Θέμα: Questions & Answers

i liked the article, but i was never very good in higher math. so the formulae didnt do me any good.

also how did u come up with the eq? i dont understand the steps.

Me either. I've read that blog post numerous times and don't get how the EQ works.

The catch is the following ! Lets' say that you need a 2/1/1 ratio. Ok ? That means that main attribute must be trained more than secondary ones: 1 point for secondary means 2 points for main .
If you have a player with low quality on main attribute, you'll spend more days to train him in order to maintain on a 2/1/1 ratio.

Example:

Player1
Main attribute - 50; quality - 50
Secondary attribute 25; quality - 99
Secondary attribute 25; quality - 99
(let's say that for a specific training level, player daily practice = quality of attribute)

To bring him at a 52/26/26 you need 4 days for main skill and 2 days for secondary ones, in total: 6 days.

Player2
Main attribute - 50; quality - 99
Secondary attribute 25; quality - 50
Secondary attribute 25; quality - 99
(let's say that for a specific training level, player daily practice = quality of attribute)

To bring him at a 52/26/26 you need 2 days for main skill, 2 days for for first secondary atty and 1 day for second secondary attribute, in total: 5 days.



So, even if average quality is the same for those 3 attys, the difference of training days is different !

I've used that to find a niche market. You can buy 60-70Q'd primary guys pretty cheap. If they have 80+ secondary Q's then you're getting at least a player who has Qs as if he is 70/70/70

Yes, but what is the actual calculation used to work that out in a spreadsheet? How did he come up with those EQ figures?

I don't understand wjat are you reffering at !

On the previous page, ZOMG posted this:

Step 2 is figuring out who has a future on the team and who should be released. For this I calculate the Effective Quality (EQ) as described in this wonderful article: glanvalleyeaglets.wordpr ess.com/2010/01/19/player... . The EQ is essentially the weighted harmonic mean of the player's important qualities and is a true measure of their rate of advancement where a simple average is not. Something the article doesn't mention but is very important is to adjust the EQ based on the player's CL. In a post somewhere on the forums, the manager Stan reported that at CL 5/6, a player trains 10% slower then he would at 6/6, and at 4/6 it's a 20% reduction. Thus the EQ's for each player (as modified by their CL) are A(48.97), B(43.18), C(52.16), D(56.00). What this tells us is that D will advance the fastest and B the slowest - at least until the end of the season when some players may drop in CL and thus some recalculations may need to be done.


How did he get those EQ figures?

Now I got it !

There is a big difference between the weighted harmonic mean of the player's important qualities and arithmetic mean, I explained you in an above post why.

The weighted harmonic mean is EQ (as zomg noted it) = (A1 + A2 + A3) / (A1/Q1 + A2/Q2 + A3/Q3), where A1, A2, A3 is the ratio used for player training (2/1/1 for example) and Q means quality of attribute. This equation is the same with the one from the specified blog.


Now, let's see what data we have:
Goalie A: Age 19, 5/6, Goal: 101(83), Pass: 40(50), Tech: 37(34)
Goalie B: Age 19, 4/6, Goal: 90(75), Pass: 33(37), Tech: 45(49)
Goalie C: Age 20, 5/6, Goal: 72(58), Pass: 28(67), Tech: 29(51)
Goalie D: Age 15, 5/6, Goal: 69(62), Pass: 36(54), Tech: 42(74)


EQ for goalie A will be, according to above formula:
(2 + 1 + 1) / (2/83 + 1/50 + 1/34) <--- result1. You can calculate it !

In same post, zomg stated that 'in a post somewhere on the forums, the manager Stan reported that at CL 5/6, a player trains 10% slower then he would at 6/6, and at 4/6 it's a 20% reduction'.
Goalie A has CL =5/6, that means he is training with a 10% reduction.

So, his EQ for CL = 6/6 is result1, but we must deduct 10% (due to CL 5/6).



This is the method to calculate EQ !


Edit: I've deleted previous post. Made a mistake there !

Why you are dividing 2+1+1 with that in the brackets ? Why don't you divide it with 3 ?

*pardon - 4 instead of 3

Uhm, even easier, enter data into my spreadsheet. On the report page the number next to each position is his overall EQ. I have a player with an EQ of 94.3 at C based on his 99-95-85 Qs

I don't understand !

You mean ( 83 + 50 + 34 ) / 3 ?