New Look: Rating Overhaul

[CaptainSuperman]

Re: New Look: Rating Overhaul

Honestly the system isn't as messed up as people make it out to be. Yes, we all want separation from John Scott to Sidney Crosby. But, as Simple Mathematics mentioned on the last page, he wants John Scott to have a 1 in accuracy, and Stamkos to have a 99. Only problem is, John Scott is still a professional NHL player, and there are junior and AHL players with worse off shots. So the rating spectrum isn't just implemented to separate Sid from Scott, it's to separate the top of the NHL and the lowest of the low, like the CHL enforcers or UK National team.

It's just like all NHL teams are 4/5 stars in the 3 categories. And they should be, otherwise you can't call it a professional league. And putting the stats into a number makes it easy to see where you are at as far as your limits and abilities go. A guy with 90 deking might be able to pull of some special dekes, but at 89, while still great, will fail at that same deke. All this letter grade is doing is making a range, ie. 95-99, instead of giving a specified number

[AdamJones113]

Re: New Look: Rating Overhaul

The more and more I read this stuff Adam, the more I like the sound of your ratings system. This would add so much depth to BaGM and it would make every game different since different players would be hot and cold every game. EA really needs to consider this. Like seriously.

Still, the only thing about the letters for individual attributes is that I don't think it would provide enough separation. If they could add your potential and player roles to their current attributes system with the numbers, I think they would have something incredible on their hands. And if they added more player separation as well, it would be a dream come true.

Great stuff Adam.

Thanks! I would be delighted were something (I am not fool enough to expect this to be read and implemented) like even those two attributes inputted into the game.

Really like the base outline, really good stuff and lots of options to improve/add upon!

Thanks!

Honestly the system isn't as messed up as people make it out to be. Yes, we all want separation from John Scott to Sidney Crosby. But, as Simple Mathematics mentioned on the last page, he wants John Scott to have a 1 in accuracy, and Stamkos to have a 99. Only problem is, John Scott is still a professional NHL player, and there are junior and AHL players with worse off shots. So the rating spectrum isn't just implemented to separate Sid from Scott, it's to separate the top of the NHL and the lowest of the low, like the CHL enforcers or UK National team.

It's just like all NHL teams are 4/5 stars in the 3 categories. And they should be, otherwise you can't call it a professional league. And putting the stats into a number makes it easy to see where you are at as far as your limits and abilities go. A guy with 90 deking might be able to pull of some special dekes, but at 89, while still great, will fail at that same deke. All this letter grade is doing is making a range, ie. 95-99, instead of giving a specified number

Glad you think that's all these letter grades are! Ha ha, just kidding.

I see where you are all coming from in regards to the letter vs. number grades. My thinking, as I think I explained in post #9 of this thread, is that numbers will be coded no matter what: I think they've got to be easier to code for than letters representing a value. I think the grade is merely a better representation that may seem to include more players, meaning less separation, but over the course of a season the fluctuation will take its toll.

There are definitely plenty of cases where I'm wrong. But I'm going to do some testing. I don't believe that one attribute difference changes that much.

Goalie ratings (I'm still using the letter grade, view it as a number grade if you want) coming later today or tomorrow.

[AdamJones113]

Re: New Look: Rating Overhaul

Goalie Ratings

Now, goalie ratings are a tricky subject. Goalies don't play full 82 game seasons. Goalies can't all of a sudden just flat out produce like demons; even King Henrik needs a good defense. But goalies can steal a game. Goalies can stand on their head on every trip down the ice and pull out a game where their team was overmatched. Quantifying them correctly, then, is clearly important.

Letter Grades
Now for goalies, I think letter grades have a must. There is a lot of separation in goalies, but that separation is more style-based than quality-based. Sure, some goalies are better with their glove than others, some have better poke checks, but there isn't enough difference in that area to preclude letter grades. The difference has to be in styles.

GoalieScreen1.jpg

New Attributes
Here are two attributes that should be added:

Spectacular Save Ability
So that not everyone can make incredible warp-saves. If I had it my way no one would be above B+ in this rating so that it would actually work as indended.

