while i agree with the first part of your analysis about starting from 80-80-30 and adding 20-0-20 is better than 0-0-50 or 50-0-0 i dont agree with the next assumption though it is probably correct.
"Then, at some point between 50 and 80, adding strength to the third atribute becomes non-optimal. You would rather add some strength to the first atribute."
You have assumed that the optimal point is above 50. It is very possible based solely on the guide that the optimal point could be below 50 but closer to it that to 30.
Additionally we are all assuming that the optimal points are all based on linear functions which is unfounded.
Selecciona un país: |
![]() |
Internacional |
Yes indeed, the assumption is probably but not necessarily correct. Put in other words, it´s not impossible to have
119-80-31 > 100-80-50
according to the guide.
This would require a really exotic (but it could still be injective) function.
119-80-31 > 100-80-50
according to the guide.
This would require a really exotic (but it could still be injective) function.
How the hell do you react to this...
http://pptv.powerplaymanager.c om/en/hockey-broadcast.html?da ta=3422722
The game goes through OT to a shootout... where only ONE shooter from each team shoots????
In a shootout you are supposed to have 3 shooters, that's why i took the time to set them up on the bloody line setup
What a load of BS that is! Very very p*ssed off right now!
http://pptv.powerplaymanager.c om/en/hockey-broadcast.html?da ta=3422722
The game goes through OT to a shootout... where only ONE shooter from each team shoots????
In a shootout you are supposed to have 3 shooters, that's why i took the time to set them up on the bloody line setup

What a load of BS that is! Very very p*ssed off right now!
My friend, altough I agree with you, it has been like that since I first entered PPM, some 6 months ago. So I guess it´s really important for us to set very carefully our penalty shooters.
But I must say I disagee with the maths for beta and gamma.
I know figured out why I disagree with certain folks here! LOL Your a group of economist! ROFL I/m an accounting guy! hehehe We just don't mix well! LOL
Have a great week.
@ eagles.
Loved the blog as well. But wouldn't put to much into the Latvian goalie thing. 1/2 season, tactics, importance, defensive build, ect., ect, ect. Though that said It's very clear a large number of successful managers use 2:1:1. Or could it be some are 1 atty junk sellers that gained thier advantage in the game through a practice I personally dislike. Though certainly allowed.
Again maybe 2:1:1 is the BEST build. I'm giving it a few more seasons to evolve. Building a few 2:1:1 guys to use next season. Never had any luck with the build but I'll give it another try. Can't hurt. If thier ineffective it's an easy fix.
Have a great week.
@ eagles.
Loved the blog as well. But wouldn't put to much into the Latvian goalie thing. 1/2 season, tactics, importance, defensive build, ect., ect, ect. Though that said It's very clear a large number of successful managers use 2:1:1. Or could it be some are 1 atty junk sellers that gained thier advantage in the game through a practice I personally dislike. Though certainly allowed.
Again maybe 2:1:1 is the BEST build. I'm giving it a few more seasons to evolve. Building a few 2:1:1 guys to use next season. Never had any luck with the build but I'll give it another try. Can't hurt. If thier ineffective it's an easy fix.
Curious question!
What is the distribution of your players handedness?
Mine is 18L 17R 13U
What is the distribution of your players handedness?
Mine is 18L 17R 13U
21L 25R 11U
You are well endowed on universal huh?
You are well endowed on universal huh?

While we're on the topic:
What are your CL distributions?
6/6= 19
5/6= 23
4/6= 5 (All my C's and A's are in here)
3/6= 1
What are your CL distributions?
6/6= 19
5/6= 23
4/6= 5 (All my C's and A's are in here)
3/6= 1
Temas favoritos
Ultimos comentarios