Notice his top 5/6 didn't include anyone from Victorian teams....
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
AFL 2007 talk
- Thread starter Fiery Hawk
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
- Status
- Thread starter
- #952
Those players are definitely top at their clubs. Not sure who the top 5 of all the players are.
Overall the teams are pretty evenly rated this time around when you consider that their best 22 form the team rating. It's only once injuries occur that depth becomes an issue for the lesser teams.
The reason we made the teams more evenly balanced this time around is it helps with the longevity of game simulations and statistics. You see in real life how some teams come from nowhere within 12 months. In AFL2006 they would come to the fore after 4 or so seasons. This was too long in a simulated experience and dulled the career mode.
- Thread starter
- #953
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
Yeah but the Vics have forgotten how to play footy
Forgotten? They ever knew?
Yeah, but the 1st and 3rd players on my list are from Victoria
Tarkyn_24
Okeydoke7 is [redacted]
- Dec 23, 2006
- 58,206
- 84,785
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Banned
- #960
If reiwolst aint top 5 ill go heave ...
raiders07
Senior List
Riewoldt is overrated.
A change from this bitching about "top 5 players", I feel that kicking distance should not be treated like other stats.
Instead of being rated 1 to 100 and modifiable, it should be from 45 (Troy Cook and that) to 75 (Hurn, Lynch) and defined when a player is drafted. Players don't "develop" into superboots in real life, why would they in AFL 2006 then?
Been meaning to say this for ages.
MG
Instead of being rated 1 to 100 and modifiable, it should be from 45 (Troy Cook and that) to 75 (Hurn, Lynch) and defined when a player is drafted. Players don't "develop" into superboots in real life, why would they in AFL 2006 then?
Been meaning to say this for ages.
MG
JPEGFrAnKlIn#23
Rookie
- Thread starter
- #967
Yeah I tend to agree with you MG. We've made a change in 2007 - now it costs about 10 dev points (from memory) to 'up' the player's kicking distance stat by 1. We agree that you shouldn't really be able to develop a longer kick and considering the amount of dev points you receive during a season you'd be reluctant to spend so many on just one stat improvement.
For the record...a player with a 50 rating can kick about 45m whereas a player with a 100 rating kicks about 70m so the amount of distance improvement you get from upping the stat category is minimal.
For the record...a player with a 50 rating can kick about 45m whereas a player with a 100 rating kicks about 70m so the amount of distance improvement you get from upping the stat category is minimal.
- Thread starter
- #969
70m is taking into account kicking on the run. Granted there are very few who can do this and as such there aren't many rated that highly.
The majority of players are ranked 60-80 in this category which makes it hard to rate players 90+ overall in the game. The overall player ratings are a lot lower this year but that's because of the new way we have approached the kicking distance rating.
The majority of players are ranked 60-80 in this category which makes it hard to rate players 90+ overall in the game. The overall player ratings are a lot lower this year but that's because of the new way we have approached the kicking distance rating.
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Tim Notting!70 m = super boot. How many people can kick that far
raiders07
Senior List
So FH you mean that Paul Haselby's rating for example has dropped from 88 to 84. Is this what you mean?
And MG I like that idea about the kicking distance. You wouldnt see Troy Cook or Peter Bell kicking 70-80m.
- Thread starter
- #973
So FH you mean that Paul Haselby's rating for example has dropped from 88 to 84. Is this what you mean?
Sorry, I'll try to make it clearer.
Basically an overall player rating is derived from 10 stat categories. Given that most player ratings for the kick distance will be low in AFL2007 it'll mean an overall drop in their ratings.
e.g. In AFL2006, Player A rated 90 in all stats categories so has a rating of 90 overall. He can only kick 45m though as a max distance so in AFL2007 his kick distance rating is 50 (remembering that a rating of 50=45m and 100=70m). His overall rating is now 86.
You'll therefore notice an overall drop in player and team ratings for AFL2007 based on how we rate kicking distances this time around.
Wow, just realised, the game will be out next month...
- Thread starter
- #974
Brendon Goddard, Anthony Rocca, Dustin Fletcher, Quinten Lynch would go close, Shannon Hurn can kick it a mile... just to name a few.
- Status