It's a shame GLB never paid attention to the football mechanics forum. If I felt like it would help, I'd bring it back to life. That would help tremendously with this sort of stuff.
Forum > Test Server Discussion > Test Server Discussions > Passing Game Mechanics Test Results-Discussion Thread
Ronnie Brown 23
offline
offline
Originally posted by Staz
It's a shame GLB never paid attention to the football mechanics forum. If I felt like it would help, I'd bring it back to life. That would help tremendously with this sort of stuff.
Yea, it would have been extremely valuable.
It seems like the developer would like to do it all on his own (which is perfectly reasonable tbh).
It's a shame GLB never paid attention to the football mechanics forum. If I felt like it would help, I'd bring it back to life. That would help tremendously with this sort of stuff.
Yea, it would have been extremely valuable.
It seems like the developer would like to do it all on his own (which is perfectly reasonable tbh).
Edited by Ronnie Brown 23 on Oct 4, 2010 11:10:40
Staz
offline
offline
Originally posted by Ronnie Brown 23
Yea, it would have been extremely valuable.
It seems like the developer would like to do it all on his own (which is perfectly reasonable tbh).
It is reasonable, but I'm sure many of us are well aware of this fact - There are people who understand the game of football, and are willing to offer their insight and information to improve the game, but they just aren't being utilized, or even "accepted".
Yea, it would have been extremely valuable.
It seems like the developer would like to do it all on his own (which is perfectly reasonable tbh).
It is reasonable, but I'm sure many of us are well aware of this fact - There are people who understand the game of football, and are willing to offer their insight and information to improve the game, but they just aren't being utilized, or even "accepted".
Dr. E
offline
offline
Originally posted by Staz
It is reasonable, but I'm sure many of us are well aware of this fact - There are people who understand the game of football, and are willing to offer their insight and information to improve the game, but they just aren't being utilized, or even "accepted".
There are a lot of people who have a lot of football knowledge, but their conclusions are flawed and illogical. Others still who use their experience in football to forward some aspect they want into the game. Others who have no idea what is possible with programming and/or hardware available or even practical to a small affair such as GLB.
It is reasonable, but I'm sure many of us are well aware of this fact - There are people who understand the game of football, and are willing to offer their insight and information to improve the game, but they just aren't being utilized, or even "accepted".
There are a lot of people who have a lot of football knowledge, but their conclusions are flawed and illogical. Others still who use their experience in football to forward some aspect they want into the game. Others who have no idea what is possible with programming and/or hardware available or even practical to a small affair such as GLB.
Dr. E
offline
offline
If it was me, I wouldn't change anything about the WRs catching ability on 3rd down. I would add to a CB's effectiveness for every additional defender within a certain radius of the receiver. For example, if there is one additional Dot in coverage on the receiver I would make both slightly more effective. If there were triple coverage I'd make it an even bigger bonus to the defender and higher for any additional defenders. I'd also do as someone else suggested and make deflections harder to catch. Make that catching skill more important.
rockitsauce
offline
offline
I just ran 2 test games where one team had the super speedy receivers with little catching, and the other with slower but super catching abilities. What would you expect from that? The sentiment is that only the speedy guys make plays....
Well, the catchier guys won both games and had better stats. It helps that all receivers go into elusive route mode when the route is finished. The slower guys got open and made more catches in traffic on balls not deflected.
Well, the catchier guys won both games and had better stats. It helps that all receivers go into elusive route mode when the route is finished. The slower guys got open and made more catches in traffic on balls not deflected.
Staz
offline
offline
Originally posted by Dr. E
There are a lot of people who have a lot of football knowledge, but their conclusions are flawed and illogical. Others still who use their experience in football to forward some aspect they want into the game. Others who have no idea what is possible with programming and/or hardware available or even practical to a small affair such as GLB.
Of course. However, I know for a fact it's possible to get a group of experienced agents together and have them research and develop "basic" football mechanics. Weren't you in that forum?
Originally posted by jamz
ITT: Staz tries to rename dotball stazzball
If Stazzball = A realistic BEHAVIOR (idc about realistic results in terms of stats or w/e, just the way they happen) then so be it lol
There are a lot of people who have a lot of football knowledge, but their conclusions are flawed and illogical. Others still who use their experience in football to forward some aspect they want into the game. Others who have no idea what is possible with programming and/or hardware available or even practical to a small affair such as GLB.
Of course. However, I know for a fact it's possible to get a group of experienced agents together and have them research and develop "basic" football mechanics. Weren't you in that forum?
Originally posted by jamz
ITT: Staz tries to rename dotball stazzball
If Stazzball = A realistic BEHAVIOR (idc about realistic results in terms of stats or w/e, just the way they happen) then so be it lol
simpathia
offline
offline
Originally posted by rockitsauce
I just ran 2 test games where one team had the super speedy receivers with little catching, and the other with slower but super catching abilities. What would you expect from that? The sentiment is that only the speedy guys make plays....
