PDA

View Full Version : JeffHCross Project #1: How is OVR determined?



JeffHCross
02-20-2011, 10:13 PM
This is #1 in a series of, for lack of a better description, projects that I want to do before NCAA 12 is released. Hopefully long before NCAA 12 is released. I'm creating these threads to hopefully increase my own incentive to work on the projects.

Think of it as incentive by potential public embarrassment.

Now, PocketScout (http://www.pocketscout.site90.com/) posted a list of the most important ratings that influence OVR. It was a very good list, and initially I didn't see much reason to expand on it. But his list was, or at least appeared to be, limited to the most important. I want them all.

Between NCAA 10 and 11, I did a lot of work on trying to create Historical Players (http://www.thegamingtailgate.com/forums/showthread.php?77-Creating-Historical-Players-in-NCAA-11) using statistics. Ideally, I'd like to be able to provide the ability for anyone to create any player, and all the ratings, solely from Height, Weight, 40 time, and a moderate amount of statistics. It wouldn't be perfect, but it'd be light years beyond the method I used.

Anyway, after creating an Excel file of every player's ratings (http://www.thegamingtailgate.com/forums/showthread.php?1064-NCAA-Football-11-Online-Dynasty-Data-Exports&p=43132#post43132), I should be able to, fairly easily, determine the relationship between individual ratings and OVR.

steelerfan
02-21-2011, 12:22 AM
Interesting.

Now hurry up!

morsdraconis
02-21-2011, 05:51 AM
Truthfully, I can't believe this hasn't been done yet. I'm so used to PC games like WoW and Diablo 2 where everything is broken down into the smallest amount of statistical data (mainly because they have access to scource code and such) where everything can be calculated to the 3rd decimal.

It just amazes me that someone hasn't taken the time to do it for the Ncaa series (or even Madden).

Let me know if you need any hard data on how many points it takes of a certain stat to increase the overrall as I'll gladly do the leg work for that (as it's always been a curiosity of mine)

JeffHCross
02-21-2011, 07:14 PM
I'm so used to PC games like WoW and Diablo 2 where everything is broken down into the smallest amount of statistical data (mainly because they have access to scource code and such) where everything can be calculated to the 3rd decimal.I'm sure you meant something other than source code ... because Blizzard has never released source code for either of those titles. Now, being that they are on the PC and have modding abilities, there are a lot of aspects of both titles that you can access that you can't see on a console. But, for most games like that, since they are RPG games, there's just a lot of detail given that's not present in sports games. Like you see "20.41 damage" or "Critical Hit" or, depending on the level of detail, you may even see stuff like "Rolled 6, no Hit". That stuff is all being done internally on NCAA and we have no way of seeing it.

As to whether or not someone has done it ... I'm sure PocketScout has. The amount of data he's generated over the last year or so -- I'm sure he's got exactly what I'm trying to do. But I'm not going to ask him for all his numbers. I wouldn't expect him to give it to me, and I wouldn't blame him for not doing so. It's easy enough for me to do it myself, and that way, at the end of the day, I have a confidence in those numbers.

One reason you probably haven't seen it done before is that the game keeps changing up on us. A LB that was 87 OVR on NCAA 2004 would be a 78 OVR on NCAA 07 with the same ratings.

steelerfan
04-21-2011, 06:47 AM
Think of it as incentive by potential public embarrassment.

Well.....?

psusnoop
04-21-2011, 07:30 AM
Jeff is currently not available at this time.

JeffHCross
04-21-2011, 09:39 PM
Well.....?Still working on it.

ram29jackson
04-21-2011, 10:04 PM
Interesting.

Now hurry up!


Well.....?


and I thought I was annoying ? :)

steelerfan
04-21-2011, 10:18 PM
and I thought I was annoying ? :)

You are. :P

I'm just messing with Jeff because his plate is full with being outed as a Community Event guy. ;)

ram29jackson
04-21-2011, 10:49 PM
You are. :P

I'm just messing with Jeff because his plate is full with being outed as a Community Event guy. ;)


I know, I know,I am. I just try to be thorough with questions and see what answers I can get. its just hard at times trying to type a dialogue/question as opposed to asking someone in person.

souljahbill
04-22-2011, 12:01 PM
Jeff, did you think to ask this question at the event?

JeffHCross
04-22-2011, 06:30 PM
Jeff, did you think to ask this question at the event?Of sorts. I didn't get a direct answer (and honestly I wouldn't feel comfortable asking for a list or anything like that), but he didn't dodge my question either. More or less, I asked if this was even a worthwhile effort, and he didn't disagree. I did get some insight into how OVR is computed, but it really just confirmed what I already thought, based on the results that PocketScout had provided me.

The biggest holdup on this is that Microsoft Excel is only capable of doing a Regression on limited amounts of variables. So I'm going to have to use a more powerful program to pull this off, and I just haven't had time to set it up.

Rudy
04-23-2011, 05:46 AM
I've got a roster file from Pocket Scout Jeff. I may take a look at this on Tuesday at work (I'm off until then). I'll try running a simple regression using SPSS first although I suspect there will be economies of scale. I can run a non linear regression on it as well and that will probably be the only way to determine the true results. I'm assuming I will have to do this on a position by position basis to get any meaningful results.

JeffHCross
04-23-2011, 08:37 PM
Yeah, definitely position by position, Rudy. OVR isn't determined the same was for QBs as it is for WRs, I know that for fact.

Daywalker86
04-26-2011, 02:01 PM
I'm pretty excited to see how this breaks down.

Rudy
04-26-2011, 06:45 PM
I uploaded all of the formulas by position to google docs: https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0ArB9QSYxv2ZGdG0yeldBdHI1T2RocHhVTnBrajJqR mc&hl=en#gid=0

These are based on a pocket scout recruit export file. I get most positions accurate to 97 or 98%. By this I mean I predict the exact overall rating for 97 to 98% of the players. The other 2-3% that are off are only off by one point on the overall so this is highly reliable imo. The dev team might 3 or even 4 decimal places in their formulas. The rounding might also be slightly different or done in each stage to account for the very small discrepancy. Most positions start out with a fairly large negative to start. It's around -55 to -75. They probably use this to adjust the ratings so the average player comes in where they want. From there you just add so many points based on the ratings each position uses.

Some interesting things. I believe Russ Kiniry said awareness is barely used any more in the calculations on the field other than QB. They tend to use the newer ratings for some positions but AWR is still present in every position's overall rating. It's obviously biggest for the QB position. Weight is NEVER used at all.