Awareness
I have no clue why this isn't a thing. This attribute determines how aware a goalie is of opposing players. Determines whether a goalie recognizes an opponent on the back post, an opponent coming from behind when the goalie has the puck behind the net, and a trailing player on an odd-man rush.


Rating Categories Revamp
Currently goalies are allocated ratings in 3 categories: Reflexes, Athleticism, and Puck Control. I'm proposing a complete change: Pre-Shot, Shot, and Post-Shot. In Pre-Shot will fall attributes like Angles and Aggressiveness; Shot will contain attributes like Glove High and Breakaway; Post-Shot has Recovery and Passing.

GoalieScreen2.jpg

The attributes are subject to fluctuation by the same methods as tangible skater ratings. The only Intangible attributes, subject to the same scale as skater intangible attributes, are Poise (Pre-Shot) and Awareness (Pre-Shot), which the goalie will improve in because he will know more tricks and strategies as he plays more.


Revamped Goalie Designations
Rather than having goalies be termed as Starters, Backups, etc, I am proposing a new designation system. This separates goalies by suggesting their number of games played at a certain level. This attribute does not fluctuate. In the NHL, better goalies with higher Endurance and Durability will be suggested to play more games while goalies with lower Endurance and Durability will be suggested to play fewer games: (Top: High Endurance. Bottom: Low Endurance)

GoalieScreen3.jpg

In the AHL, however, potential is factored in. A young goalie with good potential will be suggested for more games than normal even if the starter is better. That does not mean he'll be suggested for a lot of games, but it will be more than if he had less potential: (Top: High Potential. Bottom: Low Potential)

GoalieScreen4.jpg

Keep the feedback and suggestions coming!

[m_maclean24]

Re: New Look: Rating Overhaul

Goalie ideas look good. I'm going to say it again, I really love the idea of tangible and intangible ratings, and the difference in how they impact player development.

I'm still not 100% sold on how you are going to get more separation by using the letter grades though. Can you explain a bit more how this would work in your opinion?

The more I think about it, the more I think I understand it - there will less separation in overall ratings, say most players will be between an A- player and a C overall, but the "behind the scenes" ratings become increasingly important, because those are the ones that will cause the actual separation when it comes to on the ice performance?

Let me know if I'm understanding this...

[AdamJones113]

Re: New Look: Rating Overhaul

Goalie ideas look good. I'm going to say it again, I really love the idea of tangible and intangible ratings, and the difference in how they impact player development.

I'm still not 100% sold on how you are going to get more separation by using the letter grades though. Can you explain a bit more how this would work in your opinion?

The more I think about it, the more I think I understand it - there will less separation in overall ratings, say most players will be between an A- player and a C overall, but the "behind the scenes" ratings become increasingly important, because those are the ones that will cause the actual separation when it comes to on the ice performance?

Let me know if I'm understanding this...

The "Overall" rating is not as important as it seems to be. It's the individual attributes that determine what happen. My theory is that there isn't much, if any, differentiation between close attributes (e.g. 99 and 98). Therefore grouping the ranges into slightly less-specific categories isn't a big deal, especially since ratings will be constantly fluctuating. Production on the ice, therefore, is most important, and since that isn't really affected by the slightest of changes a smaller range won't affect it either. It works both ways.

Separation will come from the more specific player types and the new attributes. Those are very important.

[m_maclean24]

Re: New Look: Rating Overhaul

The "Overall" rating is not as important as it seems to be. It's the individual attributes that determine what happen. My theory is that there isn't much, if any, differentiation between close attributes (e.g. 99 and 98). Therefore grouping the ranges into slightly less-specific categories isn't a big deal, especially since ratings will be constantly fluctuating. Production on the ice, therefore, is most important, and since that isn't really affected by the slightest of changes a smaller range won't affect it either. It works both ways.

Separation will come from the more specific player types and the new attributes. Those are very important.

Thanks for clarifying that for me. That's certainly along the lines of what I was understanding

[redsox4evur]

Re: New Look: Rating Overhaul

The "Overall" rating is not as important as it seems to be. It's the individual attributes that determine what happen. My theory is that there isn't much, if any, differentiation between close attributes (e.g. 99 and 98). Therefore grouping the ranges into slightly less-specific categories isn't a big deal, especially since ratings will be constantly fluctuating. Production on the ice, therefore, is most important, and since that isn't really affected by the slightest of changes a smaller range won't affect it either. It works both ways.