Well, the catchier guys won both games and had better stats. It helps that all receivers go into elusive route mode when the route is finished. The slower guys got open and made more catches in traffic on balls not deflected.
Yet a QB prefers to skip the guy that can catch and throw the jump ball to the speedy guy who couldn't catch a common cold.
Oh well, Catch is working on "New method to calculate a player's risk. Still messing with this part."
I hope this new method takes actual historic performance of the receiver into account. As long as you try to do this based on player attributes you're always going to get it wrong.
I just ran 2 test games where one team had the super speedy receivers with little catching, and the other with slower but super catching abilities. What would you expect from that? The sentiment is that only the speedy guys make plays....
Well, the catchier guys won both games and had better stats. It helps that all receivers go into elusive route mode when the route is finished. The slower guys got open and made more catches in traffic on balls not deflected.
Yet a QB prefers to skip the guy that can catch and throw the jump ball to the speedy guy who couldn't catch a common cold.
Oh well, Catch is working on "New method to calculate a player's risk. Still messing with this part."
I hope this new method takes actual historic performance of the receiver into account. As long as you try to do this based on player attributes you're always going to get it wrong.
Dr. E
offline
offline
Originally posted by Staz
If Stazzball = A realistic BEHAVIOR (idc about realistic results in terms of stats or w/e, just the way they happen) then so be it lol
Don't recall being in the forum, but I join a lot and just watch and learn then later delete the forum when it no longer provides entertainment.
If Stazzball = A realistic BEHAVIOR (idc about realistic results in terms of stats or w/e, just the way they happen) then so be it lol
Don't recall being in the forum, but I join a lot and just watch and learn then later delete the forum when it no longer provides entertainment.
Mightyhalo
offline
offline
Originally posted by simpathia
I hope this new method takes actual historic performance of the receiver into account. As long as you try to do this based on player attributes you're always going to get it wrong.
Why would anything take historic performance into account? So if a low catching receiver is doing real good right now, he should get a bonus to catching based on historical production? That will never happen.
I hope this new method takes actual historic performance of the receiver into account. As long as you try to do this based on player attributes you're always going to get it wrong.
Why would anything take historic performance into account? So if a low catching receiver is doing real good right now, he should get a bonus to catching based on historical production? That will never happen.
simpathia
offline
offline
If I would be a QB I would prefer to throw to the guy that caught my passes most consistently over the last few weeks, not to the guy who runs the fastest 40.
Mightyhalo
offline
offline
Originally posted by simpathia
If I would be a QB I would prefer to throw to the guy that caught my passes most consistently over the last few weeks, not to the guy who runs the fastest 40.
Ahh I see what you mean now. That would be hard to implement, but I guess it could work like the play auto adjust.
If I would be a QB I would prefer to throw to the guy that caught my passes most consistently over the last few weeks, not to the guy who runs the fastest 40.
Ahh I see what you mean now. That would be hard to implement, but I guess it could work like the play auto adjust.
rockitsauce
offline
offline
Originally posted by simpathia
I hope this new method takes actual historic performance of the receiver into account. As long as you try to do this based on player attributes you're always going to get it wrong.
Why not take it into your own hands and set QB's favorite targets?
I hope this new method takes actual historic performance of the receiver into account. As long as you try to do this based on player attributes you're always going to get it wrong.
Why not take it into your own hands and set QB's favorite targets?
Joebarber
offline
offline
Originally posted by darkenrahl_17
I should clarify then......The 140/50 makes more catches(drops less) than the 120/90 because of the strength of the AEQ and VA's for catching bonuses. The Catching attribute is being looked at see if we can make that more important than the AEQ and VA's which should be bonuses, not staples of WR.
The point is not dictate how to build, but to instead make the attributes work for what they are intended and the AEQ/VA's be more supplemental rather than overpowering in situations like the one I listed above.
A 140/50 would still be viable in breaking open and I imagine on deep routes, etc....but it would balance the catching to be more indicative of the build.
140/50 is no longer the realistic speed build
I should clarify then......The 140/50 makes more catches(drops less) than the 120/90 because of the strength of the AEQ and VA's for catching bonuses. The Catching attribute is being looked at see if we can make that more important than the AEQ and VA's which should be bonuses, not staples of WR.
The point is not dictate how to build, but to instead make the attributes work for what they are intended and the AEQ/VA's be more supplemental rather than overpowering in situations like the one I listed above.
A 140/50 would still be viable in breaking open and I imagine on deep routes, etc....but it would balance the catching to be more indicative of the build.
140/50 is no longer the realistic speed build
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
