|
United States8477 Posts
On January 09 2013 03:51 Chr15t wrote:
Oh hi monk, I wonder if you can tell me when this weeks trade-window starts, i've been f5ing the page every 30th minut so far, to get my hands on the new data to test out optimizations for my current program.
It's whenever R1CH wakes up/updates it.
|
On January 09 2013 04:24 monk. wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2013 03:51 Chr15t wrote:
Oh hi monk, I wonder if you can tell me when this weeks trade-window starts, i've been f5ing the page every 30th minut so far, to get my hands on the new data to test out optimizations for my current program. It's whenever R1CH wakes up/updates it.
okay thanks for the reply 
|
Canada8036 Posts
Weekly point gain and trade value data for Round 1:
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/4718/Round 1 Data.xlsx
Edit:
Given a team with 4 (P), 1 (T), 1 (Z), is it possible to use the 2 weekly main-team trades to make the following trade without breaking the rule for having at least one of each race on a team?
1 (T) -> 1 (Z)
1 (Z) -> 1 (T)
I tested this, and it doesn't work. You can only trade the zerg for another zerg, the terran for another terran, etc.
|
United States8477 Posts
Just to check, the algorithm I used for best team without trades gives me:
Cure, free, Revival, soo, Terminator, P7GAB(Wooki), KT Rolster
Anti: Dear, RorO, Turn
|
Canada8036 Posts
|
Turn Dear and RorO are horrid anti-teams.
A better one would be Turn, hyvaa and Trap which is still 0, 0, 0.
Is there are way to sort it by winning percentages over the season?
|
Canada8036 Posts
Ok, everything's fixed now. The new scoring was wreaking havoc with my code.
Name Cost Points
Terminator 3 6
Revival 3 7
free 3 8
Speed 4 7
soO 5 8
Wooki 6 11
KT Rolster 6 12
@Blisse: You haven't fulfilled the 13 cost anti-team requirement.
Week 1's a bit of a crapshoot anyways.
|
Was just thinking about exactly the same problem the last few days and now saw this thread. Yeah, the optimization problem without trading is what I've used to pick my team for R2 too (and doing pretty well), but then the real problem would be to include trades in the optimization, which increases the complexity way too much. Glad to see others thinking on it also.
|
I'm working on this now (best w/ trades) based on R1 data. Can anyone confirm that this is the one of the best main teams w/o trades?
Max score: 172
Best team:
KT.Rolster (3.0, 32)
Action (3.0, 23)
Fantasy (6.0, 27)
Shy (7.0, 27)
Speed (2.0, 18)
Stats (5.0, 24)
Wooki (3.0, 21)
|
Canada8036 Posts
What's the first number in the bracket signify?
|
The player's initial cost.
|
Canada8036 Posts
Hm, my bad. Looks like I've screwed up the initial team costs in the excel file. The costs under "Team trade values" are accurate though.
Edit: Player costs are also fine.
Edit 2: As an aside, trade values in the excel file reflect the player's/team's trade value at the end of the week. So week 4 trade values are essentially irrelevant.
Edit 3: Excel spreadsheet values are now corrected.
|
On January 09 2013 15:28 paladin8 wrote:I'm working on this now (best w/ trades) based on R1 data. Can anyone confirm that this is the one of the best main teams w/o trades? Max score: 172
Best team:
KT.Rolster (3.0, 32)
Action (3.0, 23)
Fantasy (6.0, 27)
Shy (7.0, 27)
Speed (2.0, 18)
Stats (5.0, 24)
Wooki (3.0, 21)
according to http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=391291¤tpage=1#1 172 points is best you can get, little different team there.
On January 09 2013 13:17 monk. wrote:
Just to check, the algorithm I used for best team without trades gives me:
Cure, free, Revival, soo, Terminator, P7GAB(Wooki), KT Rolster
Anti: Dear, RorO, Turn
Where did you get Cure? Hes dosen't exist on my list at all http://www.teamliquid.net/fantasy/proleague/Stats.php?r=13&s=2&d=0
I get 59 points with
Wooki, free, soO, Revival, Speed, Terminator, KT Rolster
Reality, RorO, Trap
I found total of 10 other ways to get same value anti team, but no other way to get same value main team.
|
Canada8036 Posts
Cure is Speed. I have to keep a file specifically set up to catch all the alternate aliases, haha.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On January 09 2013 15:17 Spazer wrote:Ok, everything's fixed now. The new scoring was wreaking havoc with my code. Name Cost Points
Terminator 3 6
Revival 3 7
free 3 8
Speed 4 7
soO 5 8
Wooki 6 11
KT Rolster 6 12 @Blisse: You haven't fulfilled the 13 cost anti-team requirement. Week 1's a bit of a crapshoot anyways.
