Manager ratings

Are they ever going to be used again?

Regardless of how good or bad a manager is having those ratings to gauge oneself or for something to shoot for was kind of nice.

Who knows?

It seemed to me the only real purpose they had was for weeding out
experienced players if the league creator set an arbitrary value in the
league name such as "No managers over 1000 points".

Which brings up another interesting point, if manager ratings are no
longer recorded, why bother with Advanced vs. Standard leagues?

Presumably you still bother with standard/advanced because at some time in the future the manager ratings will return and games being played right now will be included in the points.

I do not miss the mgr ratings. They were good for sort of rewarding those who played a huge number of teams. And more often as you mentioned as a convenient way for some managers to identify experienced managers and tell them to stay away. I hope they stay gone until they can be altered so a league cannot be advanced without some minimal level of experienced players. In fact I would remove the ability of the league creator to designate whether the league was standard or advanced. A league would only get advanced status if the total of manager points exceeded some cutoff.

agreed. Im not opposed to manager ratings at all, but they shouldnt be volume ratings as they were. They should be for number % of games won, % playoffs, %champs number of losing seasons, div champs, etc.

the standard vs advanced is indeed farsical.

I won the championship with my 7th team in a 140 million league. It did boost my ego to see some of the manager rating that I beat. As a newbee it also helps to know the experience you are up against and avoid some divisions with experienced managers. Also, I did see some managers with high ratings that filled the final spot in a division that had managers with low ratings. Having said all that, I would not sure I would make an argument to bring it back.

http://onlinegames.strat-o-matic.com/team/339415

As a newbee it also helps to know the experience you are up against and avoid some divisions with experienced managers

Except using manager ratings for that purpose you can be easily deceived. A high rating only meant a person had played a lot of teams, not that they were any good. Plus while I can see wanting to avoid experts your first few teams but after that avoiding experienced managers is a mistake. And maybe even a mistake from team one.

Why? You only play against inexperienced players you will not really learn how to compete with good players. You might match up and outsmart another rookie. But you only learn to compete against quality by competing with quality. You use your first 20 credits to compete against peewees and when you finally step in with someone like Nev he will eat your lunch. Spend those same first 20 credits competing against the best, studying what they do and more important trying to understand why they do it and you might have a chance of going toe to toe with that 21st credit.

I cannot stress this enough. My #1 advice to newbies is play against the best and do your best sponge imitation soaking up whatever you can learn from them. Avoiding them might allow you to win a few extra games, maybe even luck in to a few playoffs, but you will not learn near as much. And if this is something you enjoy and you are going to stick around and play for years don't you want to do whatever it takes to actually get better?

I don't know, Valen. You're right, if you spend your first 20 credits and then step in with Nev or TLD they will eat your lunch. But, if you use your first 20 credits playing against more experienced managers and learning how to play; then you step in with NEV or TLD...they will still eat your lunch

I get what you're saying. And i agree with your point that you're only going to get better if you play against and see for yourself what better actually looks like. So I don't think anyone should avoid stiff competition no matter what their experience or skill level. But there's nothing wrong with mixing in some leagues with similar competition to your own level. It's no fun getting your ass kicked all over the place in EVERY league you join.

I played in my share of leagues with manager rating caps when I was starting out. I feel like it gave me just enough taste of success to hook me and is part of the reason I'm still here. That didn't mean I avoided other leagues.

I'd like to see the ratings, or ratings of some sort make a return.

I just started playing again after the transition. Manager ratings are vastly overrated. Back 4-5 yrs ago I was rated in the top 100 for managers. I hadn't won but a couple of rings and most of my teams really stunk. I was only in the top 100 because of the volume of teams i played ...only. So take the ratings with a grain of salt. If you build a good team , no matter who is in the league, you should win some games. If you build a bad team, well better luck next time.

I may be in the minority here among those who post, but I LIKE the manager ratings and hope that they are soon brought back. The ratings serve as a guide to the infrequent or casual player about the nature of the competition in the league, particularly for managers in the same division. While I agree that the displayed rating is heavily weighted in terms of participation, by clicking on the rating one is able to determine the number of teams, the overall winning percentage, the number of playoff teams and the number of rings. The ratings may be used by some as a guidepost for structuring their team to compete more effectively with the highest rated manager in their division or league.

Moreover, the ratings serve as a measuring stick for comparing one's performance to those with higher ratings.

As for leagues with max manager rating caps, I understand the arguments both ways about the level of competition. Personally, I like the tough competition. If you want to be the best, you have to beat the best. But, that being said, it's not my call who others decide to play. I'm "pro choice" when it comes to others deciding who to play and am against any "legislation" that would ban leagues with manager rating cap limits. Every manager should have the right to make his own decision as to his league comfort level and to play in a league of his choice. If he chooses to play in a league of managers with similar experience, so be it, but it's his call and his call only as to what level of competition will give him the most enjoyment for his dollar.

The game has come a long way since the transition, with several new features. But bringing back the manager ratings and the monthly batch of new player cards are old features that are long overdue for restoration.

Good and Bad. Often I would be hesitant to try something new, like a mystery card game or
ATG in my case. I didn't want to "ruin" my manager rating. Now without the ratings, I am not as concerned about going 70-90 in a mystery game or in a 99 game or whatever.