Player's weights (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Sports] >> Maximum-Football 2.0



Message

rcleslie -> Player's weights (3/6/2008 3:19:40 AM)

Now that I know a player's height affects play outcomes (no wonder all my old 5'5" WRs were so lousy!), I now wonder about weight. Does weight matter re play outcomes? It seems that it should, but I also wonder how long an algorithm can get?!. If weight does matter how does it correlate with strength and/or interact with blocking ability? For that matter, how do blocking ability and strength interact?



David Winter -> RE: Player's weights (3/6/2008 5:09:01 AM)

Weight is part of physics yes. A heavier linemen is more difficult to push around.

I've noticed you mentioning "algorithm" to determine things. I think there may be a misunderstanding about how the game works, and I just wanted to clear that up. Maybe I am missunderstanding what you mean when you are saying algorithm.

Speaking for the moment specifically for the 3D portion, the game is real time, based on physics, with player skills effecting that physics. For example, when the player throws the ball, I'm using ballistics physics to launch the ball (based on the throwing players skills), move it through 3D space vs gravity, and determine where it will land. There is no single formula that takes all the data and spits out the result of the play. Each play run is unique and nothing about the 3D game is predetermined before hand.

This is something Maximum-Football and Madden have in common, and what separates both from many other games.

The simulated feature is very different, however I still have no single function or formula that tells me how the play ended. The events of a play, including blocking are determined as needed. But because there is no 3D engine involved, the physical playing out of the game is substituted by probablilities (modified by player skills) and random numbers. So no phyisics, but no single formula either.

I just wanted to clear up any misconceptions on how the game works, or any missunderstandings I may have had about your questions.

thanks
David



elmerlee -> RE: Player's weights (3/6/2008 7:12:16 PM)

The fact thar Max does not predetermine results in the 3D game is 80% of the reason the game has such great potential. Actually this is rather easy to see when watching the plays unfold. Makes the whole thing worthwhile.

Not to dispute the statement that Madden functions in the same manner but I have very serious doubts about this. I've played Madden for years and this has always been a major debate on Madden boards. I often enjoy watching two CPU teams go at it and over a period of time you can see a pattern develop. I'll bet 90% of the time it is possible to tell if a team will start a scoring drive after a couple plays. Also, without the 3rd party editors the game is in no way realistic.

Anyway this is the reason I still take an interest in Max despite my bit**ing.



Marauders -> RE: Player's weights (3/6/2008 7:46:42 PM)

I'm not sure if Madden does either, but David has more inside knowledge about that that I would.

I do know that Madden had non-physics based tackles until recently.

Thanks for keeping interest.  I believe you will like some of the changes to Maximum Football for the 2.2 release.  I am sure it won't do all that you have asked for, but the improvements should really round out the game for the 2.x series.



David Winter -> RE: Player's weights (3/6/2008 8:13:46 PM)

Madden does a number of things I don't particularily like, but I am sure the play outcome is not 100% predetermined. If it were, the arcade (it's primary mode of play) portion wouldn't work. The game needs to deal with the game player doing unexpected things on the field. If everything was predetermined before the snap, the arcade mode wouldn't work properly.

Maybe it's better to say that Madden has different levels of play outcome restrictions. But given the audience for that game, I think that's okay. And they sell a bazillion units per year so the game must be doing something right [:)]

thanks
David



DreamTeams -> RE: Player's weights (3/6/2008 9:31:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: elmerlee

Not to dispute the statement that Madden functions in the same manner but I have very serious doubts about this. I've played Madden for years and this has always been a major debate on Madden boards. I often enjoy watching two CPU teams go at it and over a period of time you can see a pattern develop. I'll bet 90% of the time it is possible to tell if a team will start a scoring drive after a couple plays.



This is something I've wondered about Madden. Also, a scoring pattern seems to develop, as well. For example, one team seems to always score 14 poits first in most games and then the other team will score. Stuff like that. But, in MF I don't see these type of patterns. In fact, no two contests are exactly alike. Some games are blowouts, some scoring contests, others close, still others are defensive struggles.



quixian -> RE: Player's weights (3/6/2008 10:12:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DreamTeams


quote:

ORIGINAL: elmerlee

Not to dispute the statement that Madden functions in the same manner but I have very serious doubts about this. I've played Madden for years and this has always been a major debate on Madden boards. I often enjoy watching two CPU teams go at it and over a period of time you can see a pattern develop. I'll bet 90% of the time it is possible to tell if a team will start a scoring drive after a couple plays.



This is something I've wondered about Madden. Also, a scoring pattern seems to develop, as well. For example, one team seems to always score 14 poits first in most games and then the other team will score. Stuff like that. But, in MF I don't see these type of patterns. In fact, no two contests are exactly alike. Some games are blowouts, some scoring contests, others close, still others are defensive struggles.



One of the many reasons MaxFB appeals so much to me as well personally is the fact that the gameplay does NOT feel pre-determined in any way. Tweaking the playbooks and constants can change the overall human difficulty level and typical game results, but the wide variety of outcomes one can encounter in MaxFB pretty much blows Madden away.

