Ratings/Traits overkill

[hanzsomehanz]

I see where you are going with the sub-traits under the umbrella of a main trait but we would not see this umbrella if your underlying principle were respected.

I wholehearterly see and indeed salivate over how the functions would play out if the principle were respected. If only they can grasp the concept for GenX.

As it stands now, a player can big hit regardless of lacking the power and form (basically the capacity: force). This goes against physics. It is akin to seeing an NBA athlete pull off NBA Jam dunks when he in reality can barely graze the rim - it goes against SIM.

The equation I see is that the player must first have the capacity to pull off the trait before the trait can ever become dominant. In the big hitter scenario we need to see the equation of force play out, F=m*a

As it stands now the big hitter trait is the Force that is overriding/ignoring mass and acceleration making it possible for anyone to perform big hits. In your offer sheet we see the opportunity to reverse this process and get the logic right by having, at least, tackle be the mass and acceleration be acceleration and by having these two components dictate Force (Hit Power).

Since Hit Power is its own rating we need to see its accuracy impact the big hitter traits. In the age of electronc arts physic, I would justifiably wish to see the POW rating abolished and have it produced through the natural law of physics (m*a).

As you put it, the rating combinations should impact trait varities and tendencies opposed to traits being a stand alone function.

Whichever way we go we return to the Law and it needs to be respected rather than outlawed.

Sent from my SGH-I727R using Tapatalk 2

[Trick13]

Quote: Originally Posted by hanzsomehanz

Since Hit Power is its own rating we need to see its accuracy impact the big hitter traits. In the age of electronc arts physic, I would justifiably wish to see the POW rating abolished and have it produced through the natural law of physics (m*a).

I am tempted in two ways concerning what I bolded from your last response;

1 - I agree on a portion of that statement, being that "physics" should be used as the basis for POW and it should be determinate when determining the force of big hits, however;

2 - Some guys are hitters and some just are not. Much to my dismay, and maybe yours too, D. Ware never seems to "drop the hammer" so to speak. You could make the argument that he is too darn nice. Now you take his size (listed at 254, 6'4" on official Cowboys' website) and speed and you would think, if we only had TAK, ACC, Size and so forth that he would have to be a big hitter, when he really isn't - then how does physics account for a former Cowboy - Safety Roy Williams, who may not be even as fast as Ware and is smaller at 230? lbs but was a big hit machine for a couple years??? In my example, you have two players of varying levels of "Hit" skill, not "tackle" skills and I am not sure how to account for that without the POW rating. And, in my mind it would be preferable to account for a "tendency" and the actual "hitting" ability when hits are attempted.

[hanzsomehanz]

I got you - I would do away with the POW rating and substitue it with Big Hitter under the umbrella of tendencies wheras you would keep it (POW) as the tendency indicator - no biggie -- same bridge; different course.

*Good use of the D.Ware case study - names can create emisconceptions. I would think a big name like his would be known for big hits but I stand informed. It is true, I do not hear him in big hit conversations nor see him deliver the boom - he uses alot of corraling form opposed to driving thru with the shoulder. I guess we could agree there is an Art to it and a tendency - Its part of a player's style and DNA and not just size and speed.

Sent from my SGH-I727R using Tapatalk 2

[Trick13]

Big Hits, you nailed it hanzsomehanz, is an art form and speed + size(mass) doesn't always equal hitting ability. Another example would be Bob Sanders who is rather small and yet when he was healthy he was a crushing hitter.

I have to say again, just to drive it home, that ratings and physics should rule the interactions, with tendencies or traits being the "cherry on top"! And within the Hit Stick functionality there has to be more than just "hit or miss".

There has to be staggers, miss-timed whiffs, bounce offs, spin outs, and it needs to be balanced so that there is just generally some risk involved.

I have hit the stick way too early in M13 and watched as the player I am using make no reaction until the ball carrier got close enough and then attempt a big hit - it usually results in a tackle rather than a hit, but if I am that off in my timing, especially on All-Madden, I should be completely out of the play - stumble or very susceptible to juke/spin/stiff-arm and so on.

[KBLover]

My thoughts:

I don't think ratings should "supercede" traits, but I think they should be available only to ratings above certain thresholds and/or flesh out a player's STYLE and not ABILITY (ratings).

A guy with low STR and POW (ability to deliver tackles with force) should not have access to Big Hitter. Plus, I think that's a poor name of the trait. Aggressive (or Fierce) Tackler would be better. That's more a STYLE distinction, which is what I think traits should be for. Then low TAK and POW is taking a risk being aggressive with his tackles (which isn't necessarily hitting either - maybe this type goes for the strip instead of the tackle, the hit instead of the pick, etc).