QB - accuracy and the throwing power are the biggest. Awareness is next and everything else much less. If someone has a 90 accuracy vs. 70 accuracy it will result in a 12 point OVR difference.
HB - break tackle and speed are both equally important. The next level is carry and acceleration. Blocking is ignored in the ratings.
FB - run blocking footwork and strength are easily the two biggest variables
WR - Catch and speed are #1. Then acceleration and then route running and agility.
TE - No position uses more variables to come up with an overall rating - 26 in total! None of the categories dominate but run blocking, speed and catching are at the top. Route running is next. Interesting to note that catch in traffic adjust the TE rating more than the WR rating.
OL - all are slightly different with run and pass blocking categories dominating the top tier. Both guards and centers give greater weight to run blocking while tackles are equally weighted between pass and run blocking.

DL - DTs are done a bit different than DE. Zone coverage matters for DE but not for the DT. The DT has three main categories - strength, block shedding and tackle. While both have a heavy emphasis on tackling, DE downplays block shedding and strength and focuses a bit more on speed and acceleration.
LB - MLB and OLB are similar although there is more emphasis on tackling for the MLB and more emphasis on speed for the OLB. Block shedding and strength are also important. No other position uses PRC more than MLB (I don't know what PRC is).
CB - CB is different than safety. Speed is very important and #1. Man and zone coverage are also important with acceleration being #4.
S - Tackling is #1 for both but more important for SS. Speed and zone coverage are also important. Man coverage is more important for the FS while HPW (?) and block shedding is more important for the SS.

P and K - both very similar with kick power and accuracy making up the entire rating almost. Awareness is the only other category that counts and it's minimal. K values accuracy a little more than power. P values power over accuracy by a touch.

JeffHCross
04-26-2011, 06:53 PM
Rudy, that's awesome. Exactly what I was planning to do, but hadn't had the time. Thanks a hell of a lot, man.

morsdraconis
04-26-2011, 06:59 PM
LB - MLB and OLB are similar although there is more emphasis on tackling for the MLB and more emphasis on speed for the OLB. Block shedding and strength are also important. No other position uses PRC more than MLB (I don't know what PRC is).

S - Tackling is #1 for both but more important for SS. Speed and zone coverage are also important. Man coverage is more important for the FS while HPW (?) and block shedding is more important for the SS.

PRC = Play Recognition
HPW = Hit Power

Rudy
04-26-2011, 07:02 PM
Rudy, that's awesome. Exactly what I was planning to do, but hadn't had the time. Thanks a hell of a lot, man.

No problem.


PRC = Play Recognition
HPW = Hit Power

Thanks. That makes more sense now. I couldn't figure out what those meant at work (it's been very slow lately, this game me some interesting stuff to look at).

morsdraconis
04-26-2011, 07:13 PM
Thanks. That makes more sense now. I couldn't figure out what those meant at work (it's been very slow lately, this game me some interesting stuff to look at).

No problem man. Anything that can be done to help figure out the nuts and bolts to how a game figures out something is always interesting to me. I'm all about getting down to the nitty gritty of how something is figured out on the back end so that I can better understand how it works.

Unfortunately, for NCAA Football, figuring out how the overall rating is calculated doesn't really help much in game.

Rudy
04-26-2011, 07:20 PM
Unfortunately, for NCAA Football, figuring out how the overall rating is calculated doesn't really help much in game.

This is true. But some things can help when setting your depth chart. Most people use overall to do this and the auto re-order uses this heavily as well. If you are running a pass happy offense, you might not want to use the overall rating for guards and centers since it gives greater weight to run blocking. Fullbacks are rated predominantly on their run blocking abilities. If you want a more well rounded FB you may not care for the overall rating. Some stuff may be interesting to see how it's weighted and what might be missing.

What about the height of the WR? I'll have to double check that tomorrow but height and weight don't affect rating at all. It would be nice if these were included - at least a little.

JeffHCross
04-26-2011, 07:23 PM
Unfortunately, for NCAA Football, figuring out how the overall rating is calculated doesn't really help much in game.Actually, it can. Like a couple years ago we figured out that Impact Blocking and the Run/Pass Blocking Strength/Footwork ratings weren't being factored into OVR. So that meant that if you had a guy low on PBK/RBK, he'd have a low OVR regardless of his specific blocking ratings. That changed how a lot of people looked at their offensive line depth chart.

Similarly, if I noticed that some attribute is not as much of a factor in OVR as I expect, I'm going to be more likely to ignore OVR.


What about the height of the WR? I'll have to double check that tomorrow but height and weight don't affect rating at all. It would be nice if these were included - at least a little.I am 100% sure that Height and Weight don't factor into OVR itself at all. I think they may have some (though limited) influence on the type of player that is created -- in other words, they might influence SPD, AGI, etc -- but they don't have a direct influence on OVR at all.

texacotea
04-26-2011, 08:31 PM
I am 100% sure that Height and Weight don't factor into OVR itself at all. I think they may have some (though limited) influence on the type of player that is created -- in other words, they might influence SPD, AGI, etc -- but they don't have a direct influence on OVR at all.

I dont see why it would honestly, Compare Jordan Shipley more of a possesion receiver who is the slant guy and who you look for in 3rd down situations. He was good and #1 @ Texas, but a totally different receiver than say Percy Harvin. Harvin could catch the slant but his agility and speed seperated him from Shipley. Both receivers were good and was great in the offense.

morsdraconis
04-26-2011, 08:54 PM
Yeah, I'm not sure weight and height should have any effect on overall. Maybe for the defensive and offensive linemen, but, otherwise, I'm not sure how height or weight should really do much.

Though, I could see a RB that's 6'2" 235 being a better bruising RB simply because he's a big guy and is more mass to bring down and therefore more mass coming at a high speed results in harder to bring down.

Sadly, those type of things just aren't happening in NCAA Football at all.

JeffHCross
04-26-2011, 09:15 PM
I can see height and weight being a factor in a system like Head Coach 09. In Head Coach 09, there was a Team Philosophies section where you were able to set what kind of player you wanted at each position. Like you could choose Field General for QB, Possession for WR, Power for HB -- and you had like 6 choices at each position, and you even had the ability to choose differently for WR #1 and WR #2. Then each player at that position on the depth chart would be evaluated based on your criteria, so their OVR would change.

In that case, I can see stuff like a Speed or Power back's rating being influenced by height/weight. Same for a WR to stretch the field (since they tend to be taller). But beyond that -- they shouldn't factor in. Height and Weight, if anything at all, should have an influence on a player's ratings, which then influence OVR.

Using Ohio State for an example ... we had Cameron Heyward (6-5, 295) playing 3 technique sometimes last year. This year our 1 (and probably sometimes 3) is Jonathan Hankins (6-3, 325). If they both theoretically had the exact same athletic ability -- same strength, same footwork, same ability to get off blocks -- is one better than the other because he's taller? Or fatter? I can see one being a better NT than the other because of sheer girth, but that doesn't mean his OVR should be better.

texacotea
04-27-2011, 05:49 AM
Agreed, I think the way (we) recruit sometimes resemble this method. We want smaller shiftyer slot receivers as to where we want taller athletic receivers on the outside. Also with RB, I think is good to have 1 of each style back. Power/Speed. I know that whole deal kinda went off topic. its just what came to mind at 6:30am

Rudy
07-05-2011, 12:15 PM
Just bumping this for requested info.