Very few sports games are able to provide gamers with the scope of variable outcomes that we see in watching real-life sports. Overall, imo the NFL2k series had done a better job than Madden at providing a wide variety of outcomes in games - the high point for me was probably NFL2k1 on the Dreamcast - two teams could run the same offensive play vs the same defensive play and see a myriad of different events unfold. None of the outcomes would ever seemed to occur in an unlikely fashion, thus the gameplay felt realistic and organic in nature.

Some people played the High Heat series to get their baseball fix for years for the same reason (and some still do [;)]) - you'd see things in a High Heat game that you could play 1000 games of other titles and never see…Ditto with NBA Inside Drive (the 2k series was decent in this regard) and in the fantastic Winning Eleven series.

Even today, while I still like playing the occasional game of Madden or NCAA Football, it really ruins the immersion of the game for me when I see the same gameplay patterns repeat themselves over and over again. [>:]




SmilinJack -> RE: Player's weights (3/7/2008 12:40:33 AM)

Countless, years, days, and hours I've spent with Madden. On almost every system. Usually watching, but also playing head to head with friends. I agree completely! There is something about Madden that just feels iffy. It cheats. Madden was the only choice for years.

I'll never take MaxFB for granted.

Jay



Old Coach -> RE: Player's weights (3/7/2008 1:07:24 AM)

Before I began testing MaxFB in 2003, I played Madden 2002. I repeatedly read on the their forum about something called a "God Code" that would allow the computer controlled team to make unreal comebacks. I have to say that I am one that believed it exists in their code-at least it did with 2002. If I had a several TD lead late in the game, the PC team would suddenly begin stopping everything I tried on offense and nothing I did on defense would slow 'it's" offense down. The PC team would be making miraculous catches, the QB would be throwing perfect strikes while going down, no pass I threw would be complete, etc. I have Madden 2005 and when I played it, I usually played it in 2 player mode, so I haven't seen the "God Code" kick in with that version. I don't have any Madden version installed on my PC at present because I'm having too much with MaxFB.

In playtest, I often will play the same opponents many times in succession to evaluate player ratings and play design. The games never play out the same way. Case in point, I recently have been working on my CFL custom league and I started 5 games between Saskatchewan and Calgary and all played out differently. The game that I played as a league game, not quick play, ended with a 24-14 Saskatchewan victory. The previous test game ended 29-15 Calgary.

My Saskatchewan team features David Winter at QB- his jersey name is Bad Ass. I play HB and Ed Early, another member of the original 2003 beta test crew- is at FB. I'm not sure if we are the 3 Musketeers or the 3 Stooges for the Rough Riders, but what ever we are, Saskatchewan is 1-0 in the league.

Old Coach




garysorrell -> RE: Player's weights (3/7/2008 2:20:45 AM)

So David came over from the XFL?
Nice stuff.

I was a big Madden 02 guy also. But, it did seem that you were never safe from the comeback. Also, the quick sim results were horrible. I would always quick sim all games except my own, and would lose by 20 to the 2-10 team, and destroy the 12-0 team.
I think the game took nothing into account, it matched two teams and spit out a boxscore.



David Winter -> RE: Player's weights (3/7/2008 2:46:31 AM)

quote:

3 Stooges for the Rough Riders


Errr.. Larry.. you probably wanted the Roughriders. The Rough Riders were in Ottawa. The Roughriders are in Saskatchewan. Two different words meaning two different things, owned by two teams that were at one time in the prehistory of the CFL, in two different leagues.

That said, when I'm insanely wealthy, I'm going to put a team in Halifax and call them the Ruff-Ryders. [:D] Just to help add to the the confusion.



garysorrell -> RE: Player's weights (3/7/2008 2:50:56 AM)

I miss Ottawa. I loved having the two similar named teams. So is the city just snakebit? Has the problem been support, attendance, bad ownership?



David Winter -> RE: Player's weights (3/7/2008 3:10:50 AM)

My opinion is that it was ownership. Without good ownership you don't have good attendance and support. I don't know what it was with the ownership groups in Ottawa, but they all seemed to have this mindset that they should have all their bills for the year paid off and be making profit after the first game of the teams existence. All teams in the CFL make money (not true 10 years ago but the league has changed a lot since the US expansion days). I've heard reports that the Roughriders made 14 million in profit this year (not revenue, profit). So there is no reason to expect that Ottawa can't make money either. You just need good ownership. Ottawa has other problems now. Because the stadium has gone unused for so long, it's no longer safe. You'd have to rip it down and build a new one. There is a group that wants to do that, but the city wants that land for Condo's now, not a new stadium. So now it's politics.



Marauders -> RE: Player's weights (3/7/2008 8:02:01 AM)

quote:

Case in point, I recently have been working on my CFL custom league and I started 5 games between Saskatchewan and Calgary and all played out differently. The game that I played as a league game, not quick play, ended with a 24-14 Saskatchewan victory. The previous test game ended 29-15 Calgary.


What?

