Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Other Stuff
Rugby Video Games & Apps
Team Rankings - Full list & Overall ratings
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="captainamerica" data-source="post: 14669"><p>Well I'll be damned. EA throw out a bunch of silly ratings and it turns this thread into a cock-waving contest about the North and South. </p><p></p><p>Time, gentlemen, please.</p><p></p><p>Also, Locks has only received a handful of thanks in what had to be a very, very tedious task in documenting these ratings. Not that he's asking for it, but to scroll through 63 teams . . . well, 61 (where the hell are Leinster and the Lions?) Still, you see what I'm getting at.</p><p></p><p>reds07, the Lions appear to be locked at first. They are in the game, though from the back cover of the UK boxart, they are the 2001 Lions.</p><p></p><p>Now, about the ratings -- yes, it looks like EA/HB might have shat something atrocious out, but there possibly might be some reason behind it. I mean, I'm trying to find a reason so bare with me. </p><p></p><p>I think they went with the overall average of every player on each team. You get a team with a couple players in the lower 90's, but also some players balancing out in the high 50's (maybe their on the bench) and that brings the overall potential rating down. </p><p></p><p>That's as best as I can see it. I'm probably wrong, but as Quins said, these are probably old ratings anyway.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="captainamerica, post: 14669"] Well I'll be damned. EA throw out a bunch of silly ratings and it turns this thread into a cock-waving contest about the North and South. Time, gentlemen, please. Also, Locks has only received a handful of thanks in what had to be a very, very tedious task in documenting these ratings. Not that he's asking for it, but to scroll through 63 teams . . . well, 61 (where the hell are Leinster and the Lions?) Still, you see what I'm getting at. reds07, the Lions appear to be locked at first. They are in the game, though from the back cover of the UK boxart, they are the 2001 Lions. Now, about the ratings -- yes, it looks like EA/HB might have shat something atrocious out, but there possibly might be some reason behind it. I mean, I'm trying to find a reason so bare with me. I think they went with the overall average of every player on each team. You get a team with a couple players in the lower 90's, but also some players balancing out in the high 50's (maybe their on the bench) and that brings the overall potential rating down. That's as best as I can see it. I'm probably wrong, but as Quins said, these are probably old ratings anyway. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Other Stuff
Rugby Video Games & Apps
Team Rankings - Full list & Overall ratings
Top