Skill Rating Doesn't Matter..

[claystone]

I'm in my 3rd season and i wanted to see if these skill ratings means anything. It seems that the skill only matters to that position. What I mean by that is:

i.e. I put my QB at kicker because he had 60 KPW and 50 KAC. He actually kick worse then my kicker who has 42 KPW and 42 KAC. My QB just made it to the 30 yard line on kickoffs, but my kicker reach the 10 yard line. Why didn't my QB kick farther? He had more kicking power. It because that's not his position, QB is his position.

So it seems skill ratings only matter for that position. I know a lot people complain about their WR ELU being the same as a olineman. Well it seems like it's not. ELU is not a key skill for a olineman, but it's a key skill for HB and WR.

[dan_457]

I honestly don't get your argument, or why you have one. Is just because people were comparing atrocious wr skills to o-linemen skills that you wrote this up? Even so, how do you know a 50 ELU stat on WR doesn't Equate to the same as a 50 ELU Lineman. Your comparing apples to oranges here, with one small example, and to add, if you want to do a better test, try comparing them kicking field goals, not something like kick offs.

[youALREADYknow]

Quote: Originally Posted by claystone

I'm in my 3rd season and i wanted to see if these skill ratings means anything. It seems that the skill only matters to that position. What I mean by that is: i.e. I put my QB at kicker because he had 60 KPW and 50 KAC. He actually kick worse then my kicker who has 42 KPW and 42 KAC. My QB just made it to the 30 yard line on kickoffs, but my kicker reach the 10 yard line. Why didn't my QB kick farther? He had more kicking power. It because that's not his position, QB is his position. So it seems skill ratings only matter for that position. I know a lot people complain about their WR ELU being the same as a olineman. Well it seems like it's not. ELU is not a key skill for a olineman, but it's a key skill for HB and WR.

The only thing you have suggested is that the gameplay engine does not handle skill ratings for players changing positions well. Not sure if that's due to ratings dropping for players playing out of position (think offseason position changes) or some kind of code logic to stop substitution abuse (think online cheating).

It's fairly well known that skill ratings do matter for players playing their proper position. Therefore, a WR with low ELU will not evade many defenders. A WR with a 40 juke rating will not make defenders miss in the open field.

The comments that WR's had lower ELU/JKM/SPM than linemen are valid in some cases.

Will these WR make more players miss in the open field than the OL given a 100 juke/spin sample size? Probably so because they are playing their natural position.

Will these WR make make a respectable amount of players miss in the open field? Absolutely not because the game engine works on absolute values and the ratings are LOW.

[ZekeRoberts]

I sense that these arguments are getting personal, and that troubles me because I fear that we will be incapable of having any sort of productive discussions in these forums. Why can't you guys just agree to disagree on how big of a problem the ratings issue is to you? Why is that so hard? Honestly.

I don't agree with everything he's ever posted but Claystone's just bringing up a valid point. If you told me that you had two kickers with those sets of KPW and KAC ratings, and asked me which one would kick off to the 30 and which to the 10, I would, um, be logical. I also wonder what the AWR ratings are, because I know that they take drastic hits when you line up a FS at MLB for example. I'm sure that would have an effect.

Now I am personally not going to try to apply this situation to the great WR Elusiveness Fiasco of NCAA 2011, but I think I can see the connection that some might make. I know it is a completely different game, but for those of you who have played College Hoops 2k8, every player has the same set of ratings (just like in NCAA Football) but the game specifically states that every rating is compared relative to the position. Thus, a PF having a HDL (Ball-handling) rating of 75 is not at all the same as a PG having a HDL of 75. That PF would be able to put the ball on the floor and drive to the rack fairly well, but that PG probably gets his pocket picked a few times each game.

So how does this happen? Well, I don't claim to know how the game engine is programmed, but I imagine that it's based on how the players (recognized by the game as such) are programmed to need the ratings. So, to try to complete the analogy to NCAA, when a DL picks up a fumble and barrels toward the end zone, the game may not factor in his ELU rating at this point, or at least not very much. But if a WR catches a screen pass and has to use his blockers effectively, the program is looking for that rating.

But wait, you're saying, that's exactly the point, if they both have the same ELU rating then that WR is just as elusive as an OL when I run that screen play, right? Wrong. We are talking about two separate instances, two different plays and entirely different scenarios programmed into the game. So how an ELU of 40 affects the OL might be totally different from how an ELU of 40 affects the WR in the screen play.

I recognize that my argument here does nothing to address the issue of extremely over-rated initial rosters, as well as the fact that I have not had the (pleasure?) of running a WR screen with such a WR 5-6 years into my dynasty. So can you please recognize that you (like I) do not have an entirely accurate understanding of how the game engine works, and all of our assumptions and suppositions are just that, anecdotal experiences?

