Madden: Get rid of RATINGS.....

[KBLover]

Quote: Originally Posted by PGaither84

[I heard footwork ratings are gone in Madden 13. WTF EA... wtf?!?]

They are. What's weird is the columns are STILL THERE but the ratings are all 0.

Go figure that one. But I looked it up in the depth chart during a game, and RBK/PBK is there, but the rest are not. Makes me wonder how they decide who's a zone blocking lineman, etc, how successful he is (does it use his actual physical ratings?)

[RogueHominid]

I think a major problem here is that it's hard to decide on exactly what "ratings" or "skills" are salient to evaluating football players and replicating their likenesses in video games.

In the quest for realism, we want height, weight and strength to matter, but we'd probably also want to account for how well or poorly those measurables are deployed for certain football-related actions, which we might call "technique."

We would then have to determine how many "techniques" were relevant to rating and evaluating each position, and how those values related to the values generated for other positions.

I think that project gets really hairy and is almost impossible to do right. How would we create a matchup between an OT with a narrow base vs. an above-average power rusher? Would we combine the strength of the OT with some other pass blocking attribute, and, say, something like "balance" (which isn't the same as footwork), and then compare that with the strength, acceleration, some kind of power move metric, and something like "leverage" for the DT?

That's just a simple version of one matchup. We'd also need to figure out how that cluster-mess of ratings would correlate to real-life metrics. PFF, for example, has stats on how often OT allow their QBs to get sacked, hit, or hurried, and the worst starters tend to make negative played 7-8% of the time (the best are about 98-99% successful according to their metric, which, like any, has its strong and weak points).

In light of this, I think it would actually be better to have fewer ratings and to have them linked not to RTP, but to animation sequences that are defined by football actions.

In other words, I'd rather have an OT that is a "strong run blocker" and "average pass blocker" according to a short set of ratings (5 or so), who can then access a defined set of run and pass blocking animations for his player type.

That's probably a minority opinion (and I think DCEBB's site and work are great), but it's more practical than the alternative imo.

[TreFacTor]

I think getting rid of the difficulty setting would solve all of the issues with the ratings. Since 09 madden has been using the difficulty setting to artificially raise atts on the fly to emulate a challenge to the user. i think in football this is erroneous. The difficulty setting raises or lowers the atts which essentially makes the ratings bunk. I didn't have 13 long enough to test this, but I know it was still present in 12. This still wouldn't solve other AI issues or the game play issues that also need to be addressed but would at least allow for the ratings to mean more. The other areas (gameplay ,ai) that's a whole other ball of wax.

[hanzsomehanz]

Quote: Originally Posted by JMP

I think a major problem here is that it's hard to decide on exactly what "ratings" or "skills" are salient to evaluating football players and replicating their likenesses in video games. In the quest for realism, we want height, weight and strength to matter, but we'd probably also want to account for how well or poorly those measurables are deployed for certain football-related actions, which we might call "technique."

That's what I'm saying! If we want physics perfected we need to apply the math of physics: F = ma

The height and weight of a player should be determining his match which should then eliminate hit power because the player's acceleration and size will accumulate for his force/hit power! That is natural physics -- you can't have a rating determine hit power!

The technique for tackling should then be determined by the tackle rating - is he inclined to make conservative or aggressive tackles is he balanced? what kind of tackling personality does he have?

I'm with you man. I'll go further and add that the only factor for speed should be a player's 40 time! Speed should be calculated with actual 40 times and not a rating between 0-100. Yes, a player's 40 time will increase with age and time but in respect to their 40 time it's not like you actually run a 40 yard dash in a real game - in a real game you have equipment on!

I'm with you man, ratings need to be distinguished and only the strong should stand, all the others that have limiting and arbitrary factors should be removed.

Ultimately, with the above being said, we don't need a tackle rating if the mass and acceleration of a player appropriately distributes his force - it then becomes a matter of tackling preference. That's where their NFL research should come in hand. What kind of attempts to tackle do kickers and punters make, qb's? We know who the minorities from the norm are.

[TreFacTor]

Quote: Originally Posted by hanzsomehanz

That's what I'm saying! If we want physics perfected we need to apply the math of physics: F = ma The height and weight of a player should be determining his match which should then eliminate hit power because the player's acceleration and size will accumulate for his force/hit power! That is natural physics -- you can't have a rating determine hit power!

But the infinity engine isn't a physics engine....it's an articulation engine. The infinity engine just makes players bodies contort the way an actual body would. Animations still drive contact and after the snap interactions which is why there is still suction tackling and blocking in the game.

[KBLover]

Quote: Originally Posted by hanzsomehanz

The height and weight of a player should be determining his match which should then eliminate hit power because the player's acceleration and size will accumulate for his force/hit power! That is natural physics -- you can't have a rating determine hit power!

