This question came to me while I was doing something totally unrelated to this game but hear me out:
Let's imagine our team will be playing against those 3 utopic teams.
Utopia 1 (Rating 20): All players have 80 XP and all their attributes are 20. So all of their players have a 20 rating.
Utopia 2 (Rating 50): All players have 50 XP and 50 attributes. Naturally, their ratings are 50.
Utopia 3 (Rating 50): All players have 20 XP and 80 Attributes. So their rating is 50.
When I picture myself playing against those 3 clubs, my logic tells me that I would gain more from U2 and U3 and not so much from U1. Because, no matter how experienced you are, it doesn't mean much if you don't have the talent.
In the current game system, however, players gain a lot more XP playing against U1, even tho it would only have a 20 rating.
I realize the Rating system has been altered recently, and it makes total sense to me. So that encouraged me to expect a similar change to the XP gain system.
This is a discussion rather than a suggestion. What do you think?
Having your XP gain determined by your opposition at all is a problem in my view - creates advantages between leagues, emphasises gaps between divisions.
At the moment if you know you're more than likely to get beaten it's in your interests to put up an inexperienced team to maximise your XP gain but this means your opposition get less XP as a result - through no fault of their own.
Same with fitness, chance of injury - all impacted by the other teams choices as much as your own.
With your specific choices I agree the final rating is more logical than purely XP. You really don't see teams like Utopia 1 - there used to be less exaggerated teams like that before the rating system changed, but back then the rating of Utopia 1 would have been higher than now - which was why those sorts of teams existed.
I'd personally keep it based on XP, but make it only based on your own XP like Friendly matches
Thanks for the additional input.
"Playing against a 50-rating team is more challenging than a 20-rating team. The higher challenge should yield higher experience."
Does anyone disagree with that statement?