6/6/2013 3:27 PM
- Tweaks to passing and rushing matchups - Adjusted the amount of influence that ratings have to avoid high passing yards and high rushing yards against slightly lower rated teams

- Adjusted the scoring potential - teams with a greater rating will still have high scores, but the likelyhood of blowouts will also depend on strategy and chance rather than just ratings. 

- Tweaked the winning percentage - Winning percentage is based on the above two factors. By created a more in like passing and rushing model, the winning percentage has moved away from being based solely on talent and aligns more from position by position matchups and game planning. 

- Starters - For awards at the end of the season a player must be marked a starter. There were a few teams that didn't mark the starter, so now there is redundancy code that will automatically mark the appropriate players with the start if they are not already marked by the owner. This works by determining positions to record for starters based on the most common formation used throughout the game, and finding the player with the highest numbers of  plays at each given position.

NOTE: More tweaks to the scoring, winning and pass/rush numbers might be on the way. I'm working on coming up with more statistics to align them with reality and keep the game competitive. If you notice any discrepancies be sure to let me know. 

Thanks for all of the input on this situation, your feedback has helped me in investigating this problem.
 
6/6/2013 5:42 PM
Right on!
6/6/2013 6:22 PM
By your above statements a superior human team should beat a lower rated SIM team every time. Then by the ratings below, what do you think the outcome would be.

- QB (1) 51.0 52.0
- OL (5) 57.8 64.2
- RB (2) 53.5 57.0
- WR (2) 58.5 56.0
- TE (1) 55.0 59.0
- DL (4) 52.8 59.8
- LB (4) 52.5 60.3
- DB (4) 45.5 60.5

My team is on the right and the SIM team is on the left. I did 20 test games with my game plan that is heavy run and we split the 20 games. I did 20 test games with my game plan that was heavy pass and I won 14 of 20, only 2 games had a margin of victory of 14pt.s or more. If ratings are to mean anything, then you still have some work to do. Have the updates been applied to the  test games, because I'm also seeing high completion rates.
6/6/2013 6:31 PM
One quick observation...it seems the randomness curve has been narrowed. This is a good thing....going to be doing testing to find more. 
6/6/2013 9:12 PM (edited)
Shotgun bomb is still unstoppable.
Just ran a test vs Greenville in Bava and lost 80-20.
800+ passing yards given up everytime I test against him.
Greenville was away team.

RATINGS    
- QB (1) 46.0 45.0
- OL (5) 60.0 54.4
- RB (2) 0.0 51.0
- WR (2) 53.5 49.5
- TE (1) 45.0 48.0
- DL (4) 54.0 53.8
- LB (4) 51.5 54.5
- DB (4) 46.8 50.3

Another test-lost 91-30.
He went 61-80 and 939 yards passing.
6/6/2013 10:52 PM
that is better then it was....
6/7/2013 11:43 AM
This isn't going to be a fix all. This is a step process. I'm examining different factors in the game and this process will happen step by step till it gets closer to reality. 

I'm going to be looking into position by position matchups to see how they are influencing outcomes. I'll also look into the shotgun bomb problems. I'm thinking of altering the pass completion percentage to be more influenced by fatigue and fatigue slightly more influenced by the distance of the intended pass. I'll have to run some tests to see what this will do in most situations, but I think this will help with the deep pass phenomenon. 

Thanks again for all of the input.

6/7/2013 1:33 PM
Posted by oriole_fan on 6/7/2013 11:43:00 AM (view original):
This isn't going to be a fix all. This is a step process. I'm examining different factors in the game and this process will happen step by step till it gets closer to reality. 

I'm going to be looking into position by position matchups to see how they are influencing outcomes. I'll also look into the shotgun bomb problems. I'm thinking of altering the pass completion percentage to be more influenced by fatigue and fatigue slightly more influenced by the distance of the intended pass. I'll have to run some tests to see what this will do in most situations, but I think this will help with the deep pass phenomenon. 

Thanks again for all of the input.

I don't think the completion % is off by much, if at all.  It currently stands somewhere around 35% and that seems reasonable.  IMO, the problem is the number of deep passes that go for TDs.  If the safeties are Pass-Long they should be able to prevent a touchdown if not the catch.  Of course, if the safeties are Run-Short, I don't think there's a problem with deep passing catches going the distance frequently.
6/7/2013 1:54 PM
Posted by oriole_fan on 6/7/2013 11:43:00 AM (view original):
This isn't going to be a fix all. This is a step process. I'm examining different factors in the game and this process will happen step by step till it gets closer to reality. 

I'm going to be looking into position by position matchups to see how they are influencing outcomes. I'll also look into the shotgun bomb problems. I'm thinking of altering the pass completion percentage to be more influenced by fatigue and fatigue slightly more influenced by the distance of the intended pass. I'll have to run some tests to see what this will do in most situations, but I think this will help with the deep pass phenomenon. 

Thanks again for all of the input.