JeffHCross
07-10-2011, 06:25 PM
The one thing you can't predict for a recruit is OVR. There's nothing in that chart that does that. That's where Rudy's formulas come in ... it's about OVR.

Cipher 8
07-10-2011, 07:04 PM
I do have some questions still.

Are the only ratings you can determine by this table (http://www.thegamingtailgate.com/forums/showthread.php?2661-Dynasty-Recruiting-Compendium); speed rating, strength rating, break tackle rating, tackle rating and run block rating? Or is the unknown range when looking at a single recruits skills ratings that are measured by A+, B, C, D also taken into effect in the table. For example: A player with Break Tackle rating of B would have a Break Tackle anywhere between 84-87.

And if so;

Would you then be able to determine the overall rating of a prospect whom you're recruiting by using your table in combination with Rudy's formula (http://www.thegamingtailgate.com/forums/showthread.php?1793-JeffHCross-Project-1-How-is-OVR-determined&p=53244&viewfull=1#post53244) and spreadsheet (https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0ArB9QSYxv2ZGdG0yeldBdHI1T2RocHhVTnBrajJqR mc&hl=en#gid=0) for overall by each position?


Also just to clarify and be able to do this I have yet one more question: What are considered 'skill players' on defense because you say SQT-S: is tackle for defense and break tackle for offense, this is skill players. while SQT-L: is tackle for defense and run block for offense, this is lineman and linebackers.

So what position's tackle rating are determined by SQT-S? Safety, Cornerback, Defensive Ends, Defensive Tackles? or just the two secondary positions and then is SQT-L only for linebackers? What about the D-Line then?

Basically is SQT-S only for Safeties and Cornerbacks tackle rating and SQT-L for Linebackers, DE and DT?

Sorry if I'm being a pain in the A..

EDIT: It appears you read my mind JeffHCross.

Cipher 8
07-10-2011, 07:14 PM
I don't know if I should post it in here or in your thread but since we're already having the discussion now in here I'll just ask it here.

How does Rudy's formula work? Like I get it tells you what ratings determine the OVR but how do I go about doing that.

If I give you a made up recruit with numbers for each skill can you walk me through how I do the math or algorithm or whatever.

Do you just multiple the rating you get from your table with the decimal from his formula and add them all up then minus the constant? Or am I totally off base and don't know what the hell I'm talking about...

JeffHCross
07-10-2011, 07:38 PM
Do you just multiple the rating you get from your table with the decimal from his formula and add them all up then minus the constant? Or am I totally off base and don't know what the hell I'm talking about...Yes, it's just like a regular math/algebraic formula. Substitute and multiply.

Using it with recruits is going to be harder because it's a lot of guesswork with a recruit. For example, you don't necessarily know if a recruit's B+ is going to be a 91 or an 88. But the general principle still applies.

Cipher 8
07-10-2011, 07:45 PM
I didn't notice this Simple and Simple Syntax thing when looking at the spreadsheet because it didn't show up???

It just showed the skills abbreviation title and the unstandardized numbers for each skill. That's all I saw until I copy pasted it here into a table.

HB

Unstandardized Coefficients SIMPLE SIMPLE SYNTAX
(Constant) -63.5600 -64.33
BTK 0.3944 0.40 + BTK * 0.4
SPD 0.3942 0.40 + SPD * 0.4
CAR 0.1981 0.20 + CAR * 0.2
ACC 0.1958 0.20 + ACC * 0.2
AWR 0.1013 0.10 + AWR * 0.1
BCV 0.0987 0.10 + BCV * 0.1
AGL 0.0961 0.10 + AGL * 0.1
CAT 0.0954 0.10 + CAT * 0.1
STR 0.0550 0.05 + STR * 0.05
INJ 0.0531 0.05 + INJ * 0.05
ELV 0.0244 0.02 + ELV * 0.02
TRK 0.0234 0.02 + TRK * 0.02
SPM 0.0215 0.02 + SPM * 0.02
JKM 0.0185 0.02 + JKM * 0.02
SAR 0.0178 0.02 + SAR * 0.02

So i was right you take the rating from your table and multiply it by the decimal but then what? What do you do with all the skills numbers from there to get the OVR, add them all up and minus the constant?

I'm just trying to find out how to get the overall and also find out each skills importance. Which gives me another question...

Isn't the Elusive rating kind of redundant? I mean what exactly does Elusive do, why does it matter?

You got Agility to determine how agile they are and Speed and Acceleration to determine how fast they are so those are the ratings that determine how scat backy they are, the smaller Barry Sanders type guys.

Break Tackle determines how much they can break out of tackles, which I assume means once a tackle animation starts that break tackle rating kicks in to determine if they can slip out or not, so what does Elusive do?

Does it affect those tackle animations from even starting or initiating? Like say the defender attempts to tackle and a HB with a high Elusive Rating would likely reject that tackle animation from even initiating and keep on running?

If that's the case wouldn't Elusive be better than Break Tackle?

Avoid the tackle animation from even starting rather than breaking free once it has started. Since it slows you down to battle out of a tackle where if the tackle just misses all together from the attempt you don't get slowed down...

Idk... I'm just trying to figure out what's the best things to look for in a recruit since afterall that's what this thread is for...right?

JeffHCross
07-10-2011, 07:48 PM
I've been told that BTK is more of a factor in simulation, and not actual gameplay. For gameplay, TRK and ELU are the primary factors which determine whether or not a runner slips the tackle.

Keep in mind that Rudy's formula is just a "simple" regression ... I was looking to run a regression test on ratings, and he stepped up and did it ... he doesn't have any more insight into the rhyme or reason of ratings than any of us, and that includes me. That's one item of the game that EA has largely kept close to the vest. Though I'm reasonably certain that every rating has a purpose. Especially ones that were added this generation.

Cipher 8
07-10-2011, 07:58 PM
Keep in mind that Rudy's formula is just a "simple" regression ... I was looking to run a regression test on ratings, and he stepped up and did it ... he doesn't have any more insight into the rhyme or reason of ratings than any of us, and that includes me. That's one item of the game that EA has largely kept close to the vest. Though I'm reasonably certain that every rating has a purpose. Especially ones that were added this generation.I understand Rudy's formula is not official but I still don't understand how to do it. It's been a long time since I've had to do any math like that. I was just looking for a simple answer like for the Halfback take the Speed Rating and multiply it by x.xxx and do that for all the other ratings listed by Rudy for halfback and then add them up and minus the constant number to get the overall?

Is that how you do it? Am I in the ball park even?

