Oggetto: I.1

no didnt get a chance to change my tactics was later home than i planned. when i did get on before the match it wouldnt let me change anymore.

Game engine screwed me. Almost every single person i've spoken to says I should have won that game. Oh well, makes for an interesting season. Defeating Cav was a much more important game for my lads

Good Morning!

What do you think, wichone is better?

1. A : 15 years old, 80% Average Quaility, CL5, 360 OR, or B : 15 y, 80% AQ, CL6, 200 OR

other
2. A : 15 y, 70% AQ, CL6, 400 OR, or B : 15 y, 80% AQ, CL6, 300 OR

other
3. A : 15 y, 80% AQ, CL5, 350 OR, or B : 15 y, 75% AQ, CL6, 350 OR

You see? You are too comfortable. Easy league, not too much to do, and such of mistakes happend.

You should win, no question.
What do you think? Who will be the third in your league at the end?

no not comfortable. bored. i asked not to be split from oceania. at least with them there was another top team in ericheeel.

How many candidates are still here in the forum?
They thought this serious!

I miss the old league

Which is better would depend entirely on the purpose of those players. From a league point of view, 1A, 2B and 3B would be my pick, but absolutely NONE of them would actually get game time.

1A has 160 more OR than B and chances are by the time B gets another 160 to his AI his CL would have dropped to 5 and he'd be a year older.

2A and 2B i'm on the fence, so would probably just sell both.

3B has lower Q by 5 but higher CL, so he'd be my pick.

BUT... what you have not included is what is these players EOR/EQ? AveQ means absolutely nothing in this game, so those averages you have are only good when taken in the context of all things being equal.

From a NT point of view, none of them would make my team as OR is too low on all counts.

A id ake he firs guy
B not sure
3 id take the 2nd guy

also note it depends on a lot more than just those things.

I thought so that everything else is the same in the examples. Every other information. I thought that you not really need them, just i m asking wichone is better.

I agree with the 3. example. Id take the B player. I think almoast everybody agree with that. This is better.

Of course there are some managers, who would take 3.A. If these managers dont want to use these players, just buy, train 1 or 2 season and sell.

2. example i would choose B player, but its risky. Its can be happen very easy that B players CL jump to 5 at 16 years old, and to 4 at 18 years old, he got injury 2 times for 20 days, and this player is over. Of course the other can have injury and jump CL again and again, but he have got 100 OR advantage. So "A" player can be better through seasons.

If we choose the "B" player in 2. example, then we should choose the "B" player in 1. example. Really risky, but "B" player has the chance that he will have CL6 at 18 years old. The "A" player can have CL4 at 17 years old. Huge different, or not? Do you think it otherwise?

TB has a good question! We shpuld not to see the Average Quality, but i calculate every time my own (weighted) average quality from the qualities what the player needed. Do you calculate too? Wich quality is better.? (headskill, Major, medium, small influence) 90%-80%-70%-60% or 75%-75%-75%-75% or 80%-80%-70%-70%?

Do you need a 15 years old CL6, 500 OR and 99% AQ australian at next friday?

hahah in a perfect world

We should pull off a win this weekend. Our opponent is weaker than us, and we've got better players where it counts.

Pulled off a great 1-0 win in my CL match today. Expected a loss, so very pleased with the result.

Mexican are good in bravery egal game!