Is team quality calculation just.. stupid?

[Cloverfield]

Formation: 3w-1-2-3w-1
Defense: 1GK and 3Dw fixed players


Only position that was not decided the DMC.
So with all other players in defense fixed, I tried to decide between below 3 players:

I wanted to check how defense overall quality of team would be calculated, using each one of them.
I wanted to believe that there is some kind of “weight” in the calculation so the player with higher defense % would boost the defense overall % much more.
So:
4 fixed players with Escamez (120% Q – 159% Def Q)

4 fixed players with Zemanek (120% Q – 148% Def Q)

4 fixed players with Kovcas (124% Q – 115% Def Q)



So it seems that I had the higher defense % using the higher player in Q on the overall but the way way worst in defense Q.
This is just stupid...

I am starting to feel that training individual or boosting the "defense"/"attack" characteristics of a player is even more cosmetic than green peppers on a pizza.

[nikolgiorgos]

* moved here from Tutorials & Guides.

Well, actually we cannot figure out what are the calculations for those 3 sections .
Also we cannot figure out how comes the ball possession (besides the outfield factors - tickets and supporters)

What I keep in my mind is that only 1* quality (20%) or above considering as a better quality of one of the two teams.
Also a b.s. of 60-40 means nothing.

[Cloverfield]

Ok the other things you mention above are completely vague, and it is true that is hard to be calculated cause many factors may be applied.

But for what i mention I think it is a pretty straight forward logic: (example defense)
1. Which players contribute on defense
2. What is their defense q that adds to team's defense q.

It is really stupid that my team's defense q is higher when adding the lower in defense Q player.
It is unrealistic.
I have stronger defense using the worst defender (out of 3)

And it is not onky about calculation.
This also disrupts the effect of training.

Is a defender with high defense Q, better than a defender with lower defense Q but higher on the overall Q?
If not training drills, attributes etc etc are sooooooo cosmetic

[nikolgiorgos]

but Kovcas (having higher q from the two others) might have some higher skills from the other two sections (attack and M&P) which also contribute to the overall Defense.
Maybe the avg q of a player is a separate factor by itself.

[Santa1212]

Ok the other things you mention above are completely vague, and it is true that is hard to be calculated cause many factors may be applied.

But for what i mention I think it is a pretty straight forward logic: (example defense)
1. Which players contribute on defense
2. What is their defense q that adds to team's defense q.

It is really stupid that my team's defense q is higher when adding the lower in defense Q player.
It is unrealistic.
I have stronger defense using the worst defender (out of 3)

And it is not onky about calculation.
This also disrupts the effect of training.

Is a defender with high defense Q, better than a defender with lower defense Q but higher on the overall Q?
If not training drills, attributes etc etc are sooooooo cosmetic

Hi Cloverfield,

I do not think it is stupid, it is just the way the stats have beeing calculated, and you can easily use it to make your opponent underestimate it. The calculated quality of the team is just the average Q of its players. The calculated quality of the player is just the average Q of all his skills. But during the game, the actual skills of course do matter. So if you have defensemen with 150% defensive skills and 50% offensive skills, the player seems to be 100% but in fact when defending, he plays 150%. So the stats can for example show your team is 100% but if you have the right players with the right skills (defensemen with high defense skills, attackers with high attacking skills etc.) in reality your defense is playing 150% and your offense is playing 150% and you win much more easily.

I think this is really ok.

Santa