% of victory factors

I was trying to give a % (in intuition mode, nothing proved, just maybe I remember the matches during all these 32 seasons and is a estimate...)

These are my numbers:
8% win bonus
12% good substitution
12% work of testing, man in corners/fouls
15% formation
18% to attend
35% Quality (in same League level terms) counting that if, one team have a initial 11 of +3 stars one have the 0% and other the 35% to do it in some proportion/scale effects....

Maybe we can to add too...
initial orders? change orders in live match? search Key player added in the work of testing?



What is important to manage for you? feel free to give your viewpoint :D


What do you think? after play some seasons of T11, how affects every section/decision?

Yeah, I missed condition, but sometimes I don't have condition LOL
Yeah is something to add, but lets discuss like is now to have viewpoints and impressions :'D
Too I count that don't need all team in conditions + full morale.. but I dont will touch xD

You missed the good or bad player effect (nothing to do with Q) ->Performance? That little hidden something. >.<

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buffs Mad

You missed the good or bad player effect (nothing to do with Q) ->Performance? That little hidden something. >.<

---

Yeah, I know I missed things, as I've said like the condition etc.. let's see if we can add things between all and have a general opinion about the % of these things and more LOL

So now things to add:
Condition, morale, individual players (well Ive did mention about key player but thats not the same...) performance, can be mentioned as individual internal proggramming maybe¿? , ...

The idea is too to have a conclusion about what managers feel, so let's add opinions. LOL

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buffs Mad

You missed the good or bad player effect (nothing to do with Q) ->Performance? That little hidden something. >.<

---

Ratings and subs can ballance each other out (12% sum of both) :rolleyes:

Interesting idea! It would be cool if T11 released this/the algorithm they use etc. I guess that would give some of us an unfair advantage though
I'd possibly add in previous game history/rating recently of players and how that affects the team. i.e If you've got a key MC in a holding role that has been in crap form/just come back from an injury, he won't provide any good ball to your ST's and so their ability is affected.
Also I personally would have player quality higher. I feel like you can outplay the opposition off the park, but if they have clear superior quality it's still a 50/50 chance.

Edit: I've now noticed Gurt just mentioned ratings as well :rolleyes:
.Gotta be quick round here haha.

I think the Q factor is pretty good for lower levels but less important the higher you go. (NB. I said less important not unimportant.:p)

On performance, I imagine that to perform the players have their Q. Additionally, to differentiate between good and bad players of the same Q I think of a player's Performance factor - which Khris calls Hidden Programming. I visualise this as being a range between 0.75 and 1.20 (numbers half-plucked out the air and half-chosen as reasonable effects).

So in a calculation a players action (in addition to any random effects) the outcome is affected by their embedded factor. I do not rule out the code carrying 2 factors, 1 you can affect (which Amane would call motivation) and one thats player specific (embedded). You can then see that the 'bad player in bad form' effect could result in a 0.75x0.75 modifier to his action - effectively delivering 50% of his potential.

(Ofc you can go wild and apply this to FK taking, passing etc so Q (potential) x Performance (Embeded x Motivation) = Outcome)

But easier to call it the Bad/Good Player effect or Performance factor.

Don't know where to pitch it as a percentage but I'd guess having good performing players of same Q is 20% of the battle (if not more) and bonus, quality and subs are pitched at too high %age.

It is similar to the FK taker etc stuff as you have worded it. Remove the "testing" and call it Set-Piece Taker Effectiveness. (One of the ways of achieving it isofc testing but that applies to many things ;) ) Because having a Good FK taker and CK taker is definately an advantage.

I'm sure others will say thats too complex for this game but its pretty simple and a foundation of games just like 'random'.

quality of the players 20%
form of the players 15%
team formation 20%
presence of the mgr 15%

special ability of some players
(free-kick/ corner) 3%
ball possession/ticket/supporting 3% (max)
win bonus 4 levels > 1%, 2%, 3%, 4%
condition 1%
morale 1%
playing out of position -1%
subs ?%

Luck - priceless :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nikolgiorgos

quality of the players 20%
form of the players 15%
team formation 20%
presence of the mgr 15%

special ability of some players
(free-kick/ corner) 3%
ball possession/ticket/supporting 3% (max)
win bonus 4 levels > 1%, 2%, 3%, 4%
condition 1%
morale 1%
playing out of position -1%
subs ?%

Luck - priceless :cool:

