Subject: Questions & Answers

Thought you lost more than 2 times. You actually have 1-4-2 result, playing Low your matches in I league and coming here with that attitude ? Don't need to be rocket scientist to figure out what are you doing wrong. Your opponents know what will you play weeks before your match.
Teams shouldn't be positioned on the table by strength of their players, but by tactical skills of their manager.

"Teams shouldn't be positioned on the table by strength of their players"

I never stated something like this. So pls dont ascribe me a bad attitude! I'm posting here trying to get some explanations. You should know that as I got clearer and tried to explain in my second post that I see all your points by creating chances regarding the importance, I just saw no explanation to the scores regarding the importance when I still have more chances and shots. And I'm sure I got a point there.

The best explanation to me right now is of jorgenius that importance seems to correlate with the chance of getting a goal out of a shot.

I agree with you that the manager with the best mix of team and tactical skill should win. The problem there is now that ppm added the 2 additional steps of game importance to have more tactical options. Now everybody of you guys say I made the mistake of playing one step lower than my opponents. Ok, I can see that point. But if its wrong to play lower than my opponent to save energy for end of season even if I outscore him in chances and shots than the additional tactical option by adding more steps of game importance is senseless at all and we can go back to low, normal and high.

Maybe "importance" has something to do with more or less % of scoring as well...

Au contraire my friend. Although your paradox was very well posted. If the two steps added were irrelevant, you would not be able to choose in which competition put your focus on. Who wants it all may well end up with nothing, but if you choose in a calculated way you may profit a lot from some strategical thinking. It's up to us to decide and with more variables the decision becomes more complex, hence (imo), the game becomes more interesting. What is the way to the success? Is there only one path or you may create another track?

Ok, you got that point

Already been stated by lets say that again, would be wierd to think 50% lower energy would compensate for having just a small advantage in team strenght.

You said you were the best in Germany, had best players...that's why I said teams shouldn't be well positioned (forgot there a word) JUST because of their great players. Your bad attitude is when you come publicly where most people dwell, and repeat word "crap" describing game engine, without making realistic approach to your games.
So, with that attitude you showed everyone that they can spit on this game publicly whenever they want it and without really proper reason.
We have a topic for strange results, and we could talk about it there.

Ok I was disappointed and should have settled down before writing words like crap. This wasnt correct by me and I apologize for this, you are right in this point.

But into the remaining people should not interpret to much in it. I said I have the best team - I have it by team strengt. I never said having the best players just well trained. So we can neglect the point that bad training is a reason thats all. Never wanted to say anything else.
I never wanted to talk about strange results. This became clear in my second post when it became hopefully very clear what I'm pointing on. But unfortunatly jorgenius is still the only one who really tries to discuss about this point. So maybe we could finish the first post which I really regret and can discuss about my arguments in second post now.

Ok. It seems better when people let some steam out, and when they calm down.
Jorgenius will do the rest

Is there any proportion between number of player and max injured player?
For example, 11-30 max 2 player injured 31-50 max 3 player injured etc

The more you have players, the more you have probabilities to have injured players...

But I don't think that "proportion" is the idea ...

Yeah its definetly the best to calm down before doing anything
Since it applies to all things in life hopefully I will remember this

So either I really got bad luck to score almost nothing out of my lots of chances or jorgenius is right that importance has that strong effect on effectivness scoring goals out of shots on target

Well its clear that lower importance means lower performance. I think we agree on that. But I cant imagine that 50% lower importance means 50% lower performance. For this I wouldnt have in almost each game more chances. So I think its to simple to say its not possible to make up 50% lower importance by lets say 10% more team strengh. So I guess if normal means 100% performance so low means maybe 90%. Just a guess dont hit me on that exact number

Probably, but I think you are using bad tactcis for your team along with this, delay play as best team in germany for example