Well, if we want to go totally math oriented with physics, it's more than just that one formula.

If a run full speed at you, but just clip you, all my force is not transferred to you. Just like if my dog runs full speed and barely hits me, he deflects and I don't feel his full force. If he jumps and hits me full in the chest, I'll feel all of that momentum. If you're running, don't see me, and charge and smack you full on, that's a different result than if you see me and get low so you don't get my full hit, or you stiff arm me, not letting me get at your core and disrupt your center of gravity so I can bring you down.

So we do need a rating for hit power - it just takes a new meaning. Instead of just being some rating in a formula to calculate tackle success or fumble chance, it becomes "how accurately can you direct your force". There's lots of safeties in the league that run fast and have the typical weight, but not all of them are hard hitters like Ronnie Lott. Deion was quick as heck, but had little ooomph behind his tackles - and not just because he was skinny.

Quote: Originally Posted by hanzsomehanz

The technique for tackling should then be determined by the tackle rating - is he inclined to make conservative or aggressive tackles is he balanced? what kind of tackling personality does he have?

It should also be determined by leverage, ability of a player to wrap and stay locked on despite a ball carrier's efforts to shake him off or give him a small target, etc.

Quote: Originally Posted by hanzsomehanz

Ultimately, with the above being said, we don't need a tackle rating if the mass and acceleration of a player appropriately distributes his force - it then becomes a matter of tackling preference.

There is still a technique to tackling. I can "prefer" to wrap your legs, but that doesn't mean I'll do it as well as Ray Lewis. It doesn't mean McClennan or Ellerbee does either.

There is ALWAYS a difference in ability and execution on the field, imo. All the physics in the world doesn't account for this. The physics dictates what should happen, not how good the players are at doing what they want to do.

[PGaither84]

This is what "Pass Blocking Footwork" should be a measure of:



I am coaching football here in Peru. This is one of the many important things I have to teach so we can keep our QB protected and upright.

Not all linemen are the same. Anthony Davis, a 1st round draft pick by the 49ers 3 years ago came out as a monster run blocker, but was suspect in his pass protection because of his poor footwork. However, through 12 weeks of football, Davis is being talked about as one of the best pass protecting RTs in all of football, and it starts with his VASTLY improved footwork and kick slide. He gets back fast, with great technique and doesn't let anyone breath on Alex or Colin. Two years ago I would have given him a mid 70's rating. This year he should have a 95 or so. His improvement is that great.

but don't take my word for it... here is an article about the 2011 49ers season, where Davis wasn't playing so well: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...ep-up-his-play

Then the updated article here which quotes:

Quote:

In 2010, he was the fifth-worst offensive tackle out of a possible 78. In 2011, things got better, and he moved up to the 22nd-worst offensive tackle. However, 2012 has been a total transformation because PFF currently has him as its seventh-best offensive tackle overall. From Year 1 to Year 2, you could definitely see progress, and I was expecting more this year. But it's safe to say I wasn't expecting this big of a jump. So far, through the first four games of this year, he has been practically flawless. He hasn't allowed a quarterback sack or quarterback hit.

Do you want to know more about playing offensive line? Here is a fantastic presentation about pass protection concepts. It talks about footwork, communication, blitz pick up, and more.

================================

So, after all of that... do we see any of that in Madden? The trenches have MUCH to be desired, and are arguably the most important part of football.

[PGaither84]

Quote: Originally Posted by KBLover

There is still a technique to tackling. I can "prefer" to wrap your legs, but that doesn't mean I'll do it as well as Ray Lewis. It doesn't mean McClennan or Ellerbee does either. There is ALWAYS a difference in ability and execution on the field, imo. All the physics in the world doesn't account for this. The physics dictates what should happen, not how good the players are at doing what they want to do.

This. A thousand times "this."



Intentional or not, some people act like football is simply running around and doing plays. There are so many techniques, body movements and interactions that go into the game... and some players are simply better than others. That is the point of the positional ratings. part of the problem in Madden is that they do not have animation for the different levels of talent. A player with a low ratings won't play "sloppy" while a player with a high rating won't play almost flawlessly mechanically.

Obviously teams want super stars, but realistically, you are only going to have a few. The Patriots know that not every player on the field is going to be a super star, so they go looking for "smart players" who are technically sound. The Raiders, on the other hand, tend to favor athletes. Teddy Bruchi and Mike Vrable weren't a super gifted athletes like Ray Lewis or derrick Brooks... but they were just as technically sound as those guys for many years.

Even today, Rob Ninkovich has been playing better and better despite his lack of athletic prowess. He is far from an elite LB, but he is improving week in and week out. In Madden, he isn't that good because Madden is all about the speed, tackle, and throwing accuracy ratings. Not much else really matters.