What is the preferred? Intelligence is essential however lower consistency can let player go through the defense. Which is more essential IYO..I am stuck in a way because there is no use in wasting money buying players if the difference is very little. The main difference variation comes from the team you are playing against.

I want reliable MLB so can i get reliability with a linebacker who has 6 consistency and 15 intel...average kinda stuff..

BuiltForSpeed wrote: What is the preferred? Intelligence is essential however lower consistency can let player go through the defense. Which is more essential IYO..I am stuck in a way because there is no use in wasting money buying players if the difference is very little. The main difference variation comes from the team you are playing against. I want reliable MLB so can i get reliability with a linebacker who has 6 consistency and 15 intel...average kinda stuff..

it depends on how many MLBs you play, only one of them really needs to have high INT as i think it's just the highest players INT that makes the decision.

i'd prob only opt for high consistency if he's got a high talent.
consistency only really starts to be a real hinderence if you're training a player up to have a very high particular skill (16-20)

if you're just building a solid all round MLB then i'd prob use the guy with high INT

I haven't tried putting someone really unintelligent at MLB to test out and see if the D adjustments are "significant" yet, but that might be an experiment I'll have to try out in friendlies.

WARNING - math geek-i-ness incoming ... a 20 Int, 1 Con MLB would range from 16-20 Int on gameday, so his D play calling would be very good. But his tackling, strength, etc. would also be moving up or down +/- 20%, if I understand correctly. So a 20 Int, 15 Str, 1 Con MLB would be ranging anywhere from 12-18 Str, and that's a bit dangerous for getting steamrolled IMO.

But on the flipside ... don't forget that 50% of the time he'd be a 20 ... the other 50% of the time, ranging from 16-20, so his average Int wouldn't be a 18. It would actually approach 19 over a large series of games. (16,17,18,19,20,20,20,20,20 averaged out, etc. The bigger the sample, the closer the number will approach 19)

So to equal the long term Intelligence of a 20 Int, 1 Con MLB ... you'd need a 19 Int, with 15-20 Con guy. For what those 2 players would cost relatively - the 20 Int, 1 Con guy will be by far the best bargain. How much you're willing to risk his other stats fluctuating should probably be the determining factor.

/math soapbox off

jack6 wrote: Does this +/-20% on basic performance rating realy mean, that all values can increase or drop by 20%? Or does ist mean the overall value (the stars in match rating) can increase an drop +/-20%? Is that full explored?

Had a good solid debate about this in the following thread:

http://grid-iron.org/index.php?page=community&subpage=viewt&t=9262