Ozturk58 said: How many points do you think a tactic needs to score in the test league to be considered successful? Expand
I think that the main purpose of any tactic testing is to compare tactics so the tactic standing in the table determines its quality and the points it scored doesn't really matter
For example, in the test tactical league, the tactical game, which has an average of 1.75 points, collects 100 points with liverpool and becomes the champion. In the test tactical league, the average score of 1.56 points can collect 100 points with liverpool in the real game. So, as I understand it, there is no big difference between the tactics with an average of 1.56 and the tactics with an average of 1.75.
Ozturk58 said: For example, in the test tactical league, the tactical game, which has an average of 1.75 points, collects 100 points with liverpool and becomes the champion. In the test tactical league, the average score of 1.56 points can collect 100 points with liverpool in the real game. So, as I understand it, there is no big difference between the tactics with an average of 1.56 and the tactics with an average of 1.75. Expand
In theory a 1.70 PPG tactic should give you about 17% more points than a 1.50 PPG tactic, of course, if you play for long enough and I think it's what a tactic testing about
Ozturk58 said: yes there is a difference of 14% but this difference does not make such a difference in the real game as far as I see Expand
that's because there are many random factors in the game, eliminate them and you'll get an more accurate picture, also, test a tactic for more than one season, for instance, you can repeat the season 5 times or more and then sum up the points
thanks for your comments. In my opinion, all tactics in the test tactical league with an average of over 1.50 points will provide success in the game above expectations. What is your opinion in this regard?
Ozturk58 said: thanks for your comments. In my opinion, all tactics in the test tactical league with an average of over 1.50 points will provide success in the game above expectations. What is your opinion in this regard? Expand
I know there are people who are satisfied with a tactic only if it gives them the title with Norwich City in the 1st season so as you can see everyone have a different definition of "a successful tactic"
Ozturk58 said: I want to make better tactics than tff and knap's tactics. For this, I should try tactics that I produce in which team or teams do you think Expand Good luck in creating such tactics. But if you test in a full game, it will not happen soon.
How many points do you think a tactic needs to score in the test league to be considered successful?
Ozturk58 said: How many points do you think a tactic needs to score in the test league to be considered successful?
I think that the main purpose of any tactic testing is to compare tactics so the tactic standing in the table determines its quality and the points it scored doesn't really matter
For example, in the test tactical league, the tactical game, which has an average of 1.75 points, collects 100 points with liverpool and becomes the champion. In the test tactical league, the average score of 1.56 points can collect 100 points with liverpool in the real game. So, as I understand it, there is no big difference between the tactics with an average of 1.56 and the tactics with an average of 1.75.
Ozturk58 said: For example, in the test tactical league, the tactical game, which has an average of 1.75 points, collects 100 points with liverpool and becomes the champion. In the test tactical league, the average score of 1.56 points can collect 100 points with liverpool in the real game. So, as I understand it, there is no big difference between the tactics with an average of 1.56 and the tactics with an average of 1.75.
In theory a 1.70 PPG tactic should give you about 17% more points than a 1.50 PPG tactic, of course, if you play for long enough and I think it's what a tactic testing about
yes there is a difference of 14% but this difference does not make such a difference in the real game as far as I see
Ozturk58 said: yes there is a difference of 14% but this difference does not make such a difference in the real game as far as I see
that's because there are many random factors in the game, eliminate them and you'll get an more accurate picture, also, test a tactic for more than one season, for instance, you can repeat the season 5 times or more and then sum up the points
thanks for your comments. In my opinion, all tactics in the test tactical league with an average of over 1.50 points will provide success in the game above expectations. What is your opinion in this regard?
Ozturk58 said: thanks for your comments. In my opinion, all tactics in the test tactical league with an average of over 1.50 points will provide success in the game above expectations. What is your opinion in this regard?
so as you can see everyone have a different definition of "a successful tactic"
I know there are people who are satisfied with a tactic only if it gives them the title with Norwich City in the 1st season
I want to make better tactics than tff and knap's tactics. For this, I should try tactics that I produce in which team or teams do you think
Ozturk58 said: I want to make better tactics than tff and knap's tactics. For this, I should try tactics that I produce in which team or teams do you think
Good luck in creating such tactics. But if you test in a full game, it will not happen soon.
lisa you are also very successful in tactics