Well your team seems to be in order i got a bit different lineup, but comes out at the same total:
MainTeam:
Players: Race: Points:
1. Wooki P 11
2. soO Z 8
3. Speed T 7
4. free P 8
5. Revival Z 7
6. Terminator P 6
Team: KT Rolster 12
AntiTeam
Players: Race: Points:
1. RorO Z 0
2. Dear P 0
3. hyvaa Z 0
Total points: 59
EDIT: lol nevermind , our teams are identical ;D my brain just didnt compute it
|
On January 08 2013 22:25 cjin wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2013 14:28 Spazer wrote:I tried brute forcing the main using the 30 highest scoring players per week (works out to 53 players total). It tested 583 teams over the course of 2.5 hours before I shut it down since it was obviously never going to finish in a reasonable amount of time. In comparison, with the 20 highest scoring players per week (pool of 41), I did 279 teams over 40 minutes. With the 10 highest scoring players per week (pool of 27), I did 285 in 35 minutes. In short, brute forcing main teams is a pipe dream for large pools of players until we do some optimization. Low trade value players can be evaluated almost instantly, but high ones take forever. For instance, testing trades with an initial team of KT Rolster, s2, hitman, barracks, alone, jangbi, and bogus took 1 minute 18 seconds by itself. I need a better way of discarding initial teams. With anti-teams, discarding initial teams is really easy. If an initial team scores more points than your current best team right off the bat, you can safely skip it. This trims off entire branches and really cuts down on the calculation time. What we need is a smart way to do this for main teams as well. I was thinking something along the lines of this: - Take an initial team
- Determine the two best players that are not on your team for the current week
- Switch them for the two lowest scoring players on your team REGARDLESS of trade value
- Repeat steps 2-3 for each week
- If the final score is lower than the final score of your current best team, you can safely ignore this branch
My currently implemented system like this: - Take X top scoring players of each week to generate a pool of players.
- Make an ordered list ranking the pool of players by cost.
- Use a bunch of nested loops to iterate through the cost ordered list. This will make an initial team. The ordered list allows us to ignore all players past a certain point for a given loop once the cost exceeds 30.
- Check the race requirement for the initial team
- Test trades for the initial team. I use an ordered list of trade values here so that I can ignore players past a certain point, just like with step 3.
- Only attempt trades where the new player scores more points than the current player at some point in the future.
- Call the trade function recursively for each week
- Select the highest scoring resultant team and compare it against whatever our best solution currently is. Replace the best team if we've scored higher.
Also, the formula for trade value seems to be Trade value = cost * (total games in round - games played)/total games in round + points * 2/7 I'm still uncertain about the 2/7 part, but it works so far for round 2 week 1. Somehow in the last round, it ends up being (points / 4.5), and I have no idea when or how. I rewrote whole mainteamsearching shit, and ended with something like that. Only shortcut I have taken is, that instead of 6. Only attempt trades where the new player scores more points than the current player at some point in the future. I just don't allow to trade into player who will score 1 or less on next round. Or into team that will score 0 or less. I takes long to go trough all, but I'm confident it will find best solutions early. I put my round1 data trough it, and it found team that scores 215 (212 with anti team, witch is lot better than the 163 points without any trades.) in first 30 mins of running, and haven't found any better for an hour, and I think it will not find anything better anymore. Now it is basicly just discarding every startteam suggestion becouce of my version of [*]Determine the two best players that are not on your team for the current week [*]Switch them for the two lowest scoring players on your team REGARDLESS of trade value [*]Repeat steps 2-3 for each week check
What is the team that scores 215? I've been running some searches but nothing gets me close, so I'm wondering if I have a bug somewhere.