Separation will come from the more specific player types and the new attributes. Those are very important.

So pretty much you are wanting to bring the Revamped Rosters to life?

[AdamJones113]

Re: New Look: Rating Overhaul

So pretty much you are wanting to bring the Revamped Rosters to life?

I think a lot of people here want that. I don't really see what connection it has to this thread, which is intended as a speculative formulation of a new in-game rating system?

[GlennN]

Re: New Look: Rating Overhaul

Player Roles
Rather than having vague definitions for snipers, playmakers, grinders, and the ever-mystifying 3rdSCRs, I am proposing a kind new player type that combines both a player's type and their line. For example, Sidney Crosby would be a 1stPLY; Mason Raymond a 3rdSNP; Zac Rinaldo a 4thGRN. The advantages of combining the two are that it means both create separation (rather than having Steven Stamkos and Raymond fall under the SNP category) and gives a better indication of where a player is best suited to play.

[ATTACH]92826[/ATTACH]

I generally love the ideas you are bringing up. The above, though, is one I do not agree with. The line a player plays on may vary depending on the team he plays for. No matter how good a center is, he will not be on the first line in Pittsburgh or Philadelphia, for example, because each team already has a franchise-type player. A guy may be a number one guy on some teams but not others. Other than the extremes (Crosby, Giroux, Stamkos as 1st liners; Rinaldo as 4th liner), I think this is too variable by the team you play for to be useful as a rating. I like they current style better, using more vague labels (top six forward, etc)

[AdamJones113]

Re: New Look: Rating Overhaul

I generally love the ideas you are bringing up. The above, though, is one I do not agree with. The line a player plays on may vary depending on the team he plays for. No matter how good a center is, he will not be on the first line in Pittsburgh or Philadelphia, for example, because each team already has a franchise-type player. A guy may be a number one guy on some teams but not others. Other than the extremes (Crosby, Giroux, Stamkos as 1st liners; Rinaldo as 4th liner), I think this is too variable by the team you play for to be useful as a rating. I like they current style better, using more vague labels (top six forward, etc)

That is a good point; I did not clarify sufficiently. The player role is the SUGGESTED role, based on the team. I will edit the OP to reflect this, thanks.

[AdamJones113]

Re: New Look: Rating Overhaul

After testing, minute player separation does have a tiny bit off effect.

I think that the fluctuation is the key. I guess with number attributes game-to-game fluctuation is a little more realistic.

I'd love to hear more rating overhauls, possible attributes, etc.

[AdamJones113]

Re: New Look: Rating Overhaul

Adding to this tomorrow.

(No, not bumping, alerting posters to an impending update.)

[AdamJones113]

Re: New Look: Rating Overhaul

New Rating Categories

Added to: Puck Skills
1. Release OR Wrists
Affects how quickly the player releases the puck on a shot or pass. A higher release/wrists rating means the player can get rid of the puck very quickly, with less wind-up necessary for a more powerful pass. A lower release/wrists rating means the player requires a longer wind-up for a more powerful pass or shot.
Notes: You often hear the phrase "quick wrists," and that should be very translatable to the game.

2. Pass Reception
Affects how easily a player receives a pass, whether to skate with the puck or better take a one-timer. A higher rating means the player is better at taking passes without breaking stride and is also better at receiving a pass for a one-timer. A lower rating means the player needs more concentration and a lower speed to pick up the puck in stride and is worse at receiving passes for one-times.
Notes: From videos this is so evidently necessary that it's ridiculous.


Added to: Senses:
1. Vision
Affects how well a player sees open ice in regards to making a pass or feeling an incoming body check. A higher vision rating means players will be able to make more complex passes and will be able to avoid a slightly higher number of checks. A lower rating means players will have a harder time making complex passes and will be less able to sense incoming body checks.
Notes: Such a huge part of playmakers' games.

