Notpron Forums

http://dbpickup.ath.cx/rate/list.php?by=def
i make box defend

u only got 9 votes o//

the list is sorted by defense btw.

Morning*star owns, even as def ^^ :p

def ratings is a bit fucked up
when you play good as midfielder and score lots of goals or so, people might vote you "good"....but this makes you a "good" defender in this rating

some work to do goldy, eh?´

so i'd rather have "def" "mid" "att" "keep"
and maybe an overal thing:
def x mid x att x (1 + keep)

well, i changed weight of midfield votes a few days ago so they are now 0.25 of a def vote and 0.75 of a att vote (before it was 0.5:0.5), maybe this helps.

and i don't think adding an extra rating for midfield would be too good as midfield is just a combination of attack and defence.

another possibility would be to allow two partial votes for midfield, ie split it up in an half? attacker and a half? defence vote.

or just go to 1-1-3 which is way better anyway? x_X

and what about: def x mid x att x (1 + keep)
or alternatively: def x att x (1 + keep)

DavidM wrote: or just go to 1-1-3 which is way better anyway? x_X

he's right believe it or not

Morning*Star wrote: http://dbpickup.ath.cx/rate/list.php?by=def
i make box defend

Indeed you do.

Oooh, I've move up 1 place from yesterday.

Not totally sure how accurate these scores are...Some good players seem a bit down on the scale to me. But obviously this system is preferable to totally random teams.

150 Onge 3.18 (26) 5.38 1.69 (3) 0.00 (3)
50 RaGe0 3.18 (61) 6.35 2.00 (1) 0.19 (11)


u have 26 votes, this does mean that if someone votes u as bad sweep ur rating goes down dramaticly
therefore u should also look at the amount of votes

Morning*Star wrote: he's right believe it or not

no, you arent here to agree with me, this is just wrong
all who are not paid by me disagree with meh

ehm nevermind
we need 1-1-3
with 1-1-1-2 you only give the 2 attackers an alibi for not defending
(defense got worse since 1-1-1-2 was introduce, lemme tell you that as lonely sweeper)
and in 1-1-3 the 3 have to be "fieldplayers"
NOT attackers,...calling them attackers just gives em another alibi

blah </rant>

since the mid fielder and one of the attackers are supposed to come back and help on d...

i dont see why one has to be called a mid and the other an attack

---> 1-1-3 <-- makes sense.

DavidM wrote:
(defense got worse since 1-1-1-2 was introduce, lemme tell you that as lonely sweeper)
and in 1-1-3 the 3 have to be "fieldplayers"
NOT attackers,...calling them attackers just gives em another alibi

blah </rant>

u are right (no really), im a sweeper and the last couple of matches i just couldnt be bothered anymore cuz everytime it was 2 or 3 vs 1 (me) and the mid didnt come back, i could blame him but nothing worked, the attackers didnt come back...

Funny, I think things have got better defensively...I'm rarely chronically outnumbered as sweeper. Maybe I just get lucky and play with players who are prepared to take their defensive responsibilities seriously...

1-1-2-1 is a the formation most teams play...1 sweep, 1 attacker and 2 who do both...