Cipher 8
07-10-2011, 08:03 PM
I've been told that BTK is more of a factor in simulation, and not actual gameplay. For gameplay, TRK and ELU are the primary factors which determine whether or not a runner slips the tackle.
Okay now I'm officially confused... The Break Tackle doesn't matter if your controlling the player? Well what if I don't hit the truck stick and a defender initiates a tackle but my guy breaks free? Is that because his Break Tackle rating or because of his Elusiveness rating. You would think it would be BTK.

So you're telling me Break Tackle is a NPC A.I. attribute such as Awareness and Ball Carrier Vision? Where it simply doesn't matter when your user controlling the player but comes into effect if, and only if, it's a computer controlled (opponent) player or like in Coach Mode where it simulates the play after you hike it only... regardless of user input?

Whereas;

The Elusiveness rating is basically Break Tackle for when the ball carrier is under user control? Basically a Break Tackle with user input?

JeffHCross
07-10-2011, 08:17 PM
I was just looking for a simple answer like for the Halfback take the Speed Rating and multiply it by x.xxx and do that for all the other ratings listed by Rudy for halfback and then add them up and minus the constant number to get the overall? Yes.


Okay now I'm officially confused... The Break Tackle doesn't matter if your controlling the player?What I've been told is that BTK is used for simulations whereas Elusiveness and Trucking are used in gameplay. As in, one is used primarily during Super Sim and CPU Simulations, whereas the others are factors in determining dice rolls for breaking tackles. This may not be 100% absolute truth under all conditions, that's just what I've been told.


So you're telling me Break Tackle is a NPC A.I. attribute such as Awareness and Ball Carrier Vision?No, see above. But to your point, Awareness isn't a totally NPC attribute either. It can have an effect (though somewhat limited) under user control as well. I've never been clear on what BCV does ... that might be an NPC/simulation rating.

Cipher 8
07-10-2011, 08:36 PM
What I've been told is that BTK is used for simulations whereas Elusiveness and Trucking are used in gameplay. As in, one is used primarily during Super Sim and CPU Simulations, whereas the others are factors in determining dice rolls for breaking tackles. This may not be 100% absolute truth under all conditions, that's just what I've been told.



So you're telling me Break Tackle is a NPC A.I. attribute such as Awareness and Ball Carrier Vision?
No, see above. But to your point, Awareness isn't a totally NPC attribute either. It can have an effect (though somewhat limited) under user control as well. I've never been clear on what BCV does ... that might be an NPC/simulation rating.Well that's what your basically telling me... Awareness and Ball Carrier Vision do not matter when you are controlling the player, how could they when you control where they move and you decide all of their actions, such as throw the ball or scramble. They can't be aware and act on it because you control them.

From what you say, based off what you heard, that's how Break Tackle works as well. It doesn't matter when your controlling the player.

The game defers to elusiveness to determine the chances of you breaking a tackle when you do no other player input like trucking for example.

So basically elusiveness is break tackle and vise versa but one is only for non player controlled and one is only for when your controlling the ball carrier.

Right?

JeffHCross
07-10-2011, 08:42 PM
FYI, I had one of the mods move our discussion over here as it largely related to Rudy's spreadsheet rather than recruiting.

Stop thinking NPCs versus PCs, I think you're getting hung up on it. I'm talking larger picture. Simulations (Super Sim/CPU games/"Sim this game") versus actual played gameplay. What I've been told is that Break Tackle is used for simulations, while Elusiveness and Trucking are used during actual gameplay. Doesn't matter if the player is controlling them or not. Break Tackle doesn't matter during an actual game, based on what was posted on another forum some number of years ago.

Ball Carrier Vision I have zero knowledge of. I've been wondering what it does for years.

I believe Elusiveness is used for when you try to "elude" or "slip" a tackle (I believe it's a heavy component in why some QBs are able to slip out of sacks, for example), whereas Trucking is for power moves and going through a tackle. I think I've seen some truck moves performed without input on the truck stick, so it's not solely related to stick input.

Cipher 8
07-10-2011, 08:43 PM
WTF? Where did the thread go? And why were some posts moved over here? it's like jumping into another conversation I bet people reading it are confused.

EDIT: I'm starting to get scared JeffHCross you keep reading my mind on what I'm going to post next.

Cipher 8
07-10-2011, 08:48 PM
Elusiveness and Trucking are used during actual gameplay. Doesn't matter if the player is controlling them or not. Break Tackle doesn't matter during an actual game, based on what was posted on another forum some number of years ago.

...

Trucking is for power moves and going through a tackle. I think I've seen some truck moves performed without input on the truck stick, so it's not solely related to stick input.

Yeah this is what confused me because I don't do moves I just let my guys get tackled but I've seen em break free from a tackle without any input on my part at all. So when I am just running and I don't do any input but my guy breaks free from a tackle what specific rating did that?

It's not Break Tackle?
It's Trucking?

That makes absolutely no sense but I believe you. That's so dumb though, because then trucking is basically break tackle if you think about it. For when you're controlling the runner and you want your guy to shrug off tackles you want a RB with high trucking. It don't matter if he has 24 Break Tackle as long as he has 98 Trucking... :fp:

If your playing coach mode or wondering why a computer controlled player breaks tackles it's because he has a high Break Tackle not high Trucking, because it's non player controlled.

So confusing.

EDIT: I think we should do some tests on this to make sure... I believe you but I just want to make sure so I'm not ignoring Break Tackle and focusing on Trucking just to find out it is in fact Break Tackle that's the rating I'm looking for.

JeffHCross
07-10-2011, 08:57 PM
When you don't do any input but your guy still manages to break free, that could be Elusiveness or Trucking. Both of those ratings are used for CPU ball carries, and when you take on a tackle without doing input I believe you get treated like a CPU ball carrier. One thing I'm noticing in your posts is that you aren't mentioning Elusiveness at all, while I personally think Elusiveness is the primary rating for "slipping" tackles. Not running over a guy, but the animation you see where the defender gets one hand on your player and slips off ... that's Elusiveness. That's why I look at the Elusiveness of my guys before I pick my PR/KR, and it's effective in my eyes.

It's also possible that I received incorrect information and BTK is actually used in tackling calculations after all. We're basing this entire conversation on the foundation that I'm actually right ;)

The CPU controlled players are getting the same type of dice rolls that a human-controlled player does. CPU controlled players try jukes, trucks, spins, whatever, just the same as you and I -- when it's human controlled it just waits for human input, the calculations are still likely done with the same variables and ratings. I don't believe NPC versus PC has largely anything to do with it.

Cipher 8
07-10-2011, 09:09 PM
See the reason why I just find this bad is because it confuses the player. I'm sure there are gamers who recruit a guy based off his high break tackle rating and then are pissed when they come to find out and play as him in game that he doesn't break free from tackles any better then a smaller guy with lower BTK rating. The player thinks break tackle is the rating you want if you wish for your HB to break free from tackles. That's only natural given the name "Break Tackle" but in actuality it's trucking.