2. Offensive Positioning
Affects how well a player locates himself in the offensive zone for easier one-timers, tap-ins, and clear passes. A higher rating means the player will be able to create space to receive a pass or skate to cover open space successfully. A lower rating means the player will have a harder time creating open space and will be less able to cover open spaces on the ice.
Notes: Positioning is such a huge part of hockey and, in this case, offense.

3. Defensive Positioning
Affects how well a player locates himself in the defensive zone. A higher rating means that players will close out on shooters more quickly, cover unmarked players more easily, and cut off passing lanes. A lower rating means that the player will be less successful at closing out on shooters, worse at cutting off passing lanes, and will be less able to cover unmarked players.
Notes: I personally love this rating and would love any implementation.


More to come.

[Simple Mathematics]

Re: New Look: Rating Overhaul

New Rating Categories

Added to: Puck Skills
1. Release OR Wrists
Affects how quickly the player releases the puck on a shot or pass. A higher release/wrists rating means the player can get rid of the puck very quickly, with less wind-up necessary for a more powerful pass. A lower release/wrists rating means the player requires a longer wind-up for a more powerful pass or shot.
Notes: You often hear the phrase "quick wrists," and that should be very translatable to the game.

2. Pass Reception
Affects how easily a player receives a pass, whether to skate with the puck or better take a one-timer. A higher rating means the player is better at taking passes without breaking stride and is also better at receiving a pass for a one-timer. A lower rating means the player needs more concentration and a lower speed to pick up the puck in stride and is worse at receiving passes for one-times.
Notes: From videos this is so evidently necessary that it's ridiculous.


Added to: Senses:
1. Vision
Affects how well a player sees open ice in regards to making a pass or feeling an incoming body check. A higher vision rating means players will be able to make more complex passes and will be able to avoid a slightly higher number of checks. A lower rating means players will have a harder time making complex passes and will be less able to sense incoming body checks.
Notes: Such a huge part of playmakers' games.

2. Offensive Positioning
Affects how well a player locates himself in the offensive zone for easier one-timers, tap-ins, and clear passes. A higher rating means the player will be able to create space to receive a pass or skate to cover open space successfully. A lower rating means the player will have a harder time creating open space and will be less able to cover open spaces on the ice.
Notes: Positioning is such a huge part of hockey and, in this case, offense.

3. Defensive Positioning
Affects how well a player locates himself in the defensive zone. A higher rating means that players will close out on shooters more quickly, cover unmarked players more easily, and cut off passing lanes. A lower rating means that the player will be less successful at closing out on shooters, worse at cutting off passing lanes, and will be less able to cover unmarked players.
Notes: I personally love this rating and would love any implementation.


More to come.

I agree with every one of these. We need a "consistency" rating for skaters too. This would be huge for those 3rd line snipers and playmakers.

[Gotmilkman24]

Re: New Look: Rating Overhaul

I too really like the rating idea, my only problem with offensive position is that those will not effect human players? Unless I did not comprehend it correctly I would believe most of those stats would effect the computer... which I'm all for as well, but I do want to see some more human attributes because most of the skills we control are boring and make all of us skate the same.
I almost wish there was an auto deke button you can hold when coming near players who are trying to land a hit. If the player you try to "auto deke" around has a high hit chance and you have a low deke skill then well.. tough luck.. but an auto deke skill should be limited to simple dekes. A good dman should always be able to handle his own when it comes to a check.
I also wish there was kinda a brace yourself from a hit button. If I'm john scott I don't think I should be leveled by Gerbe.
It's odd how currently in the game you can have no body checking be a small play-maker and level people..
I just came up with this right now so it may not be the best of ideas, but I do wish they had an auto deke (simple dekes) to help the offensive entry or even neutral zone entry. Obviously thats where fatigue would kick in and so on.
And another stat that should be looked into is defensive awareness. This attribute works.. alright.. Its nice to see an auto pokecheck to break up the pass, but I'd like to see this do more. Facing the play correctly would be a start. It should help with shot blocking, and maybe player "tie-up". Getting your stick on the ice to break up anything low coming to the net. It should also effect a complete dskill stick. (How hard is it to put this in the game???) All I play is defense which does get boring at times and pretty discouraging.
Theres so much more we could touch up on when it comes to attributes and what they do.