Proposal to overhaul progression

Temporary forum for the discussion of the Tuesday Morning project, to enhance the Madden 08 off-the-field experience.
Drizzt_13
All-Pro
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2012 7:32 pm

Re: Proposal to overhaul progression

Postby Drizzt_13 » Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:58 pm

torontogrudlies wrote:What if....

Technique is an attribute between 0 and 127 to reflect how the player is leveraging his physical skills... and it makes the relevant physical attributes adjust from 0-127%?


Well we'd probably never use less then 60 or 70 because if a player has their most important ability reduced to a 70 or less they're worthless. Why not just use the range from 75-125 and then double it so a score of 1 means you're going at 75% 50 means 100% and 100 is 125%? If we have a separate technique rating for each skill then we could use 0-127 as it wouldn't be so bad.

Re: Proposal to overhaul progression

Sponsor

Sponsor
 

User avatar
torontogrudlies
MVP
Posts: 837
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 4:56 pm

Re: Proposal to overhaul progression

Postby torontogrudlies » Sat Jun 02, 2012 12:09 am

Drizzt_13 wrote:
torontogrudlies wrote:What if....

Technique is an attribute between 0 and 127 to reflect how the player is leveraging his physical skills... and it makes the relevant physical attributes adjust from 0-127%?


Well we'd probably never use less then 60 or 70 because if a player has their most important ability reduced to a 70 or less they're worthless. Why not just use the range from 75-125 and then double it so a score of 1 means you're going at 75% 50 means 100% and 100 is 125%? If we have a separate technique rating for each skill then we could use 0-127 as it wouldn't be so bad.


Right, we could set and adjust the variance accordingly... this is one of those things which can have a constant defined in the configuration file. Like, if we decide that 75% is too small for the minimum, or 125% boosts it too much, can just adjust the config.

It would probably be rather cumbersome to have a technique rating per skill. Could find a way if absolutely necessary. But do you think it might be workable to have one rating, which adjusts all of their relevant skills? Example, a lineman's pass, run blocking and agility all get adjusted by the same %?

Drizzt_13
All-Pro
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2012 7:32 pm

Re: Proposal to overhaul progression

Postby Drizzt_13 » Sat Jun 02, 2012 12:17 am

Yeah using a configuration file make sense, as does just having one that effects the relevant stats. Let's just go with that and then use the potential rating to cap physical stats.

User avatar
torontogrudlies
MVP
Posts: 837
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 4:56 pm

Re: Proposal to overhaul progression

Postby torontogrudlies » Sat Jun 02, 2012 12:55 am

Ok good. Any ideas on figuring out the potentials? I think they would represent not what the player will be at the peak, but what they could get to. The likely result would be slightly short of the potential in most cases....

Littleware
Banned
Posts: 754
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2011 10:33 pm
Location: Detroit, Michigan

Re: Proposal to overhaul progression

Postby Littleware » Sat Jun 02, 2012 2:19 pm

Drizzt_13 wrote:
Littleware wrote:Don't temp me to load it. I have never been a fan of rating players high. Of course there are players who are better than others, but none of them are perfect in any area of their respective positions to earn the coveted 99 in any attribute. (ex. Peyton Manning's 99 awareness and importance, but throws a int in the biggest game of his career and cost his team a chance to win) No player deserves it! Lower ratings allow for the sliders, sub patterns and mistakes to happen more naturally.


To be fair I have seen Peyton throw interceptions in madden even though he has an awareness of 99, players with 99 PBK still give up sacks. To say that no player ever deserves a 99 because they still make mistakes isn't true because those players still make mistakes in madden. The point of lowering ratings is to have a larger spectrum of player ability and if we make fewer high rated players then all we've done is shifted the spectrum from being 80-99 to 70-90. If we want to take a serious look at lowering player ratings we have to recognize that it's a very complicated task and approach it seriously. It's related to progression because any progression system will need to have the lower ratings in mind so it doesn't produce too many high rated players. Let's start another thread for this.



Morale affects motivation, desire, will and loyalty. Awareness affects precision of technique (running correct routes, picking up the correct blitzer, etc ), being in the right place, knowing assignments, and mistakes.[/quote]

Awareness allows you to choose the correct blitzer to pick up, strength gives you the ability to push them up away, but if you don't have the technique to correctly apply leverage you're still going to get beat.

Morale should affect motivation desire will and loyalty but it should not equal them. Some players will be lazy even if they have everything they want and others will work hard even when things are going badly. That's why we are planning on having an expanded stat-line of sorts with things like work ethic for different players.[/quote]

There is no 100% player at any position. NFL QB's passer completions % is at best 65% for a season, so how can any QB have an accuracy of 99?
QB's can't have 99 arm strength nor accuracy. There is no 99 rated QB that "does it all", no RB or WR can be 99 fast. There is a (fastest guy in the league) but not the fastest ever in life to get a 99. So if another is faster, what do we do? lower the previous fastest speed to 98?
Awareness: (Tackle has 48 speed, 76 agility 83 awareness, 81 pass block, only an elite DE will beat him infrequently. But his awareness along with his agility gets him in place to pickup the correct blitzer in this game).