|
On January 12 2013 02:40 paladin8 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 08 2013 22:25 cjin wrote:On January 08 2013 14:28 Spazer wrote:I tried brute forcing the main using the 30 highest scoring players per week (works out to 53 players total). It tested 583 teams over the course of 2.5 hours before I shut it down since it was obviously never going to finish in a reasonable amount of time. In comparison, with the 20 highest scoring players per week (pool of 41), I did 279 teams over 40 minutes. With the 10 highest scoring players per week (pool of 27), I did 285 in 35 minutes. In short, brute forcing main teams is a pipe dream for large pools of players until we do some optimization. Low trade value players can be evaluated almost instantly, but high ones take forever. For instance, testing trades with an initial team of KT Rolster, s2, hitman, barracks, alone, jangbi, and bogus took 1 minute 18 seconds by itself. I need a better way of discarding initial teams. With anti-teams, discarding initial teams is really easy. If an initial team scores more points than your current best team right off the bat, you can safely skip it. This trims off entire branches and really cuts down on the calculation time. What we need is a smart way to do this for main teams as well. I was thinking something along the lines of this: - Take an initial team
- Determine the two best players that are not on your team for the current week
- Switch them for the two lowest scoring players on your team REGARDLESS of trade value
- Repeat steps 2-3 for each week
- If the final score is lower than the final score of your current best team, you can safely ignore this branch
My currently implemented system like this: - Take X top scoring players of each week to generate a pool of players.
- Make an ordered list ranking the pool of players by cost.
- Use a bunch of nested loops to iterate through the cost ordered list. This will make an initial team. The ordered list allows us to ignore all players past a certain point for a given loop once the cost exceeds 30.
- Check the race requirement for the initial team
- Test trades for the initial team. I use an ordered list of trade values here so that I can ignore players past a certain point, just like with step 3.
- Only attempt trades where the new player scores more points than the current player at some point in the future.
- Call the trade function recursively for each week
- Select the highest scoring resultant team and compare it against whatever our best solution currently is. Replace the best team if we've scored higher.
Also, the formula for trade value seems to be Trade value = cost * (total games in round - games played)/total games in round + points * 2/7 I'm still uncertain about the 2/7 part, but it works so far for round 2 week 1. Somehow in the last round, it ends up being (points / 4.5), and I have no idea when or how. I rewrote whole mainteamsearching shit, and ended with something like that. Only shortcut I have taken is, that instead of 6. Only attempt trades where the new player scores more points than the current player at some point in the future. I just don't allow to trade into player who will score 1 or less on next round. Or into team that will score 0 or less. I takes long to go trough all, but I'm confident it will find best solutions early. I put my round1 data trough it, and it found team that scores 215 (212 with anti team, witch is lot better than the 163 points without any trades.) in first 30 mins of running, and haven't found any better for an hour, and I think it will not find anything better anymore. Now it is basicly just discarding every startteam suggestion becouce of my version of [*]Determine the two best players that are not on your team for the current week [*]Switch them for the two lowest scoring players on your team REGARDLESS of trade value [*]Repeat steps 2-3 for each week check What is the team that scores 215? I've been running some searches but nothing gets me close, so I'm wondering if I have a bug somewhere.
First of all, are we using same data? The one I'm using has week 2 trade values quessed to something in the lines of what I think they could be, and it might be possible I have mistake in scoring them.
|
On January 12 2013 07:57 cjin wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 02:40 paladin8 wrote:On January 08 2013 22:25 cjin wrote:On January 08 2013 14:28 Spazer wrote:I tried brute forcing the main using the 30 highest scoring players per week (works out to 53 players total). It tested 583 teams over the course of 2.5 hours before I shut it down since it was obviously never going to finish in a reasonable amount of time. In comparison, with the 20 highest scoring players per week (pool of 41), I did 279 teams over 40 minutes. With the 10 highest scoring players per week (pool of 27), I did 285 in 35 minutes. In short, brute forcing main teams is a pipe dream for large pools of players until we do some optimization. Low trade value players can be evaluated almost instantly, but high ones take forever. For instance, testing trades with an initial team of KT Rolster, s2, hitman, barracks, alone, jangbi, and bogus took 1 minute 18 seconds by itself. I need a better way of discarding initial teams. With anti-teams, discarding initial teams is really easy. If an initial team scores more points than your current best team right off the bat, you can safely skip it. This trims off entire branches and really cuts down on the calculation time. What we need is a smart way to do this for main teams as well. I was thinking something along the lines of this: - Take an initial team
- Determine the two best players that are not on your team for the current week
- Switch them for the two lowest scoring players on your team REGARDLESS of trade value
- Repeat steps 2-3 for each week
- If the final score is lower than the final score of your current best team, you can safely ignore this branch
My currently implemented system like this: - Take X top scoring players of each week to generate a pool of players.
- Make an ordered list ranking the pool of players by cost.
