What should they all mean? RATINGS REVISITED Topic

Posted by polabonez on 8/15/2012 4:28:00 PM (view original):
I don't get why it has to be so confusing/difficult/realistic.

WR measured by SPD , TECH, HANDS
DB measured by SPD, TECH, HANDS.

Better DB's have a better chance of stopping the play.  Better WR's have a better chance of making the play.  QB Factors into both situations......

Simple is better.


I just hope to God that hands actually matter in the new version. Especially for receivers and db/lb.
8/15/2012 10:07 PM

As I brought up in my original post - what about durability and stamina? Should a 32 stamina OL play 94% of the plays and a 69 stamina play 100%? If each starts at 100% the stamina factor should decreased far more rapidly for the 32 player than the 69 player - and the 32 player should get about half the snaps. Also - make the player who has had his"fatigue indicator dot" turned red, functional to the point of running onto the field and collapsing. I have had far too many SIM OL be turned yellow or red against my starting above average defenders and they still find a way to move the ball. Red players should be at about a 50% reduction of all attributes and play an insignificant part in the game. This would make stamina an important factor again and make low stamina players part-timers. That was one interesting part of GD 1.0 was being able to plan on low stamina OL getting rests between line changes. Also - maybe low stamina players - or any player for that matter - if they play too much maybe they aren't able to recover to 100% for the next game (like the soccer game) and start at 90%.

Durability values needs to directly relate to in game nicks and if low enough to one or multigame injuries. We would know the likelyhood of any player getting injured and depth chart to the possibility.

What do people think about the current stamina and durability numbers?

 

8/16/2012 1:21 AM
I agree with you, the current stamina system sucks. GD1.0 was much more fun.
8/16/2012 7:19 AM
And personally, I'd be fine if injuries were removed completely.
8/16/2012 7:19 AM
I think the opposite.  I think niggling injuries directly related to the durability attribute should be more prevalent, not removed completely.  I am not necessarily advocating more multi-game injuries as we don't have the roster sizes to really deal with that obstacle.  But I do think that it would add to a game's drama and make you really think hard in recruiting...  "Yeah, he's a 90-90 OL but he has a 25 DUR so maybe I'd be better off with the 85-82 OL with the 50 DUR instead."
8/16/2012 11:03 AM
I think injuries have a place, but they should only apply with distinct parameters. Durability of under 30 - chance of being hurt and out for multiple games and frequent nicks in game. Under 50 - chance for injury 1 - 2 games and some of nicks in game. Under 70 - very little chance of losing a game and infrequent nicks in game. Over 70 - never gets hurt. And I don't see why we shouldn't see even DIII players with durability up in the 90's.

If I know it could happen I can plan for it or recruit against it. But if it is random it is a worthless attribute.
8/16/2012 11:06 AM
Posted by cydrych on 8/15/2012 5:11:00 PM (view original):
But don't oversimplify it.  For instance, I know Norbert has already identified that there should be a difference between long routes and short routes, likely requiring different skill sets. 

Maybe Speed is only important on long routes... a DB whose Speed is outmatched could be at a significant disadvantage (unless the formation provides a safety cover).  Short routes could be about a WR's Elusiveness where a DBs Instinct or Elusiveness might be needed to counter.  Either way, ,when the ball is delivered (which is up to another set of calculations to see if the QB sees the open receiver and can make a quality throw) everyone in the target area will need decent hands and technique to make a play.
As long as we can understand what is going on.

Oversimplifying the engine doesn't necessarily oversimplify the strategy.  If I can look at your roster and realize that your DB's are worse than my receivers, I should benefit by throwing more, and more aggressive.  If I realize you have stout DB's, I either must try to be more conservative with passing or try to exploit one of your shortcomings.

But I can't do any of that with 47 checks in a play and have no idea whether my receivers with 10 hands are better than your DB's with 90 speed on out patterns.
8/16/2012 12:39 PM
Absolutely right. pola!
8/16/2012 1:29 PM
◂ Prev 123
What should they all mean? RATINGS REVISITED Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 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.