Onderwerp: Questions & Answers

Hi Everyone

As most of you know I like to play with number! ROFL There has been a long standing question on how the 2 "best" players in the guide are calculated. We've never come up with a formula/answer to this. Atleast not one I've read going back to BETA.

Secondly we have 2 primary builds in the game for bundle ratio, 2:1:1 and 4:3:2. I have come to some conclusions that allow me to suggest how stars recognizes the primary atty of a player and explains how 2 different builds can both be reasonably effective. 1st atty recognition and the guide.

Rule 1

Primary atty is recognized at 2 times the lowest secondary atty.

Rule 2

Either secondary atty above 75% of prime is penalized for the excess.

Example 1

Best

120:30:50

Others

180:25:25

70:90:90

120 recognized as 60:30:45 with 5 penalty for agro over 75%

180 reconized as 50:25:25 no penalty

70 recognized as 70:52.5:52.5 penalty on excessive atty above 75% is 37.5 + 37.5

It's likely there is a factor then used otherwise the 70 prime guy is useless. My guess is you add the 2 excesses together then divide by 2 as a possibility. Note the range. 50% to 75% no penalty in stars/pucks. This is why my build of 4:3:2 and the 2:1:1 build look the same on stars.

Example 2

Best

100:80:50

recognized as 100:75:50 with 5 penalty for excessive tech over 75%

Others

130:80:30

recognized as 60:45:30 less penalty 35

80:80:80

recognized as 80:60:60 less penaly 20 + 20

Should be noted that this might not be the exact answer. It does satisfy the question why both players in the example can be best.

Basically the atty recognition in the game I've known for a very long time. When I pulled players with low secondary attys, below 50%, and trained them up in those attys and played the in league games the stars increased not training primary. Therefore there had to be a max primary recognition factor. Otherwise these insane 1 atty junk builds would have huge stars if they played. 50% on prime was the number I discovered seemed to be accurate. The second issue I always had centered on excessive agro in a few players and thus how they performed so poorly. If you ever built a 1:1:1 player you'd have thought extra tech and agro a good thing for wingers. Especiall pass and tech for centers as tech effects faceoffs. I tried that build for a couple of centers. They were pure junk.

The approach to primary recognition also explains several other aspects of the game. First how 2 different builds can have the same star recognition as I believe the 2 I mentioned previously do. It also leaves open the discusion as to why a team with more stars may lose to a team with less stars partially. I believe the actual game engine far more complex than merely taking the "recognized" primary and applying it to the in game play. Again just a theory of mine that extra second atty up to 75% of primary makes a more effective player.

Any comments or observations welcome.

"Rule 2
Either secondary atty above 75% of prime is penalized for the excess. "

i cant believe in this rule cause it means that two players with everything else equal except the second atty, where one player is below 75% and the other way above 75% would mean that the first player would be seen as better even though he is equal or worse in all aspects.

I believe it to be true to some degree. I've had a couple of players have an overall decrease in production when I raised their secondary atty too high. They had an increase in production once the training came back in to check. I dont have specifics any more but 75-80% range sounds correct.

could the decrease in production be based on not keeping up with other players because spending too much time on secondaries compared to other players?

this would mean that while there is not fixed limit (i am hoping there isnt) there is quickly decreasing returns for increasing attys past there optimum point compared to keeping them balanced correctly.

i have noticed bad things if you let the 2nd or 3rd atty drop below 50% of the primary.

same here (2nd atty too high (beginning of this season, and took me a few matches to recover from it, and up till wednesday to recover fully in ranking (back on no.1, where I've been like forever previous season))

What I'm also saying is perhaps both builds work. 2:1:1 and 4:3:2. You do not move the primary as fast but perhaps the game engine has an advantage in it for extra 2nd atty up to 75%. That would mean a player with lower stars may play as well as a higher star rated player. It's my opinion atleast.

then the question becomes...what is "too high" for the second atty? anyone work that out yet?

+80%

Yup. I found 75% better but 80% is very reasonable as the upper limit.

That entirely possible for the forward I had trained like that but my goalie was also was affected.

When it's all said and done I think between 55-75 is ideal. Then again I could be wrong lol!

hmm...sounds about right. i've been shooting for something like 100-80-60. and my forwards and defensement seem to shine at those break points. but, goalies seem to be a bit different. my goalies go straight into the toilet as they reach that balance. they seem to do better at about 100-70-60.

How you guys even remember what happened when your players where 100-70-60 ? Was this a random factor, or you are sure that is it ? I just want some proof that somebody's team is playing better with 100:75:50 than 100:50:50 before, including almost the same situation/league if it's possible. If I'm right, and we all know that it's been discussed here that team form (goalkeeper form) can and will fluctuate, that engine is not so perfect after all, that you can even lose from dead team....then how can you be so sure that new observed (successful or not) games are product of your changing in players training ?
I can't be satisfied with the theory that some ratio is giving the most stars BUT some other ratio is giving the most effectiveness. Was that said somewhere from the guys who made this game but I haven't read about it yet? What are the standing grounds for that point of view?

That's the whole point. Your 2:1:1 gives you a higher primary atty build over time than 4:3:2. No one knows how the game engine applies your atty build within game calculations. My observations relate to stars and primary atty recognition. You like 2:1:1 I like the other. But as long as we stay within our ratios both appear to have no primary penalty nor secondary atty penalty.

As to remember I do going back to season 1. Player bundle development and when a guy started producing. I've tried 2:1:1 builds and they played aweful. My present build seems pretty effective. 4 losses this year all playing low on the road versus normal or high importance.

My belief isn't that only one build works at this point. I'm never going to figure out the actual in game engine applications so I go by results in relative terms within my team. Just my approach.

I'm training a goalie to a 10:5:1 ratio. He should be at 120/60/12 come playoff time. Will test this ratio out then.