You should probably look into the QB strength aspect as well. QB strength should be related to ability to pass long and completion percentage. The QB strength should almost be his max pass distance, with 0% completions beyond that distance and increasing as you get closer. (strength of 25 - max yards 25 at 0% completion - at 24 yards 4% completion, 23 yds 8% etc. modified again by technique, defense play call, WRvsDB etc.) a 25 strength QB may only be effective to 15 yds. If this provides appropriate differentiation between a 25 str QB and a 50 strength QB then what to do next is increase the base QB rating for recruits and not mess with the engine any further. Should look into this for other positions as well as some ratings numbers are ridiculous - even the clumbsiest OL shouldn't have a speed of 5 (delay of game penalty every time he goes on the field!).
6/7/2013 2:41 PM
slid6er and katzphang88. Excellent take. I'll mess a bit with those concepts and see what kind of results they give. 

Thanks
6/8/2013 1:11 AM
I agree that the completion % on long passes is okay, or close to it. I don't, however, agree that the QB's strength rating should be his max distance he can complete a pass. Not realistic at all. Heck, a decent high school QB can throw the ball fairly accurate at 35-50 yards! I think the main problem is there is very little chance of paying a price for throwing into coverage. Not enough int.'s. If coaches new they were taking a heavy risk of throwing picks when they chose to throw long, especially against a defense that is playing the deep pass, it would stop a lot of this type of offense. just like it does in real life! So...make the DB's more apt to pick, especially when the WR is double or triple teamed, and a lot of this problem is solved...Again, just MHO...
6/8/2013 11:55 AM
Another problem is all quarterbacks on all teams have an extremely high completion percentage regardless of passing ratings.  Gi and Technique have a huge impact in 2.0 but are meaningless in this version.
6/9/2013 10:28 AM
OK Oriole, I have had a chance to test many games.  First off, I use RanMac in Hooper.  Heads and tails better than any team in the world. Have won every nat. championship etc.  So, started off testing with the 2nd highest rated human coached team.  I was able go 50/50 with him alot which ok I guess but then started testing against my horibly ranked sima ai upcoming exb game opponent.  Same results. 50/50 no matter what strategy I used. In the actual game last night I was favored by 60 which is about right.  I barely won.

In conclusion: You have definitely toned down the blowouts. My advise. Back up a bit and go about half way to where we were and are now. A comfortable middle so to speak.
6/9/2013 6:16 PM
Posted by coach_deen on 6/8/2013 1:11:00 AM (view original):
I agree that the completion % on long passes is okay, or close to it. I don't, however, agree that the QB's strength rating should be his max distance he can complete a pass. Not realistic at all. Heck, a decent high school QB can throw the ball fairly accurate at 35-50 yards! I think the main problem is there is very little chance of paying a price for throwing into coverage. Not enough int.'s. If coaches new they were taking a heavy risk of throwing picks when they chose to throw long, especially against a defense that is playing the deep pass, it would stop a lot of this type of offense. just like it does in real life! So...make the DB's more apt to pick, especially when the WR is double or triple teamed, and a lot of this problem is solved...Again, just MHO...
Deen - I think we missed understanding each other. I suggested the strength rating equals the yard passing at the example of 25 yards because we see many DIII QB's who have that strength. So for now to compare the statistics that a 25 strength QB could put up against what a 50 strength QB could put up would be easier to tweak the engine. I personally think that even in DIII, if the strength determines the distance of the pass, we should see QB strength in the 50 - 60 range routinely. I really don't think in real life their aren't QB in DIII that couldn't out distance some D1A QB, but lack in other attributes that would put them in D1A. Strength attributes should put the ball downfield, but formation IQ, GI and technique should determine how accurate the passes shuold be.

Other attributes are out of whack, such as the many recruits we see with any attribute less than 10 or 20. If they have these real-life skills they wouldn't be considering playing college football. The game should up the minimum attributes, and make the intangibles more important.
6/10/2013 8:49 AM
It"s not just long passes that are out of whack it"s all passes.  81.8, 457 yards, 68.3, 308 yards, 68.4, 398 yards.  Those are the totals of my opponents in my 3 exhibition games.  The problem is the quarterbacks are all scrubs.  My Westminster qb in d3 blows thes guys out of the water.  This version is almost 100% random.  It's like someone rolling dice, pass complete, pass complete, pass complete.  Every qb I have faced has put up the same numbers.  I had a guy last year complete 35 out of 37 passes against me and he was a bum.  There needs to be more incompletions on all passes, not just the bombs.  Also, I see guys with 19 strength completing all these bombs, 19 strength is crappy for d3, let olone d2.  (I'm talking about d2 here.)  People keep defending this engine saying talent is king and whatnot.  What I am saying is this engine has no idea why or how these qbs perform.  It is a  100 percent roll of the dice.  I have never seen a quarterback throw under 60% in a game.  My Westminster teams have held to 48% completion rate on the season.
of 2

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.