The problem is some recruits may have a high break tackle but low trucking where other may have high trucking but really low break tackle.

So on one side it doesn't make sense but on the other side you can really find some nice gems and steals for breaking tackles if you just focus on trucking. A :3star: player with C Break Tackle but A Trucking will play just like a user controlled John Clay last year where as a :5star: runningback with A+ Break Tackle and only C Trucking won't. Just stupid if you ask me.

JeffHCross
07-10-2011, 09:11 PM
Just stupid if you ask me.
It's also possible that I received incorrect information and BTK is actually used in tackling calculations after all. We're basing this entire conversation on the foundation that I'm actually right ;)

Cipher 8
07-10-2011, 09:13 PM
When you don't do any input but your guy still manages to break free, that could be Elusiveness or Trucking. Both of those ratings are used for CPU ball carries, and when you take on a tackle without doing input I believe you get treated like a CPU ball carrier. One thing I'm noticing in your posts is that you aren't mentioning Elusiveness at all, while I personally think Elusiveness is the primary rating for "slipping" tackles. Not running over a guy, but the animation you see where the defender gets one hand on your player and slips off ... that's Elusiveness. That's why I look at the Elusiveness of my guys before I pick my PR/KR, and it's effective in my eyes.


Okay well I did say this which by the sounds of what you just wrote is true then? Mainly the bolded... ignore the rest as we've already discussed that...




Isn't the Elusive rating kind of redundant? I mean what exactly does Elusive do, why does it matter?

You got Agility to determine how agile they are and Speed and Acceleration to determine how fast they are so those are the ratings that determine how scat backy they are, the smaller Barry Sanders type guys.

Break Tackle determines how much they can break out of tackles, which I assume means once a tackle animation starts that break tackle rating kicks in to determine if they can slip out or not, so what does Elusive do?

Does it affect those tackle animations from even starting or initiating? Like say the defender attempts to tackle and a HB with a high Elusive Rating would likely reject that tackle animation from even initiating and keep on running?

If that's the case wouldn't Elusive be better than Break Tackle?

Avoid the tackle animation from even starting rather than breaking free once it has started. Since it slows you down to battle out of a tackle where if the tackle just misses all together from the attempt you don't get slowed down...

Idk... I'm just trying to figure out what's the best things to look for in a recruit since afterall that's what this thread is for...right?

Cipher 8
07-10-2011, 09:15 PM
It's also possible that I received incorrect information and BTK is actually used in tackling calculations after all. We're basing this entire conversation on the foundation that I'm actually right ;)

Yes I'm always typing up my reply to one of your posts and don't see your latest post, twice now it's looked like you've read my mind ;)

JeffHCross
07-10-2011, 09:23 PM
Okay well I did say this which by the sounds of what you just wrote is true then? Mainly the bolded... ignore the rest as we've already discussed that....

I believe Elusiveness is used for when you try to "elude" or "slip" a tackle (I believe it's a heavy component in why some QBs are able to slip out of sacks, for example), whereas Trucking is for power moves and going through a tackle. I think I've seen some truck moves performed without input on the truck stick, so it's not solely related to stick input.


I personally think Elusiveness is the primary rating for "slipping" tackles. Not running over a guy, but the animation you see where the defender gets one hand on your player and slips off ... that's Elusiveness. That's why I look at the Elusiveness of my guys before I pick my PR/KR, and it's effective in my eyes.

Cipher 8
07-10-2011, 09:26 PM
I hope this makes sense...


when you take on a tackle without doing input I believe you get treated like a CPU ball carrier.

So you think that if I didn't do any player input like try to truck stick or spin or juke and a tackle animation starts up or begins to happen because the elusiveness rating dice roll that happens behind the scene fails to avoid the animation from even beginning that it treats me like a CPU ball carrier and not a player controlled ball carrier?

And then...

The CPU controlled players are getting the same type of dice rolls that a human-controlled player does. the calculations are still likely done with the same variables and ratings.
Wouldn't that mean that the game then uses the BTK rating to determine if the npc player breaks free from a tackle animation that has already started?

Sure, That would totally go against everything we've just discussed and that you were told but to me that would make more sense.

JeffHCross
07-10-2011, 09:41 PM
So you think that if I didn't do any player input like try to truck stick or spin or juke and a tackle animation starts up or begins to happen because the elusiveness rating dice roll that happens behind the scene fails to avoid the animation from even beginning that it treats me like a CPU ball carrier and not a player controlled ball carrier?Yes. I've broken some tackles without doing any truck stick or other input, and it's largely (or maybe solely) been the "elusive" type of breaking tackles. Take a high ELU player and put him back at PR, and I practically guarantee you'll see tackles broken before you even had a chance to react to the hit coming.

Now, if you don't do any user input at all, including left-stick input, then you are a CPU-controlled player, because the CPU takes over until you actually perform input.


Wouldn't that mean that the game then uses the BTK rating to determine if the npc player breaks free from a tackle animation that has already started?No. Simulation versus Gameplay, not NPC vs PC. The control of the player has nothing to do with it. Assuming I'm right about BTK.

Cipher 8
07-10-2011, 10:34 PM
No. Simulation versus Gameplay, not NPC vs PC. The control of the player has nothing to do with it. Assuming I'm right about BTK.

But you said...


when you take on a tackle without doing input I believe you get treated like a CPU ball carrier. the calculations are still likely done with the same variables and ratings. I don't believe NPC versus PC has largely anything to do with it.

So if you're treated like a CPU ball carrier wouldn't that be simulation and hence NPC.

souljahbill
07-11-2011, 06:18 AM
So if you're treated like a CPU ball carrier wouldn't that be simulation and hence NPC.

Just think of it like this:

If the play happens and you actually see the players, it's gameplay, whether you're controlling the player or not. That's elusiveness.

If the play happens without you seeing it (super sim in game, sim over computer, sim from menu), that's break tackle.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

jwallace0317
07-11-2011, 07:28 AM
Latecomer to this thread. Always glad to see stuff like this, because figuring out under-the-hood ratings issues has always been an interest area of mine. A question: has anyone tried labbing the "BTK not relevant when user is inputting" theory? It would go something like this: you set up a running play against a particular defensive play where your running back is usually isolated against the same one or two defenders. You set up two HB's who are identical except that test HB #1 is rated ELU 1, TRK 1, BTK 99 and test HB #2 is rated ELU 99, TRK 99, BTK 1. Your test defense would be identical as well, and you'd probably want an average defense to work against. Running the same play while usering the HB in the same general manner (with no attempts at spinning/juking/trucking) should give noticeable results that confirm the theory one way or the other (i.e., if BTK truly has no effect while usering the ballcarrier, you will see HB #2 will break significantly more tackles). Anyway, just a thought.