- Use a bunch of nested loops to iterate through the cost ordered list. This will make an initial team. The ordered list allows us to ignore all players past a certain point for a given loop once the cost exceeds 30.
- Check the race requirement for the initial team
- Test trades for the initial team. I use an ordered list of trade values here so that I can ignore players past a certain point, just like with step 3.
- Only attempt trades where the new player scores more points than the current player at some point in the future.
- Call the trade function recursively for each week
- Select the highest scoring resultant team and compare it against whatever our best solution currently is. Replace the best team if we've scored higher.
Also, the formula for trade value seems to be Trade value = cost * (total games in round - games played)/total games in round + points * 2/7 I'm still uncertain about the 2/7 part, but it works so far for round 2 week 1. Somehow in the last round, it ends up being (points / 4.5), and I have no idea when or how. I rewrote whole mainteamsearching shit, and ended with something like that. Only shortcut I have taken is, that instead of 6. Only attempt trades where the new player scores more points than the current player at some point in the future. I just don't allow to trade into player who will score 1 or less on next round. Or into team that will score 0 or less. I takes long to go trough all, but I'm confident it will find best solutions early. I put my round1 data trough it, and it found team that scores 215 (212 with anti team, witch is lot better than the 163 points without any trades.) in first 30 mins of running, and haven't found any better for an hour, and I think it will not find anything better anymore. Now it is basicly just discarding every startteam suggestion becouce of my version of [*]Determine the two best players that are not on your team for the current week [*]Switch them for the two lowest scoring players on your team REGARDLESS of trade value [*]Repeat steps 2-3 for each week check What is the team that scores 215? I've been running some searches but nothing gets me close, so I'm wondering if I have a bug somewhere. First of all, are we using same data? The one I'm using has week 2 trade values quessed to something in the lines of what I think they could be, and it might be possible I have mistake in scoring them.
Yeah, I used the data you posted, so it should be the same. The best team I found only gave 204, so if you could post the 215-point team I'd like to know why my program isn't finding it or anything close.
|
On January 12 2013 08:13 paladin8 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 07:57 cjin wrote:On January 12 2013 02:40 paladin8 wrote:On January 08 2013 22:25 cjin wrote:On January 08 2013 14:28 Spazer wrote:I tried brute forcing the main using the 30 highest scoring players per week (works out to 53 players total). It tested 583 teams over the course of 2.5 hours before I shut it down since it was obviously never going to finish in a reasonable amount of time. In comparison, with the 20 highest scoring players per week (pool of 41), I did 279 teams over 40 minutes. With the 10 highest scoring players per week (pool of 27), I did 285 in 35 minutes. In short, brute forcing main teams is a pipe dream for large pools of players until we do some optimization. Low trade value players can be evaluated almost instantly, but high ones take forever. For instance, testing trades with an initial team of KT Rolster, s2, hitman, barracks, alone, jangbi, and bogus took 1 minute 18 seconds by itself. I need a better way of discarding initial teams. With anti-teams, discarding initial teams is really easy. If an initial team scores more points than your current best team right off the bat, you can safely skip it. This trims off entire branches and really cuts down on the calculation time. What we need is a smart way to do this for main teams as well. I was thinking something along the lines of this: - Take an initial team
- Determine the two best players that are not on your team for the current week
- Switch them for the two lowest scoring players on your team REGARDLESS of trade value
- Repeat steps 2-3 for each week
- If the final score is lower than the final score of your current best team, you can safely ignore this branch
My currently implemented system like this: - Take X top scoring players of each week to generate a pool of players.
- Make an ordered list ranking the pool of players by cost.
- Use a bunch of nested loops to iterate through the cost ordered list. This will make an initial team. The ordered list allows us to ignore all players past a certain point for a given loop once the cost exceeds 30.
- Check the race requirement for the initial team
- Test trades for the initial team. I use an ordered list of trade values here so that I can ignore players past a certain point, just like with step 3.
- Only attempt trades where the new player scores more points than the current player at some point in the future.
- Call the trade function recursively for each week
- Select the highest scoring resultant team and compare it against whatever our best solution currently is. Replace the best team if we've scored higher.
