• Help Support The Rugby Forum :

My New Idea



Well i was sittin there takin a **** earlier today, and i had a brilliant idea. My idea was change what "impact player" is. I dont mean take away their stars, or their particular stats, just change what it means. Believe it or not every team has that impact player, not just the best teams in the world. USA has Mike Hercus for example, and he could easily be an impact player.

What i think is that EA should consider what i stated above while selecting the impact players. Not every impact player has to be a 98 or 99 overall. I personally think that each team regardless of skill level should have that impact player, the player with more experience than everyone else. Ok take Mike Hercus again for example, he is what a 78 or something like that overall, but because of his experience and his ability i believe he should earn a "impact player" star. There is no doubt that throughout a game, Hercus can display that he has that X factor which will propel his team through a particular challenge.

Do you guys sort of get what im saying?

Impact should not necessarily mean that you have to be a 98 or 99 overall, but that you have what it takes to help your team win, and have the X factor needed.
Thats what I have Tried to achieve in my roster, Jason White is a better example for Scotland.

Shouldn't people like Mike Hercus simply be higher on "command" and have that star higlighted????

Truth is Mike Hercus would not have too much impact if he were playing for a good team like the Huricanes trying to knock off the Crusaders......so why should he have "impact" status ahead of other S14 players????
noo im not just talking about him, im talking about players in general

theres a impact player on my rugby club who would not have to be a 99 overall but he's still a impact player for what part he plays in the success of the club
or say for fiji caucau for how he runs on guys all day long, he's not a 99 but he plays a huge role in fiji's success
How about Hb decide to create something with depth...

Perhaps with impact players, you could take into account the opponents they're playing against, their stats, their morale, and their form to decide just how..... Potent their impact is.
Ie. Let's say that Sione Lauaki for the Chiefs has been playing superbly for the Chiefs, and he's chucked on the bench against the Force. With 20minutes to go, the Chiefs are 8 points up, so you bring Lauaki in. He has a bright as star above his head/next to his name, meaning that he will be very hard to stop on runs, and make his offloads very smoothly indeed.

Later on, you can throw him into the AB's, and he has been playing reasonably. He get's chucked on against South Africa in the latter parts of the game. ABs are losing by 10 points. His star isn't that bright, but he still has a slight impact...

Effectively, that could open up heaps of possibilities in Manager Mode next year (there will be one. I just confirmed it), meaning that potentially any player in the game could become a Star player.,
personally i think that they should ditch the star player idea all togeather and let stats speak for themselves. it still works in the usa team, or any other minnow, because if there is someone such as hercus, they would be better than the rest of the team anyway.

although it would be better if they had a impact player option, like they do with captains etc, and players with higher agression, acceleration and kicking should improve more with it on.
Hey sambad!!!!!!!!!!!! How about a "form meter" underneath the stamina meter in the game? You could use this to see just how much of an impact (good or bad) a certain player could have on the game. Also you can see how much a form a sub is in, and the chances of him making an impact on the game could be seen there...
yes, but then you have the ea problem which states: if you dont score 32584965396936793691257 tries in a season, your a **** player and your morale is 0, such as the fowards, in particular, the tight 5, in particular, the frount row.

another idea that i thought of the other day. in wl, how you have a pool of players that you can choose from, well one thing that ****** me off is that you can only get players from your division, and only if they want to play for you etc. i think you should get 3 poach trades per season, when you can get any player from your division, or lower divisions. but they are 25% more expencive
once again i had another great idea while taking a crap!!

how about scouts, and you can search in regions for players that you would like to possibly develop, and play in your squad.

say you wanted to look for what little talent is availabe in north america, and say you found a decent youngster you could sign him and bring him up til he starts for the first XV.
Originally posted by woosaah@Apr 21 2006, 02:57 PM
there is noone decent in north america so that wouldnt work :D
thanks for that we have a few good players lying around mostly famous forwards although gareth rees is our famous flyhalf
Originally posted by Canadian_Rugger@Apr 21 2006, 03:26 PM
thanks for that we have a few good players lying around mostly famous forwards although gareth rees is our famous flyhalf
Sounds Welsh, tbh :p

Latest posts