In other words, I know that with the game in my console, I definitely can't prove that the game engine works in the way that I have described above. At the same time, I don't know how you can disprove it either, but I am totally open to reading your attempts to do so... which brings me back to my final and most important point... let's try to be open-minded and solutions-oriented here, and not try to be the "winners" and "right" in "defending" what you "know."

[Pogo27]

Quote: Originally Posted by ZekeRoberts

In other words, I know that with the game in my console, I definitely can't prove that the game engine works in the way that I have described above. At the same time, I don't know how you can disprove it either, but I am totally open to reading your attempts to do so... which brings me back to my final and most important point... let's try to be open-minded and solutions-oriented here, and not try to be the "winners" and "right" in "defending" what you "know."

Reverse engineering the game code to try better understanding how the game engine works would be illegal, I believe.

[FOREST007]

Quote: Originally Posted by ZekeRoberts

But wait, you're saying, that's exactly the point, if they both have the same ELU rating then that WR is just as elusive as an OL when I run that screen play, right? Wrong. We are talking about two separate instances, two different plays and entirely different scenarios programmed into the game. So how an ELU of 40 affects the OL might be totally different from how an ELU of 40 affects the WR in the screen play. I recognize that my argument here does nothing to address the issue of extremely over-rated initial rosters, as well as the fact that I have not had the (pleasure?) of running a WR screen with such a WR 5-6 years into my dynasty. So can you please recognize that you (like I) do not have an entirely accurate understanding of how the game engine works, and all of our assumptions and suppositions are just that, anecdotal experiences

I have run a WR screen in the future, its not so bad...considering the AWR rating for everyone is low.

But I have to disagree with what i bolded up top. Thats like saying 86 speed for a LB is different from 86 speed WR. People like Dwight Freeney (DE) are faster than people like Reggie Wayne (WR). People assume because of the different positions that the WR will always be faster. So if they want to give speed the universal treatment, then all attributes should get the same treatment.

But I understand, that's just your hypothesis, I just hope you're wrong on it (in the nicest way possible )

[Pogo27]

Quote: Originally Posted by FOREST007

I have run a WR screen in the future, its not so bad...considering the AWR rating for everyone is low. But I have to disagree with what i bolded up top. Thats like saying 86 speed for a LB is different from 86 speed WR. People like Dwight Freeney (DE) are faster than people like Reggie Wayne (WR). People assume because of the different positions that the WR will always be faster. So if they want to give speed the universal treatment, then all attributes should get the same treatment. But I understand, that's just your hypothesis, I just hope you're wrong on it (in the nicest way possible )

Speed is one of the core attributes. As is acceleration, strength, and there may be a couple others. Elusiveness is not a core attribute--it doesn't generally effect the ability for an offensive linemen or anyone on the defense to make the plays they need to make, except in the scenario where they've picked up a fumble or interception (or are a returner).

[ZekeRoberts]

Quote: Originally Posted by FOREST007

I have run a WR screen in the future, its not so bad...considering the AWR rating for everyone is low. But I have to disagree with what i bolded up top. Thats like saying 86 speed for a LB is different from 86 speed WR. People like Dwight Freeney (DE) are faster than people like Reggie Wayne (WR). People assume because of the different positions that the WR will always be faster. So if they want to give speed the universal treatment, then all attributes should get the same treatment. But I understand, that's just your hypothesis, I just hope you're wrong on it (in the nicest way possible )

I'm glad you brought this up, because it was another thing I was thinking during my ridiculously long post above. I made sure not to discuss ratings such as SPD, STR, AGI, ACC, because I believe that these should be universal (and I'm sure there are others, STA, INJ, etc.) At least I hope EA recognizes that a community exists in which people would go into practice mode and sit there with a stopwatch, and also analyze every cut in and out of crossing patterns, etc.

I just don't know that every single rating behaves those same ways in every situation. For instance, I don't think my 5th and 6th string WRs have very good TAK ratings at all, but they seem to do just fine tackling on special teams, as well as my safeties in my regular 4-3 defense anyways. But if I put in a WR in at safety, would he tackle as well as he does on kickoffs? My guess is definitely not, but of course the confounding variable as we would say in my Statistics class is the lower AWR rating that the WR would have there. You can raise similar questions all over: Do LBs with the same CTH rating as a TE catch open curl routes just as well if you put them there? If a FB and a HB have equal CAR ratings, will the FB protect the ball just as well if you put him in the HB spot?

In my first year, I had a DT on my cupcake team who had high blocking ratings, he was a senior so I never got the chance to change his position to OL, but I know that his OVR at the OL positions exceeded all of my backups even though his AWR there was really low. I think it goes down to the 20s or 30s when they are out of position in the depth chart... this is an entirely different issue that people could raise a stink about if they wanted but I am not going there...

But anyways I'm getting off track again... thanks for both your thoughts and the respect with which you posted them.