Unfortunately Morale affect several motivations in the game, there's no way around it!

Does anyone understand the "IMPORTANCE" attribute?

User avatar
NickyJ
Hall of Fame
Posts: 2713
Joined: Wed Jul 20, 2011 7:09 pm
Location: Virginia
Contact:

Re: Proposal to overhaul progression

Postby NickyJ » Sat Jun 02, 2012 3:06 pm

Littleware wrote:Does anyone understand the "IMPORTANCE" attribute?

From what I've seen, it affects how much the player is worth to a team. For example, if Albert Haynesworth has an importance rating of 86, then teams will offer high round draft picks for him. If you set it low (I think I put him in the 30s), then teams will offer you a low round pick, as well as a certain bottlecaps they found in a landfill depending on his tackle rating.
Image

User avatar
torontogrudlies
MVP
Posts: 837
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 4:56 pm

Re: Proposal to overhaul progression

Postby torontogrudlies » Sat Jun 02, 2012 4:55 pm

NickyJ wrote:
Littleware wrote:Does anyone understand the "IMPORTANCE" attribute?

From what I've seen, it affects how much the player is worth to a team. For example, if Albert Haynesworth has an importance rating of 86, then teams will offer high round draft picks for him. If you set it low (I think I put him in the 30s), then teams will offer you a low round pick, as well as a certain bottlecaps they found in a landfill depending on his tackle rating.


If we come up with successful formulas for GMs evaluating players, I'd say we bypass that part of the in-game. I'm sure it's possible to do; I already have done basic valuations but we will be able to get much more detailed.

Drizzt_13
All-Pro
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2012 7:32 pm

Re: Proposal to overhaul progression

Postby Drizzt_13 » Sat Jun 02, 2012 11:53 pm

Littleware wrote:
There is no 100% player at any position. NFL QB's passer completions % is at best 65% for a season, so how can any QB have an accuracy of 99?


Have you simmed through a season of madden? QB's with 99 accuracy do not get a 99% completion rate, people with 99 tend to max at around 68 which makes sense as Brees got 71% last year

Littleware wrote:QB's can't have 99 arm strength nor accuracy. There is no 99 rated QB that "does it all", no RB or WR can be 99 fast. There is a (fastest guy in the league) but not the fastest ever in life to get a 99. So if another is faster, what do we do? lower the previous fastest speed to 98?

Look I think we have very different understandings of what the madden rating system means. A 99 does not mean perfect, it does not mean the best ever in life, it just means the highest madden is willing to represent in their game. Players with 99's make mistakes and get beat, they are not perfect and they were never meant to be perfect. You keep saying that it makes no sense for players to be rated perfect when all players still make mistakes, play some madden, players with 99's don't play the game perfectly. I think part of the reason why it's a 99 and not 100 is that it isn't meant to represent perfection.

99's do not equal the perfect player, they equal as good a player as madden is capable of simulating. If you play madden at all you will realize that those players are not perfect. Reducing player ratings across the board so we don't have any 99's means that we are not changing the possible difference between players just shifting it. Instead of having players rated from 75-99 you have players rated from 70-95 and then you don't gain very much. Ratings are relative, a 99 speed WR beats a 90 speed CB just as much as an 89 WR beats a 80 CB, the only difference is you have a problem with the 99 because you believe it represents perfection when in the game ti clearly doesn't. If we just shift all the ratings down we don't change anything about the way the game works.


Littleware wrote:Awareness: (Tackle has 48 speed, 76 agility 83 awareness, 81 pass block, only an elite DE will beat him infrequently. But his awareness along with his agility gets him in place to pickup the correct blitzer in this game).
Unfortunately Morale affect several motivations in the game, there's no way around it!

Does anyone understand the "IMPORTANCE" attribute?


We can make an app that overwrites those changes and makes morale more complex, that's how we can get around it.

User avatar
torontogrudlies
MVP
Posts: 837
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 4:56 pm

Re: Proposal to overhaul progression

Postby torontogrudlies » Sun Jun 03, 2012 12:09 am

...but 99 does mean "there's no room for improvement." Even if the player is about to play in the most important game of the year, in primetime, against the team which stiffed him on his contract, this can't be reflected, because he's already 99.

Drizzt_13
All-Pro
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2012 7:32 pm

Re: Proposal to overhaul progression

Postby Drizzt_13 » Sun Jun 03, 2012 12:41 am

A game has to set the cutoff somewhere. There is always going to be a scenario in which there is no room for improvement unless you simply never use the top of your range, in which case what's the point of having it if it's actually impossible for players to get there or so improbable that they never would. It isn't going to be any functionally different if you lower ratings so that it looks like there is room to improve but it's actually impossible to hit a 99, there will still be a max it will just be less noticeable.


Don't get me wrong, I think there should be much fewer players rated 99, and a larger spread of player ability would make the game more interesting for sure. But I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with a player having a 99 overall rating or a 99 in one attribute which is what was being argued.


Return to “Tuesday Morning Manager”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests