I think Points Used for the partial is good. I can't think of anything better for the "Raised"...

If a player has been raised a lvl, then we could say they've leveled?

Or is that too D&D?

Would a player's SL look something like 6.0 for an uncoached lvl 6 and progressing to 6.1, 6.2 and then 7.0 whe they level up?

This would probably give something like DF II 5.2.  An age II DF, coached twice at lvl 5.

I think Al's looking to keep the SL and the partial levels as separate numbers. Otherwise, it could get complicated in the simulator.

Same here for me: PU and RSD

I wasn't talking about in the simulator.

Al asked, ' what do we call that'?

I just figured it meant how we as managers shall refer to a given player. Possibly in terms of trading and so on.

We'll need to make it clear to another manager what sort of player they're looking at. If it's an APP, the number of matches they've played, how close they are to leveling up and so on.

Yeah, in a spread sheet/simulator or algorithm the system will have to just use whicever relevant number. I don't believe partial levels count towards area totals and so on. A partial level will just be a different variable.

Sorry for the misunderstanding David. Al's looking for both actually... what do we call these things in the database/website and how do we want to refer to them in passing.

For inter-manager communication, forum/blog posting, I think you have a good idea to refer to a 'DF II 5.2'

Thanks for the feedback David, Rene, and Rob.  Yeah, for reference the 5.2 point makes sense.  I'll plan to show it as PU for CP used and RSD for skill levels raised that season.

Al