Oggetto: Player Questions

Stan... you are the philosopher of PPM. Keep up the great work... but shorten up the posts would ya

I reduse to read the second post as it seems a wall of text. I hate reading those.... do you got a summary?

refuse* we need an edit button/

Haha. They are always a good read. Well worth the time Trust me on that one.

Read It. Good read. I am going to apply to my goalies even though I already know who my top guy is. What do the elite players call a good training player?

I refer to low OR high Q players as prospects... not sure if there is a distinct term coined.

Good post, Stan... I've been factoring in the shot in my player selection as well, but I've never formally laid it out like you have.

Well done, and it's given me food for thought.

Yeah, what is a good Q for prospect of a good team? With me I am kind of rate my prospects(players unable to make my team). By there skills and Qs

I STRONGLY disagree with the way you interpret the qualities.

Suppose your goalie has bundle qualities 80-80-0 and you want to train a 2:1:1 bundle ratio. What is his effective quality?

The formula 80*0.5 + 80*0.25 + 0*0.25 won't give a meaningful answer

The Formula I use is as follows.
training % is equal to Q for this example and train up an extra 180OR

With the 3 primary stats being 180Q total

If a 85 - 55 - 40 spread
Based on a 2-1-1 spread (90-45-45)
It would take (90/.85) + (45/.55) + (45/.4) days
or 106 + 82 + 113 = 301 days
Based on 4-3-2 (80-60-40)
It would take (80/.85) + (60/.55) + (40/.4) days
or 95 + 110 + 100 = 305 days

If the Q's were 60-60-60
Based on a 2-1-1 spread (90-45-45)
It would take (90/.6) + (45/.6) + (45/.6) days
or 150 + 75 + 75 = 300 days
Based on 4-3-2 (80-60-40)
It would take (80/.6) + (60/.6) + (40/.6) days
or 134 + 100 + 67 = 301 days

Actually shows no matter the build a 60-60-60 spread is not worse, even a little better than spreads high primary Q and lower secondary Q's like a 85 - 55 - 40 spread.

So the formula I use is
For 2-1-1 spread
(90/Primary Qual) + (45/2nd Qual) + (45/3rd Qual)
For 4-3-2
(80/Primary Qual) + (60/2nd Qual) + (40/3rd Qual)

I use that, and if the answer is less than 300 I look at other Quals, Career Length, and Side Pref, if it is higher than 300 I sell.

As my team get better I lower the bar from 300.

Long winded I know, but hopefully helpful to others or someone else can point out the error of my ways, cuz I use a spreadsheet formula to tell me these ratio's automatically for all my players based on both builds (4-3-2 and 2-1-1 with and without shooting and tech when not in top 3 for position) for every position (C/W/D/G).

Nytes approach equally effective. Would mention for clarity your measuring the length of time needed to improve 180OR rating based on each of 2 ratios. Lower days is a better trainer obviously. Different approach but gets you to similar comparable data. Very nice!!

Just thought I'd add that each CL level decreases daily training as does playing versus not playing. Also either approach presumes equal atty 1 and atty 2 for staff influence. In Nytes example you'd add days on for each level CL is below 6/6. In mine you subtract quality/add time at net. Both work and I like your approach. Congrates.

Must of had a bad day at work?

Obviously you need to use a little common sense. A 0 quality atty makes improving the ratio of a bundle impossible. Which if you read your post you'll know is a little of base. I did mention something about diminishing returns in one of my 2 posts I believe.

It's not really interpretation if you think about it. I know your very good with math so just think in these terms. Building 2:1:1 requires twice as much time building prime as either secondary if all 3 attys were the same quality. I'm merely looking for a way to represent the value of a player training to a specific ratio based on the quality of each specific atty. The math here is the game engine.

I believe the training is linear. That means if an atty is 50% then it will train at 50% of the maximum dailly possible training based on regen/training facility level plus staff influence. Not accounting for game energy used and CL level or the random daily factor. All of which have influences on the actual training number. I hadn't added my adjustments here as I thought the basic theory enough to grasp. Though if someones interested you can PM me for particulars.

Basically it comes down to this common sense tells us if 2 players have the same average quality for the bundle and second that we train twice as many points into prime versus either secondary that the higher primary quality player will train better overall within certain tolerancies. This can likely be reflected as the quality of the secondary attys must be no less than 1/2 the primary atty to not "create drag" on bundle development. I'm not going to waste time on doing math and formulas but no question there would be a point of diminishing return.