Also, the formula for trade value seems to be Trade value = cost * (total games in round - games played)/total games in round + points * 2/7 I'm still uncertain about the 2/7 part, but it works so far for round 2 week 1. Somehow in the last round, it ends up being (points / 4.5), and I have no idea when or how. I rewrote whole mainteamsearching shit, and ended with something like that. Only shortcut I have taken is, that instead of 6. Only attempt trades where the new player scores more points than the current player at some point in the future. I just don't allow to trade into player who will score 1 or less on next round. Or into team that will score 0 or less. I takes long to go trough all, but I'm confident it will find best solutions early. I put my round1 data trough it, and it found team that scores 215 (212 with anti team, witch is lot better than the 163 points without any trades.) in first 30 mins of running, and haven't found any better for an hour, and I think it will not find anything better anymore. Now it is basicly just discarding every startteam suggestion becouce of my version of [*]Determine the two best players that are not on your team for the current week [*]Switch them for the two lowest scoring players on your team REGARDLESS of trade value [*]Repeat steps 2-3 for each week check What is the team that scores 215? I've been running some searches but nothing gets me close, so I'm wondering if I have a bug somewhere. First of all, are we using same data? The one I'm using has week 2 trade values quessed to something in the lines of what I think they could be, and it might be possible I have mistake in scoring them. Yeah, I used the data you posted, so it should be the same. The best team I found only gave 204, so if you could post the 215-point team I'd like to know why my program isn't finding it or anything close.
+ Show Spoiler +WEEK 1
Main Team Pt Anti Team Pt
Fantasy +4 Trap +1
Action +4 Kop ±0
herO[jOin] +4 Shine +1
Wooki +4
Speed +4
soO +4
KT Rolster +8 Trade Tax ±0
-----------------------------------------
Score Week +34
Score Total +34
WEEK 2
Trades
Speed ->Soulkey
soO ->Shy
Trap ->Stork
Main Team Pt Anti Team Pt
Fantasy +4 Stork ±0
Action +4 Kop ±0
herO[jOin] +14 Shine ±0
Wooki +7
Shy +8
Soulkey +14
KT Rolster +4 Trade Tax -3
-----------------------------------------
Score Week +52
Score Total +86
WEEK 3
Trades
herO[jOin] ->Flash
Wooki ->TaeJa
Stork ->Reality
Main Team Pt Anti Team Pt
Fantasy +11 Reality ±0
Action +6 Kop ±0
TaeJa +15 Shine ±0
Flash +16
Shy +10
Soulkey +6
KT Rolster +8 Trade Tax -3
-----------------------------------------
Score Week +69
Score Total +155
WEEK 4
Trades
KT Rolster ->Woongjin Stars
Flash ->JangBi
Shine ->Bbyong
Main Team Pt Anti Team Pt
Fantasy +8 Reality -1
Action +9 Kop -1
TaeJa +6 Bbyong ±0
JangBi +10
Shy +9
Soulkey +6
Woongjin Stars +14 Trade Tax -3
-----------------------------------------
Score Week +57
Score Total +212
One thing that comes into mind is in my data line for TaeJa is
TaeJa T x 0 5.10 4 4.89 19 6.22 25
where x is for not available at first week (I know he could be picked for main, but my program doesn't allow it).
Is the x messing your data so that it doesn't have TaeJa available at all?
|
On January 12 2013 08:50 cjin wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 08:13 paladin8 wrote:On January 12 2013 07:57 cjin wrote:On January 12 2013 02:40 paladin8 wrote:On January 08 2013 22:25 cjin wrote:On January 08 2013 14:28 Spazer wrote:I tried brute forcing the main using the 30 highest scoring players per week (works out to 53 players total). It tested 583 teams over the course of 2.5 hours before I shut it down since it was obviously never going to finish in a reasonable amount of time. In comparison, with the 20 highest scoring players per week (pool of 41), I did 279 teams over 40 minutes. With the 10 highest scoring players per week (pool of 27), I did 285 in 35 minutes. In short, brute forcing main teams is a pipe dream for large pools of players until we do some optimization. Low trade value players can be evaluated almost instantly, but high ones take forever. For instance, testing trades with an initial team of KT Rolster, s2, hitman, barracks, alone, jangbi, and bogus took 1 minute 18 seconds by itself. I need a better way of discarding initial teams. With anti-teams, discarding initial teams is really easy. If an initial team scores more points than your current best team right off the bat, you can safely skip it. This trims off entire branches and really cuts down on the calculation time. What we need is a smart way to do this for main teams as well. I was thinking something along the lines of this: - Take an initial team
- Determine the two best players that are not on your team for the current week
- Switch them for the two lowest scoring players on your team REGARDLESS of trade value
- Repeat steps 2-3 for each week
- If the final score is lower than the final score of your current best team, you can safely ignore this branch
My currently implemented system like this: - Take X top scoring players of each week to generate a pool of players.
