it, but when you're looking at that list pre-draft, I'll fully admit I do have to look a bit closely when going down a list to see where the half star differences are, especially once you get tot he 3.5-5 star region.

An alternate display involving numbers is the natural first thought someone would have in a game full of numbers, but other ways that could keep things clearer could also be used as an option if numbers want to be avoided for the reasons. A verbal option like you see on staff ratings for instance would also be visually decoupled from mathematically things with ability and potential being rated as excellent/very good/good and so on. I assume the issue of that would be it would be a larger column which could make displaying it an issue, but it's an interesting option to make things clearer.

It could even be changed around to make it more specific to the chart of what the stars represent as you put down below, though it might be hard to come up with JUST the right word for as many as 10-12 different specific ratings (I know attributes go above 20, do ratings go into 5.5 or 6 star? I forget if I've seen that just now).

Again, I don't have too much trouble with the star ratings (though I have my days and have made my share of mistakes from misreading them), but I do understand how a cluster of yellow on a long list could look 'samey', so it's good to at least have a conversation on if there are workable alternatives that could be made optional down the line. With the amount of time a person can spend with this kind of game, any option that can be used to streamline the presentation for an individual can only be a good thing