---

Yeah, but i would put:
special ability of some players (free-kick/ corner/playmaker/dribler/etc.) -2 to 3%

I had this idea for this thread yesterday, after my ch.l. game with my alt team.
I had all the good conditions (except win bonus - I had the 1st level). All my players had a good form (ok, my GK, THE USUAL 6-7-6-6-7).
Started watching the game and when I saw that my oppo was using an asymmetrical formation (and wasn't watching the game), I changed my formation from 4-5-1 V, def/counters to attacking from left side. I took of my right winger, set an AMC (in the left side), put two ST (in left and middle side), I put red arrows in all those attackers and then my opponent scored twice :mad:
Oppo scorer got a 5 :eek:
So, after that game I was thinking what's the real meaning of watching or using the proper formation vs luck (or a fixed result :confused:)
This is not the first time. Almost half times, when I see an asymmetrical or not proper formation (for example when oppo has 3DC, attacking from the flanks) try to counter it and it's failing :(

Attachment 47703

Attachment 47704

well, sometimes games favour is just unbeaten !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nikolgiorgos

Attachment 47704

well, sometimes games favour is just unbeaten !

---

WHAAAAAT! :rolleyes:

Attachment 47711

hey Gert, your image is great :D
Today played the 2nd leg and won 0-2 away (not so easily, the second goal was at last minutes, so if he scored, I would be out know).
But the reason I post this match isn't about to vent, why I have better team, sa, watching the game blah, blah, blah ..,
It's about if we 're overestimate the participation of formation in the results.
I would expect to win even if I had a same quality team (or a little lower), when I 'm watching and setting a counter formation but this thing doesn't work many times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nikolgiorgos

hey Gert, your image is great :D
Today played the 2nd leg and won 0-2 away (not so easily, the second goal was at last minutes, so if he scored, I would be out know).
But the reason I post this match isn't about to vent, why I have better team, sa, watching the game blah, blah, blah ..,
It's about if we 're overestimate the participation of formation in the results.
I would expect to win even if I had a same quality team (or a little lower), when I 'm watching and setting a counter formation but this thing doesn't work many times.

---

Khris is agree. LOL
I don't belive a lot in counter formations, thats why I do a mention of lots of things in this thread, everyone have a % of influence, and really the formations... I'm not sure about, but is just a little %, more important is to attend and obtain the +15% or have a key player.... I think that a good job searching for the correct players can aganst all the formations too, so...

I understand too that the game can not have 20 factors, everyone with 5% influence in the result and have realistic results... is not so simple, the game give a plus for who manages live and do a work of management of his team, searching for the best, and deciding basically, to try to explain. lol

agree
Attachment 47761

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by khris

Khris is agree. LOL
I don't belive a lot in counter formations, thats why I do a mention of lots of things in this thread, everyone have a % of influence, and really the formations... I'm not sure about, but is just a little %, more important is to attend and obtain the +15% or have a key player.... I think that a good job searching for the correct players can aganst all the formations too, so...

I understand too that the game can not have 20 factors, everyone with 5% influence in the result and have realistic results... is not so simple, the game give a plus for who manages live and do a work of management of his team, searching for the best, and deciding basically, to try to explain. lol

---

I only use counter formation / tactics when the opponents formation is clearly faulty :rolleyes:

Player condition 40%
Tactics 40%
Luck 20%


1. Quality difference is pre-detemined. You can always win with a lower quality team so this factor is irrelevent (ie. its value is positive if you have higher Q and negative if you have lower Q).

2. Win bonus, morale, tactical orders all have direct effect on the form of players. Player performance make up one of the greatest impact to the outcome.

3. Tactical advantage is situational dependent. Against different opponents, there are different optimal tactics that work best against them. On a tactical higher ground, you can make a game evenly matched even if your players are getting bad form, simply because your team created more chances.

4. Troll result happens. When everything is detemined by the dice and the chance of it happening isn't zero, it is going to happen sooner or later.

:(
Attachment 48167

:)
Attachment 48168



Attachment 48169
- Hey, those are my two semi final games.
In the first one, I lost 0-1 and in the second (away) I won 1-4.
In both games I used the same formation and orders (def/counter/flanks) and the teams had about the same players (with the same difference in quality).
But there were two different things.
The first was that I set win bonus from lv1(min) to lv4(max).

- Oh, and the second ?
- Opponent manager was watching the game
- Hahahaha
- Hohohoho