Cipher 8
07-11-2011, 06:55 PM
Latecomer to this thread. Always glad to see stuff like this, because figuring out under-the-hood ratings issues has always been an interest area of mine. A question: has anyone tried labbing the "BTK not relevant when user is inputting" theory? It would go something like this: you set up a running play against a particular defensive play where your running back is usually isolated against the same one or two defenders. You set up two HB's who are identical except that test HB #1 is rated ELU 1, TRK 1, BTK 99 and test HB #2 is rated ELU 99, TRK 99, BTK 1. Your test defense would be identical as well, and you'd probably want an average defense to work against. Running the same play while usering the HB in the same general manner (with no attempts at spinning/juking/trucking) should give noticeable results that confirm the theory one way or the other (i.e., if BTK truly has no effect while usering the ballcarrier, you will see HB #2 will break significantly more tackles). Anyway, just a thought.

Yeah I think I need to see some testing to see if BTK really doesn't matter during the game when your playing. Not saying I don't believe you Jeff but I just would like confirmation.

SituationSoap
07-11-2011, 10:48 PM
Just think of it like this:

If the play happens and you actually see the players, it's gameplay, whether you're controlling the player or not. That's elusiveness.

If the play happens without you seeing it (super sim in game, sim over computer, sim from menu), that's break tackle.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The way that I think of it: If there's an animation to trigger, then ELU/TRK matter, due to the fact that the game needs to figure out which animation to play. If there isn't an animation, then the game doesn't need to worry about whether or not the player broke the tackle, they can simply note that he broke a tackle, so BRK is the only stat that matters.

All the other discussion about BRK v. ELU/TRK is somewhat academic, because it assumes that there exist backs with one that is quite high, and the others that are very low. My expectation is, that unless you edit the ratings yourself, if BRK is high, then either TRK or ELU are also going to be high, and we're tilting at windmills here.

jwallace0317
07-12-2011, 01:28 PM
I've done some labbing on this, and here's what I can tell so far:

BTK matters when usering the back, clearly. I tested a back with 99 BTK, and 0 TRK and 0 ELU, and without using any special moves or the truck stick, he shed tackles to a significantly high degree.

TRK functions just like SPN and JUK. In other words, the higher the TRK rating, the more effective your "truck moves" will be when you move the right stick forward. Specifically, the higher the TRK rating, the more often you will be able to fall/stumble forward over a defender for a couple extra yards using the truck stick. One confirmation of this, from the inverse perspective, is using a test back with 0 BTK, 99 TRK, and 0 ELU. WITHOUT using the truck stick, this back was pretty much dead meat for any defender trying to tackle him. This confirms for me that the rating, by itself, does nothing unless you're using the truck stick move associated with the rating.

ELU is how "small" the player is. And by small I don't mean physical appearance, I mean how he is perceived as a moving object by defenders. The best way I can analogize this is the difference between asking you to catch a pebble when I toss it to you, compared to a basketball. The higher the ELU, the more the runner is like a pebble, and defenders have to be more precise in addressing the ballcarrier when making a tackle, as opposed to a low ELU meaning that a defender can tackle the ballcarrier even when taking a bad angle to him. This is most apparent when usering the back between the tackles...a back with high ELU is less likely to be gobbled up immediately. How it seems to relate to BTK is this: ELU helps determine whether a defender will be able to initiate physical contact (start a tackle) with the ballcarrier. BTK helps determine whether the defender, if he IS able to start a tackle, will be able to complete it, or whether the ballcarrier will shed him.

psuexv
08-08-2011, 01:56 PM
I uploaded all of the formulas by position to google docs: https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0ArB9QSYxv2ZGdG0yeldBdHI1T2RocHhVTnBrajJqR mc&hl=en#gid=0


Rudy, is there a reason you are not including all attributes for each position? I understand that they are fairly insignificant but they do factor into the OVR rating.

For example, here is the formula I came up with for QBs

Overall = - 63.1 + 0.146 Speed - 0.00005 Strength + 0.0321 Agility
+ 0.0327 Acceleration + 0.00100 Jumping + 0.358 Awareness
- 0.00041 Stamina + 0.0261 Injury + 0.0300 Break Tackle
+ 0.0108 Trucking + 0.0120 Elusiveness + 0.00070 Stiff Arm
- 0.00273 Spin Move + 0.00609 Juke Move + 0.00013 Carrying
+ 0.00004 Ball Carrier Vision - 0.0021 Run Block
+ 0.00529 Run Block Strength - 0.00544 Run Block Footwork
+ 0.0083 Pass Block - 0.00477 Pass Block Strength
+ 0.00741 Pass Block Footwork - 0.00180 Impact Blocking
- 0.00757 Catching - 0.00139 Spectacular Catch
+ 0.00491 Catch In Traffic - 0.00157 Route Running + 0.00087 Release
- 0.00167 Tackle + 0.00040 Hit Power + 0.00136 Pursuit
- 0.00060 Play Recognition + 0.00110 Power Moves
- 0.00582 Finesse Moves - 0.00049 Block Shedding
- 0.00779 Man Coverage + 0.00699 Zone Coverage - 0.00188 Press
+ 0.547 Throw Power + 0.600 Throw Accuracy + 0.0010 Kick Power
+ 0.0033 Kick Accuracy + 0.00059 Return

psuexv
08-08-2011, 03:09 PM
So I ran the numbers for CBs and trying to predict an recruits OVR. The tough part is we don't get all of the attributes for a recruit before they sign, which I don't particularly understand since those attributes are a factor. The formula for CBs is


Overall = - 72.8 + 0.411 Speed + 0.0430 Strength + 0.0809 Agility
+ 0.167 Acceleration + 0.0427 Jumping + 0.0813 Awareness
- 0.00219 Stamina + 0.0409 Injury + 0.00094 Break Tackle
+ 0.00124 Trucking - 0.00119 Elusiveness - 0.00096 Stiff Arm
+ 0.00045 Spin Move - 0.00019 Juke Move - 0.00070 Carrying
- 0.00268 Ball Carrier Vision + 0.00460 Run Block
+ 0.00480 Run Block Strength + 0.00055 Run Block Footwork
+ 0.00224 Pass Block - 0.00176 Pass Block Strength
- 0.00085 Pass Block Footwork - 0.00135 Impact Blocking
+ 0.0394 Catching - 0.00145 Spectacular Catch
+ 0.00085 Catch In Traffic + 0.00260 Route Running - 0.00180 Release
+ 0.0822 Tackle - 0.00043 Hit Power + 0.0798 Pursuit
+ 0.0813 Play Recognition - 0.00169 Power Moves
+ 0.00202 Finesse Moves - 0.00080 Block Shedding + 0.287 Man Coverage
+ 0.288 Zone Coverage + 0.0840 Press + 0.00090 Throw Power
- 0.00339 Throw Accuracy + 0.00308 Kick Power + 0.00358 Kick Accuracy
+ 0.00004 Return

Based on this and using the ratings provided I think we can narrow down a Recruits OVR. I took a 4 star CB with these ratings


Speed A
Zone Coverage B+
Man Coverage B-
Acceleration A
Press C+
Tackle D
Play Recognition B-
Awareness D-
Agility B+
Pursuit C+
Stength D
Jumping B+
Injury B
Catching D


And applied it to the formula, we should get a low end of 77 and a high end of 83, since all we have is a range of ratings for each letter grade.

