Norbert wrote:(1/26/2012)
Just to stay on topic, the parts of the game that will work on for this update are just the game plans and the engine, including play simulation and play by play improvements. Recruiting and player development will be the focus of a different update. I know they sort of go together, but the engine is the base for the entire game, so we'd like to fully concentrate on that. Not to say that some things might not be affected, like Formation IQ, but I don't want to start spreading the focus out to the rest of the game just yet.
To focus on the projected update development, I will refrain from comments regarding further changes to player attributes and development. I wouild just like to remind Norbert that many posts have regarded changes to how players are described and how potential modifications to player ability could potentially impact how those players affect play inside the engine. I urge him to take to mind how these future player attribute changes which the community desires will be implemented into his upcoming update. I would not want him to have to rewrite the engine again to incorporate player aspect changes.
Many of the postings have been towards game planning, formations and depth charts. This will probably take more time than the actual tinkering with the engine. I have many misgivings about the current engine as it is set up, but feel it is working well as for its mechanics, given that game planning changes could fix how the engine is directed. Changes that need to be incorporated for this engine, USING THE CURRENT PLAYER ATTRIBUTE VALUES, would be:
1) Specific details and analysis included in the play by play which would describe all aspects of a play to help coaches understand strengths and weaknesses of their players and game plan. This may be to the specificity of "DT Bob Smith overpowers OL Rick Jones and is blocked by FB Mike Thomas in the backfield filling the hole. DE Tim Brown rushes by OL Jon Weeks, but is too slow for the tackle forcing RB Speedy Harris to the outside. OLB Ron White is in position, but is too slow to close and misses the tackle, but forces RB Speedy Harris inside. ILB Ted Downs is able to move down the line and tackles RB Speedy Harris for a 2 yard gain off tackle."
2) Player attributes are absolute for purposes of comparison and subsequent game engine decisions, subject only to modifications that are identifiable by coaches. The only current in game modifications altering a player and therefor a team's performance are: fatigue and injury. Other modifiers such as attribute modifiers, formation IQ and health are not altered during game play and are available for comparison prior to setting game plans and depth charts. If these two are the only numerical alterations noted during in game simulation, then a greater number should always overcome a lesser number. Combinations of attributes (EX: STR + BLK for OL would follow the same greater over lesser rule. I personally feel that, as hard as it is to get the best possible combinations - the game should give us the formulas for what attributes are added/divided/multiplied or subtracted to give the result. There is not a good reason to hide that information from the coaches other than that the developer wants to keep it some secret and mysterious puzzle to be figured out. Give us the perfect combination of unbeatable football attributes for each position over its opposing position (OL-run vs DL-run stop,OL-pass vs DL pass rush, QB/WR-deep pass vs DB - deep cover, etc) for each type of situation - let's see if we can get them. This would also help understand the expanded PBP, so for above I would know what attributes caused DE Tim Brown to rush by OL Jon Weeks, and why Jon Weeks couldn't stop him.
3) In game decision points for standard play determination would then be minimized as player vs player would be straight-forward high>low progression. Decision points would occur randomly in the above example for the situations where player vs player comparisons are not needed. Above these would be:"DT Bob Smith overpowers OL Rick Jones and is blocked by FB Mike Thomas in the backfield filling the hole. DE Tim Brown rushes by OL Jon Weeks but is too slow for the tackle forcing RB Speedy Harris to the outside. OLB Ron White is in position, but is too slow to close and misses the tackle, but forces RB Speedy Harris inside. ILB Ted Downs is able to move down the line and tackles RB Speedy Harris for a 2 yard gain off tackle." In the three bolded examples, the simulation would make a random decision - did the fullback's block fill the hole forcing him out or open the hole for the RB to move through?, was the DE action going to force the RB inside for the ILB or outside for the OLB?, was the OLB action going to force the RB inside for the ILB or outside for the CB/S? Ultimately, the ILB strength and GI negated the speedy RB's strength and GI causing a tackle. Should the decision points have been opposite the outcome would have been different - but the player vs player mis-matches remain accurate.
4) For game decision points regarding irregular occurances such as turnovers, penalties, and injuries; the engine should be skewed to acknowledge those players with high and low values in certain attributes and for the differences in those attributes in player vs player match-ups. Currently, as has been presented in past forums and developer chats, there are many attributes which can determine a turnover. These are low attribute values for things as durability, stamina, hands, GI, tech and combinations with relation to mis-matches for strength, formation IQ, elusiveness etc. Some diligence should be directed toward the simulation so that ONLY players who have low values (bottom 20% of an individual attribute for each divisions player population) or mismatch values of greater than 20% for a player vs player match-up would even generate the possibility of a penalty or turnover event. This may need to be revised during beta testing, but I would start low and work up. Also, significantly reduce scores off turnovers. Correct me if I'm wrong, but a fumble or an interception where the player ending up with the ball is down on the field, the ball cannot be advanced. This would cut down on the number of turnover TD's. Also, would need to add occurances which never happen in GD - fumbled snaps, muffed punts and KO returns, defensive fumbles. (any others?)
There's probably more, but I'll stop now. Thank you. Enjoy the Super Bowl!