- Make an ordered list ranking the pool of players by cost.
- Use a bunch of nested loops to iterate through the cost ordered list. This will make an initial team. The ordered list allows us to ignore all players past a certain point for a given loop once the cost exceeds 30.
- Check the race requirement for the initial team
- Test trades for the initial team. I use an ordered list of trade values here so that I can ignore players past a certain point, just like with step 3.
- Only attempt trades where the new player scores more points than the current player at some point in the future.
- Call the trade function recursively for each week
- Select the highest scoring resultant team and compare it against whatever our best solution currently is. Replace the best team if we've scored higher.
Also, the formula for trade value seems to be Trade value = cost * (total games in round - games played)/total games in round + points * 2/7 I'm still uncertain about the 2/7 part, but it works so far for round 2 week 1. Somehow in the last round, it ends up being (points / 4.5), and I have no idea when or how. I rewrote whole mainteamsearching shit, and ended with something like that. Only shortcut I have taken is, that instead of 6. Only attempt trades where the new player scores more points than the current player at some point in the future. I just don't allow to trade into player who will score 1 or less on next round. Or into team that will score 0 or less. I takes long to go trough all, but I'm confident it will find best solutions early. I put my round1 data trough it, and it found team that scores 215 (212 with anti team, witch is lot better than the 163 points without any trades.) in first 30 mins of running, and haven't found any better for an hour, and I think it will not find anything better anymore. Now it is basicly just discarding every startteam suggestion becouce of my version of [*]Determine the two best players that are not on your team for the current week [*]Switch them for the two lowest scoring players on your team REGARDLESS of trade value [*]Repeat steps 2-3 for each week check What is the team that scores 215? I've been running some searches but nothing gets me close, so I'm wondering if I have a bug somewhere. First of all, are we using same data? The one I'm using has week 2 trade values quessed to something in the lines of what I think they could be, and it might be possible I have mistake in scoring them. Yeah, I used the data you posted, so it should be the same. The best team I found only gave 204, so if you could post the 215-point team I'd like to know why my program isn't finding it or anything close. + Show Spoiler +WEEK 1
Main Team Pt Anti Team Pt
Fantasy +4 Trap +1
Action +4 Kop ±0
herO[jOin] +4 Shine +1
Wooki +4
Speed +4
soO +4
KT Rolster +8 Trade Tax ±0
-----------------------------------------
Score Week +34
Score Total +34
WEEK 2
Trades
Speed ->Soulkey
soO ->Shy
Trap ->Stork
Main Team Pt Anti Team Pt
Fantasy +4 Stork ±0
Action +4 Kop ±0
herO[jOin] +14 Shine ±0
Wooki +7
Shy +8
Soulkey +14
KT Rolster +4 Trade Tax -3
-----------------------------------------
Score Week +52
Score Total +86
WEEK 3
Trades
herO[jOin] ->Flash
Wooki ->TaeJa
Stork ->Reality
Main Team Pt Anti Team Pt
Fantasy +11 Reality ±0
Action +6 Kop ±0
TaeJa +15 Shine ±0
Flash +16
Shy +10
Soulkey +6
KT Rolster +8 Trade Tax -3
-----------------------------------------
Score Week +69
Score Total +155
WEEK 4
Trades
KT Rolster ->Woongjin Stars
Flash ->JangBi
Shine ->Bbyong
Main Team Pt Anti Team Pt
Fantasy +8 Reality -1
Action +9 Kop -1
TaeJa +6 Bbyong ±0
JangBi +10
Shy +9
Soulkey +6
Woongjin Stars +14 Trade Tax -3
-----------------------------------------
Score Week +57
Score Total +212 One thing that comes into mind is in my data line for TaeJa is TaeJa T x 0 5.10 4 4.89 19 6.22 25 where x is for not available at first week (I know he could be picked for main, but my program doesn't allow it). Is the x messing your data so that it doesn't have TaeJa available at all?
Great, thanks. I handle the x properly, so that shouldn't be an issue. Probably just a bug
edit: It seems like your team might not be valid? These two trades seem wrong.
WEEK 2: Speed (2.40) -> Soulkey (6.30)
WEEK 3: Wooki (4.67) -> TaeJa (4.89)
Assuming I'm reading your initial data correctly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
3159
344
162
EPT