I want to test this out a little further on my console to see if #1 I can get more recruit ratings than on the web and #2 sim out a dynasty and see what a recruit comes in at.

ram29jackson
08-08-2011, 03:57 PM
seriously..why dont you just ask the guys at EA to tell you how its determined ? I'm not trying to be mean or funny..you have an in-road to these guys..call them up and ask them

psuexv
08-08-2011, 04:03 PM
seriously..why dont you just ask the guys at EA to tell you how its determined ? I'm not trying to be mean or funny..you have an in-road to these guys..call them up and ask them

Well I don't know what in road you are talking about but I would love to have it. :)

Rudy
08-08-2011, 04:17 PM
You shouldn't include insignificant variables. If they don't pass the 95% test (fairly standard) and have a t-value of 1.96 or more (with this number of samples) then they shouldn't be included. Furthermore a good analyst will look at the results and determine if the borderline variables are functioning properly. For example, does it make any sense for a QB to LOSE points as his stamina or spin move goes up? That formula says it does because you have included insignificant variables (some may be borderline and even included) and the results, while very minimal, make no sense. From all the tests I ran I included all variables and you could see fairly easily which ones were very significant and designed to be included from the nominal variables (like block shedding for a QB). I excluded the insignificant ones and only used the significant ones. To do otherwise would be a mistake imo. Remember, the computer is a whore for stats and if it can find any pattern to help minimize the errors it will, even if they don't make sense.


Rudy, is there a reason you are not including all attributes for each position? I understand that they are fairly insignificant but they do factor into the OVR rating.

For example, here is the formula I came up with for QBs

Overall = - 63.1 + 0.146 Speed - 0.00005 Strength + 0.0321 Agility
+ 0.0327 Acceleration + 0.00100 Jumping + 0.358 Awareness
- 0.00041 Stamina + 0.0261 Injury + 0.0300 Break Tackle
+ 0.0108 Trucking + 0.0120 Elusiveness + 0.00070 Stiff Arm
- 0.00273 Spin Move + 0.00609 Juke Move + 0.00013 Carrying
+ 0.00004 Ball Carrier Vision - 0.0021 Run Block
+ 0.00529 Run Block Strength - 0.00544 Run Block Footwork
+ 0.0083 Pass Block - 0.00477 Pass Block Strength
+ 0.00741 Pass Block Footwork - 0.00180 Impact Blocking
- 0.00757 Catching - 0.00139 Spectacular Catch
+ 0.00491 Catch In Traffic - 0.00157 Route Running + 0.00087 Release
- 0.00167 Tackle + 0.00040 Hit Power + 0.00136 Pursuit
- 0.00060 Play Recognition + 0.00110 Power Moves
- 0.00582 Finesse Moves - 0.00049 Block Shedding
- 0.00779 Man Coverage + 0.00699 Zone Coverage - 0.00188 Press
+ 0.547 Throw Power + 0.600 Throw Accuracy + 0.0010 Kick Power
+ 0.0033 Kick Accuracy + 0.00059 Return

JeffHCross
08-08-2011, 05:07 PM
seriously..why dont you just ask the guys at EA to tell you how its determined ? I'm not trying to be mean or funny..you have an in-road to these guys..call them up and ask themAs far as I understand it, the request has been made several times over the years. This is the kind of information that companies like EA like to keep close to the vest.


You shouldn't include insignificant variables.Correct. Plus, anytime you see repeated patterns of +.05 then -.05, or something along those lines, you can relatively guarantee that those aren't really factors in OVR. That's just the regression seeing a connection between two actually-independent variables, then balancing it out the other way.

Or, another factor to consider, why in the world would they say that a QB's rating was negatively impacted by higher ratings in an individual rating.

psuexv
08-12-2011, 11:42 AM
yeah I understand what you guys are saying, but I don't completely agree. If we were truly trying to "predict" which variables had an affect on OVR then yes those insignificant variables would be disregarded.

However I think those other variables are definitely part of the formula so should be included. My rationale is, if they are not in the formula... why are they there. I would understand having them there as a placeholder so to speak since those variables are used in for other positions and not specific to each position, but why give them random ratings. Why is CBs spin move 83 if it's not factored into his OVR.

The other thing that I noticed is that there are 2 variables that are not included in any of the formulas the Rudy did. Return and Stamina. Return makes sense but Stamina?

Rudy
08-12-2011, 07:40 PM
But psu, does it make sense to include a variable in the formula that is completely contradictory to value? Like a better spin move resulting in a lower overall rating? That just makes no sense and is completely wrong in a regression analysis.

The point of the exercise wasn't to come up with a new formula and create a way to say how good a player is at each position. The point was to determine what variables EA is using to get that overall rating. It's up to you then to determine how much that overall means to you. For example, I believe guards are graded higher for run block than pass block. If you are a pass happy Air Raid team you might want to overlook the overall rating in this case. Very clearly EA uses specific variables for specific positions. To use all ratings for every position is simply wrong. It would be the same as using the number of the player or his name. They shouldn't be correlated and even if there was a slight correlation we wouldn't bother including it.

psuexv
08-15-2011, 12:11 PM
Rudy, I completely agree with you, I'm not saying what you are doing it is wrong. If I'm trying to determine which factors make my crops grow better and I find that timing between fertilizing has an insignificant effect, I'm not factoring that into my equation. However I for some reason feel EA is using all variables though, even though it may not make sense... gut feeling.

I tried to find some players that have identical "significant" ratings. That was kinda difficult. I did find something though that may help my case. 2 Kickers with identical KAC and KPW ratings. 84 and 84. Their awareness is 50 and 80 respectively. Based on your formula they should come out to be 82 and 84, when actually their ratings are 83 and 84. Yes it's a small difference but I think that it does show that their are some other factors coming into place.

I ran them with all variables included and got 83 and 84. In the grand scheme of things does it really make any difference, probably not, but I just have a feeling that they are using all variables.

psuexv
08-15-2011, 08:43 PM
Well I was wrong, my damn gut anyway. EA does it right

Rudy
08-15-2011, 10:53 PM
By the way, that 197-198 pound run stopping DE was the #11 DE in the country and a 4* player. Just looked him up the other day.

psuexv
08-16-2011, 09:42 AM
So here's how I proved myself wrong :D. I created a player with the exact same ratings as a current player on the default roster, then I ran all of the non significant attributes from Rudy's equations up to 99. The OVR stayed the same which would lead us to the fact that, yes only certain attributes are in the OVR equation.

