That's what the education is for; I was actually just looking at some of the different roles, and there's still many untested very high scoring masters out there.
It doesn't mean that the person is going to be excellent, but it gives an indication.
I have tried everything, and I am still none the wiser. I have tried scouting people, signing them then scouting them, i have tried designing parts with them and nothing. My coach does not even reveal their stats, I have tried selecting people via qualifications, but i cannot reveal any stats.
So i have a team of people and no matter what I do i cannot see how good they are. Its making it quite hard to play the game as a large part of it is down to quality of staff. I understand that there needs to be an element of skill/luck when hiring to make it challenging, but i cant play the game blind. Is this a bug or have i really missed something fundamental.
Christopher, taking a quick look at your team, you are missing something. All your staff have Terrible or Bad experience. Try hiring staff with a little more experience (Okay and Good).
The experience stat gives an indication of how high the staff members overall stats should be. So the higher the experience, the more likely they are to at least be decent.
I think we just need to be able to scout people who arent signed. Now maybe not get all the stats but at least a star rating will be really helpful.
Bit of a side note but Frank it may also be helpful to have the scout give an estimated career expectancy for staff. If I had a younger staff member who wasnt that great but could see he would be around a long time i might be more willing to take a risk and bring him in to train up. And the opposite if there was someone really good but they will start to degrade after a year then i might stay clear. Not a biggy but might add a nice element to picking staff
Also Christopher, if you go to the job market then you can see the education degree for each staff member. This is the biggest indicator of their talent. Of course there are exceptions that might not do so well, or who are under rated, but those are exceptions. This stat is probably the biggest sign of talent, but I think I need to put it more in the picture as not a lot of people seem to be aware of what it is.
Tim, we used to have that but it was too revealing. If you're hiring a 35 year old staff, then he's good for at least 10-15 seasons you can be sure.
Same reasoning as above, you can see who trains youth well. And in the future (especially for coaches) there will be a drop in performance if staff have too many tasks.
