Θέμα: Questions & Answers

One thing i think you have to look at too in shooting is passing. Good passing by other players help setup your scorer.

Yes, like I said many things factor in to whether or not your player will score goals. Line composition among them. But as far as training individuals, I've found the above successful.

One thing I wonder about is defensemen. One of my D-men just so happens to have a shooting attribute of 50, with a def. of 100, and a shot quality of about 53. However, I think he has one goal. His offensive attribute is like 18. So I am wondering if the shot training is really proportionate to the offensive, not merely primary, attribute?

Higher OFF = more shots. Higher SHOT and TECH = better S%.

perhaps, but since you generally don't train off for defensemen, you will never train shot. And I don't expect goals from defenseman anyways. Hopefully they rack up assists from deflections and rebounds.

are the graphs on the PRO PACK not in use yet?

defenseman scoring is a great tweek to strong scoring. my problem is that's where about 50% of my scoring is coming from. and my d-men aren't great shots. anyhone have ideas why this is going on?

I have a question about something in the blog about determining the EQ. In that blog he writes “100 points of chemistry give +20% to the attributes and each 100 points of experience give additional +20% to the attributes.”

Now does anybody know if this is still true and if there is a sliding scale? Meaning if you have 50% Chemistry then the boost is 10% or is it all or nothing?

I'm sure it's not all or nothing.

I heard it is linear. So Yes, 50% chem is a 10% boost and 25% chem is 5% boost and 5% chem is 1% boost etc. Likewise for EXP.

I've made an excel for calculating EQ but I have an issue:

If CL=5/6, that means EQ = EQ (at 6/6) - 10% ?

this is from page 80 in this forum.

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.

going by this a 6/6 player trains as normal, no reduction.

Not good in my opinion !

6/6: no reduction
5/6: -10%
4/6: -20%
3/6: -30%
2/6: -40%
1/6: -50%
0/6: ?

We know that at CL 0/6, player won't get any practice. Shouldn't be linear?

I think it's not linear. At 0/6 there is no training and I guess at certain age deterioation starts for players with 0/6.

I calculate it as the EQ(5/6) = EQ(6/6) * 90%. Similary EQ(4/6) = EQ(6/6) * 80%.

The data I wrote down from Stan's test is:

6/6 - 100%
5/6 - 90% (-10%)
4/6 - 80% (-20% net)
3/6 - 60% (-40% net)

Knowing that 0/6 is supposed to be 0%, my guess is that 2/6 is 40% and 1/6 is 20% though I haven't confirmed it to be true.