Rudy
08-16-2011, 04:18 PM
I think the reason the overalls are off on some guys (1 point max) is due to the way they round the calculations and/or some other ratings that might seem insignificant but could be.

ram29jackson
08-19-2011, 12:47 AM
So here's how I proved myself wrong :D. I created a player with the exact same ratings as a current player on the default roster, then I ran all of the non significant attributes from Rudy's equations up to 99. The OVR stayed the same which would lead us to the fact that, yes only certain attributes are in the OVR equation.

i'm just saying that I noticed that years ago.. I dont care or know what the significance is, just saying I noticed it

JeffHCross
08-19-2011, 05:34 AM
yeah I understand what you guys are saying, but I don't completely agree. If we were truly trying to "predict" which variables had an affect on OVR then yes those insignificant variables would be disregarded.That is what I was trying to predict ;)


I think the reason the overalls are off on some guys (1 point max) is due to the way they round the calculations and/or some other ratings that might seem insignificant but could be.This is true. One thing I know they do is cut off the OVR rating at 99 (i.e. some players are actually higher than 99, but the game displays 99) and, I believe, 40. The other thing I know is done is rounding.

nmccauley
08-30-2011, 12:33 AM
Interesting thread. Has anyone devised a method (aside from Jeff) to derive Trucking, Elusiveness, Spin Move attributes based on actual player characteristics (i.e. HT, WT, 40 time, etc.) or actual stats (yards/carry, TD/carry, etc.)?

JeffHCross
08-30-2011, 08:23 PM
Interesting thread. Has anyone devised a method (aside from Jeff) to derive Trucking, Elusiveness, Spin Move attributes based on actual player characteristics (i.e. HT, WT, 40 time, etc.) or actual stats (yards/carry, TD/carry, etc.)?As far as I'm aware, no. And it's tough to characterize my method as deriving it either. I derive some, but not much. I'm hoping to change that in the future, but haven't had time yet.

The only other people I know that are looking into this kind of stuff are Playmakers (on OperationSports) and MattUM2 (http://www.thegamingtailgate.com/forums/showthread.php?2624-MattUM2-Roster-Project-Series-2-Re-Rating-PS3-Rosters). I know Playmakers makes his historic teams by finding a contemporary comparison for a historic player. I'm not fully up to speed on how Matt comes up with his numbers.

twookool
09-03-2011, 08:13 PM
maybe i missed it, but where do you get the numbers to plug into the calculations?

JeffHCross
09-04-2011, 01:37 PM
maybe i missed it, but where do you get the numbers to plug into the calculations?They come from a player's individual ratings. SPD, AGI, THP, etc. You could also use this to estimate a recruit's incoming OVR (which is part of what PocketScout has done), by first converting the B+ and C- ratings to numbers.

The real meat of this regression isn't to find out an individual's OVR -- that's already there by a simple glance at the roster. It's what goes into that calculation that was interesting.

If someone wanted to get really sophisticated, they could now take something like what Rudy's done and modify it to their own liking. Essentially re-calculation the OVR ratings for their players. Think Play Recognition is more important for a defensive player than Block Shedding? Easy change.

supersigmaof21
06-05-2012, 06:36 AM
Good info here!!

JeffHCross
06-05-2012, 07:38 PM
Thanks for the reminder, Sigma. I really need to get back into this again. There's a few things I wanted to do but never had a chance to put together.

IBI
06-06-2012, 06:47 AM
Yeah, thanks sigma. This was the first time I've read this thread, and there is a lot of great info in here. Jeff, while reading this thread, I was thinking exactly what you're suggesting. By being able to download my OD rosters, I could easily change the formula to weigh the attributes that I find important for a user controlled OVR, and set my lineup based on my own calculations, rather than sifting through all of the attributes. It will also help greatly with identifying my type of players in recruiting.

Excellent thread topic! I may run a test when I get home tonight, but does anyone know if Rudy's calculation is accurate for NCAA12?

JeffHCross
06-06-2012, 06:41 PM
does anyone know if Rudy's calculation is accurate for NCAA12?I didn't really ask directly while I was at the Community Day events last season, but ratings did come up several times in conversations between me and a couple devs that we were working on rosters/ratings. What I got out of those conversations was that there was a slight change to how a WR's overall was being calculated, but not significant.

I can't make any such prediction about 13 though.

supersigmaof21
06-10-2012, 09:03 AM
I definitely think my year 3 FAU team is the better for me stumbling across this old thread. I think AWR should be more important (I play coach mode) but I understand why it's not because the user is the AWR for the players. Then again, what about the CPU controlled opponent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JeffHCross
06-10-2012, 11:49 AM
The user's AWR really only takes the place of the QB (or HB on a running play) and the defender you choose to control. AWR does factor in to other players, IMO.

I think AWR is as important as it should be. As it stands now, you can't have a super OVR if you have high AWR but lack the physical skills. But you can be at least decent OVR if you have the physical skills but lack AWR. That's true for real football too ... you'll usually play a gifted player, who may make some mistakes, over the guy that understands the Xs and Os but that can't keep up with those around him.

But for you, since your playing CM, you should probably prioritize AWR when you're comparing your QBs. Shouldn't make much difference for how you assess other players though.

supersigmaof21
06-10-2012, 04:09 PM
That's the funny thing ... All of my QBs AWR is sub 70 but the kid with the highest THA performs the best of the 3. I just suffered through 2-3 games without my starting QB and went 2-1. In those 3 games my backs definitely shouldered the load to give us a chance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

supersigmaof21
06-11-2012, 06:39 AM
Man, my DL is killing right now. Got a guy with 11 sacks on the season with 2 games to go. Also my #1 CB has like 8 picks. He's had a couple multiple INT games already. My D is pretty stout. We get burned occasionally but for the most part they're on.

JeffHCross
06-11-2012, 08:34 PM
Nice, sigma! What's your base D? One thing I'd love to do, basing it off of Rudy's work, is to figure out a ballpark calculation for a "3-4 DE" and/or "3-4 OLB".

supersigmaof21
06-12-2012, 11:16 AM
My base is a 4-3


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

supersigmaof21
06-12-2012, 08:42 PM
Finished the regular season 9-3 (6-2) with my C, C-, C team and Herbstreit has us favored to win the New Orleans bowl against a USM team with all of their ratings in the B's


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

supersigmaof21
06-16-2012, 06:29 PM
Man ... finished the year 10-3 with a 19-7 bowl win. Defensively we had some studs. One DT set the school single season sack record. Another DT set the career sack record. And my starting CB set the school single season interception record.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk