G
gaspar
Guest
argentina 80
france 92
london wasps 75
france 92
london wasps 75
-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
S
SPIDER18
Guest
you guys might have seen the shots of the game already(see 08 screenshots thread and plus the guys rep for posting them if you haven't already) if you have you probably noticed the rankings given to france and argentina which if they are the final rankings are a bit dissapointing France are 92 which seems to high though without some reference to how high sa and nz are i can't critizise and argentina look like they are going to get screwed they had a rating of only 80 which is a surprise after beating england and nearly beating france late last year. B)
edit: sorry i didn't see the post above mine until too late.
edit: sorry i didn't see the post above mine until too late.
P
phoenix
Guest
Grrr Argentina deserve more than 80, thats not a good start EA.
C
candybum
Guest
yes i agree, they just beat Ireland 2 - 0!
S
SPIDER18
Guest
i'm not disagreeing with you but i wouldn't read too much into the ireland v argentina series as both teams didn't have their best xv on the field.
S
SmokeyMonkey
Guest
Looks like they've underated Argentina, at 80 there to France's 92!
H
hisokagray
Guest
Ireland better be bloody good(only team to beat them lately has been France) and Munster should in the top two or three rated European teams.
S
SaintsFan_Webby
Guest
Why?
They weren't in top 2 or 3 teams in this season's Heineken Cup.
H
hisokagray
Guest
That's true but my guess is that the EA ratings are about a year out of date and so Munster should be rated highly.
D
davidson
Guest
my feeling is that ea weight their ratings with respect to their big markets.
i reckon they will be generous with england as usual.
i reckon they will be generous with england as usual.
B
Bullitt
Guest
Why?
They weren't in top 2 or 3 teams in this season's Heineken Cup. [/b][/quote]
While I agree that Munster should be nowhere near the top 5 or maybe 10 even european sides, using the HEC for guidance puts Saints in the European top 4 and Wasps as the best side about while Bristol, Gloucester, Ospreys, Agen (you need to think about that one
) and Cardiff are all out in the cold.
C
Cymrurugbyfan
Guest
Right, getting to the semi-finals of the H-Cup while beating Toulouse, Ulster and London Irish twice (home and away) in their pool while also detroying Munster in the quarters doesn't grant the scarlets a 70+?
G
getofmeland
Guest
I am guessing Bath will be about 60 or lower to be honest...
S
SPIDER18
Guest
well technically they've also lost twice to argentina demonstrating a complete lack of depth. but your right victory of aus and south africa, and a close second in the six nations is obviously good don't forget they haven't played nz in a while (12 months ago and in case u forgot they lost both of them).
T
TVH11
Guest
Right, getting to the semi-finals of the H-Cup while beating Toulouse, Ulster and London Irish twice (home and away) in their pool while also detroying Munster in the quarters doesn't grant the scarlets a 70+? [/b][/quote]
I did say i was biased, haha. no but serious i don't know wot they are gonna give the teams in wales. C'mon they've rated Argentina 80 (Under-rated o'r wot) and france 92 (how, gd but are too bloody unpredictable) if these are anything to go by, New Zealand are gonna be 100 and South Affrica very close behind. Does this mean becuase Argentina beat Wales twice last year that wales are gonna be less than 80 (O'r are we gonna have benifit of the doubt which england obviously had last year and most probably this year too).
Can't wait to see al the ratings though!
D
Dmx#1
Guest
Thats why there should be a damn roster editor! So that that people can adjust the ratings to how they see fit. The editing of rosters should also show what effect it has on the team by showing a change of the team ratings like madden. Its can't be that hard damnit.
S
SPIDER18
Guest
i can definitly see the reason for a stats editor but wouldn't it be better if ea just got the rankings right? i mean i know its subjective but i think everyone agrees argentina are better than 80. though a good point was made in a earlier post they do seem to go easy on there target markets i.e england. B)
D
Dmx#1
Guest
The chances that EA will get the ratings right are not high.I wont be suprised if EA hardly touched the rosters in terms of individual ratings. They probbably just added more points to to players with lower ratings to have an a effect on the overall rating of a team (EA Employee: Hey! Since we are changing the stats and according to these somewhat outdated statistics i think France should get 92 ovr rating, and since we don't know a damn thing about rugby...Im going to add a star to random player lets Jauzion....Chabal...Nah their names dont sound like their good players...I'll roll 3 dice to determine who i give it to) .Hell i wont be suprised If Wilkinson and even more laughable, Carlos Spencer still have a higher rating then Daniel Carter. I hope your right though.
C
candybum
Guest
the thing is that everyone will have their own opinions and there will bound to still have disagreements...
how likely is it that they're going to include a editor?
how likely is it that they're going to include a editor?
N
nik
Guest
ea usually mention stuff like player editors. so if its not mentioned in the feature list then a player editor will most probably not be included in the game.