A player can have the ability to tackle aggressively, but choose not to. Whether the player is "too nice" or simply just wraps and engages instead of trying to decapitate a ball carrier, that would be a No on the trait. His POW rating, however, should still allow his tackles to have good "stopping power" unless the ball carrier is strong, has a high TRK rating, or is able to minimize, or prevent, contact (elusiveness).


Sideline catching: I can agree that AWR (knowing where you are on the field) + CTH (ability to track the ball with your eyes and position your hands to receive the ball) + AGI (bodily control, toe tap/drag) should determine success of the pass is in reach of the target along the sideline. However, if a player loose focus in those situations or just can't "put it together" despite having the physical abilities, then I can see it as a trait and have it work like CM Hooe mentioned - if No, add penalty.

My question is then - do NFL players perform like a "No" to sideline catches would? If not, then drop the trait and let ratings alone show differential of ability.


Anyway, I basically see it as Ratings = Ability, Traits = Style/Intangibles. That way one doesn't have to supercede the other. They can work in harmony to give us a complete player and behavioral diversity on the field.

Quote: Originally Posted by Trick13

I have to say again, just to drive it home, that ratings and physics should rule the interactions, with tendencies or traits being the "cherry on top"!

I somewhat disagree. Ratings and physics should rule success/failure and how things play out - but interaction can be as much style vs style or technique vs raw physical ability. I don't believe in always or never on the football field. I think the game is more subtle than that in almost every aspect.

[Trick13]

Quote: Originally Posted by KBLover

... My question is then - do NFL players perform like a "No" to sideline catches would? If not, then drop the trait and let ratings alone show differential of ability. Anyway, I basically see it as Ratings = Ability, Traits = Style/Intangibles. That way one doesn't have to supercede the other. They can work in harmony to give us a complete player and behavioral diversity on the field...

In terms of NFL WRs, there are guys who seemingly always come through in those spots, but I doubt if you had access to complex statistical data it would reveal anyone at one hundred percent. In my testing that I mentioned I lower a WR to 75 AGI, 70 AWR, CTH and 50 SPC and turned his sideline trait to "no". With normal All-Madden sliders he made an attempt (feet drag, stop-n-fall, etc) 90 percent of the time and despite his low ratings he made the grab in bounds about 65 percent of the time. I then started dropping the "catch" slider and it wasn't until I got down to 10 that he started dropping more. He still made the attempt but failed at a significant rate.

With the ratings I adjusted him down to, the trait off I would think that he should have been far less successful even on standard All-Madden sliders. It just seems from that test session that the ratings are not playing as substantial of a factor as they should - obviously my opinion, not fact but I suspect most "sim heads" would agree with my assessment if they ran the same tests.

And lastly, I really agree with you on the "more subtle" nature of interactions.

[gjneff]

I think all traits need to be replaced with tendency sliders as nba2k has. A trait shouldn't have an on/off switch. The tendency should determine how often an action is attempted, and the ratings should determine how successful that action is. I disagree with the idea that a low hit power guy shouldn't have a big hit "trait". If a small FS has small man syndrome and wants to try to lay everyone out, that should be part of his DNA. His low hit power should make that tendency a liability instead of saying he won't ever attempt to do it.

Imagine if you had a long list of tendencies to cover every available action. You could really have players that play different then. Even players with near identical ratings could be completely different on the field. A guy that spins a lot or a guy that jukes a lot. Maybe a guy runs out of bounds instead of taking hits. Guys that always go for the strip or guys that just go for the sure tackle. So many actions that should be determined by their tendency other than a roll of the dice as to what move is going to happen next.

On a side note, as long as XP is involved I think it's a waste of a game. I dream of a day when I can have a simulation experience top to bottom. Any feature should ask the question, how does this relate to an owners actions or the GMs actions or the head coaches actions or a players actions? XP? It doesn't relate to anything involving the game of football.

[hanzsomehanz]

Quote: Originally Posted by gjneff

Imagine if you had a long list of tendencies to cover every available action. You could really have players that play different then. Even players with near identical ratings could be completely different on the field.

Enjoyed all of this but this area here resonates with my taste buds!

2k has the blueprint for player DNA tendencies and is proving it works. I hope Madden adopts their tendency sysytem for GenX and translates it to Football speak.

If playerX is elusive and playerY is a trucker - both may be considered elite 'backs but they get their gains in different measures by different means.

Tendencies - Madden needs 'em!

As it stands now we have the nuance of ratings triggering almost everything, personality inclusive.

If tendencies were respected to the individual's holistic DNA and could not be altered we would see a more authentic performance in gameplay that parallels with the player's real-life DNA.

* There was a time NBA Live had 360 DNA which was a system like what NBA 2K has now but I believe it was more robust and comprehnsive.

Sent from my SGH-I727R using Tapatalk 2