I though David put in god code exclusively for Saskatchewan!  There must be a bug. [;)]




rcleslie -> RE: Player's weights (3/10/2008 2:26:54 AM)

DW,
Thx for the explanation. I guess weight matters as it should. When I use the word "algorithm" I refer to a formula the takes skill ratings into account and weights them accordingly in determining play outcomes. I think that FB Pro used to work that way. I was not aware that MaxFB and Madden are unique in not operating that way. Physics does seem to be more "real world". Anyhow, the game is great and getting better!



jdhalfrack -> RE: Player's weights (3/11/2008 9:34:19 PM)

I updated the editor for the next release so global editting of player weights will allow you to enter 3 digits.

JD



Marauders -> RE: Player's weights (3/12/2008 6:33:18 AM)

Hey, how come my opponent's players now weigh 999 pound each?

Darned utilities!



rcleslie -> RE: Player's weights (3/13/2008 1:44:35 AM)

Maybe they play football on Jupiter. Anyway, it beats suffering along with a 99lb. offensive line average[;)]



Marauders -> RE: Player's weights (3/13/2008 2:41:30 AM)

quote:

99lb


Hah!

Well, yes ... I agree. [:)]



rcleslie -> RE: Player's weights (3/17/2008 12:32:03 AM)

Sorry, but I need to ask DW another question about the weight and skills issue. My real question is how weight and skills interact, specifically weight with strength ratings and/or blocking ability. I do understand that a 300 lb. OT can more easily push around a 250 lb DT, but what if that OT's blocking ability is poor, etc.? I also assume that the 300 lb guy may be less agile. I can visualize a matrix with high v. low blocking on one side and high v. low block avoidance on the other, and the entire 2 x 2 matrix interacting with weight and/or strength and/or agility and/or intelligence, etc. Weight and strength are probably not perfectly positively correlated. A guy can be huge, but not particularly strong. It depends on the nature of the body mass, fat v. muscle, etc. (I am NOT suggesting that BMI indices be included among player attributes!)Maybe I would take the 260 lb. guy in good shape over the 330lb lard bucket. Naturally, some players block well and others don't. Also, good run blockers are not necessarily good pass blockers and vice versa, the techniques are different (or so I understand). I know the manual does provide some information regarding the importance of certain ratings to positions, e.g., page 45. Is that all I really need to know? Do I obsess beyond all practicality?

Hope these questions are not a P in the A. I truly enjoy the game and will continue to do so even if its deepest innards must remain a mystery to me. I am amazed at all of the work that has gone into this game, that continues to go into it, and with the number of people available in the forums to answer my obsessive questions. Also, I would like to give a cheer for the third party developers and their creative utilities.




rcleslie -> RE: Player's weights (3/20/2008 3:43:10 AM)

Let me add yet another question, a variation on the previous one. How does the AI deal with depth charts when I press "autofill"? It sometimes appears to make "interesting" selections that are, to me at least, completely counter-intuitive. For example it often selects a QB with a much lower PSA than another with no apparent compensatory rating on some other skill. Since I play coach only for one team and play completely solitaire I would like to be able to rely on the AI do its very best by the other teams in the conferences (three with eight teams each). Going through all of the other teams depth charts to achieve some kind of "fairness" is daunting although I do enjoy such management issues (something to do during the off season). Given the popularity of arcade and/or head-to-head competition I can understand why the wishes of the solitaire player might have to take second place. I have yet to explore all the possibilities of JDHalftrack's utility in the this regard. Nonetheless, applying various distribution parameters to the teams means much less if the AI's current approach to depth charting is "off".



jdhalfrack -> RE: Player's weights (3/20/2008 4:49:51 AM)

quote:

I have yet to explore all the possibilities of JDHalftrack's utility in the this regard.

All I can say as far as my utility is concerned is that manual/auto depth chart setting is in the works for my editor. I made an overall player rating with the last version of the editor with the intent of allowing users in the future to autoset depth charts on all teams based on a skill or the overall rating. Or, just to manually set the depth charts.

But, this won't be available for a while. [:(]

JD




DreamTeams -> RE: Player's weights (3/20/2008 10:22:33 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jdhalfrack

All I can say as far as my utility is concerned is that manual/auto depth chart setting is in the works for my editor. I made an overall player rating with the last version of the editor with the intent of allowing users in the future to autoset depth charts on all teams based on a skill or the overall rating. Or, just to manually set the depth charts.

But, this won't be available for a while. [:(]

JD




This would be absolutely fantastic.



therhino -> RE: Player's weights (3/20/2008 8:22:38 PM)

JD,
Will this be compatible with Vista? It sounds great.
therhino



rcleslie -> RE: Player's weights (3/22/2008 10:36:13 PM)

jd,
That does sound great! You have truly captured the idea of my dream. I will try to sit back and practice patience while waiting for your next version.
rc



hack153 -> RE: Player's weights (3/22/2008 11:19:03 PM)

is there a chance you can make adjustments so individuals can adjust how the overall ratings are made?

thanks for the great product!



jdhalfrack -> RE: Player's weights (3/24/2008 3:33:55 AM)


quote:

is there a chance you can make adjustments so individuals can adjust how the overall ratings are made?

Ultimately, yes. That is my goal.

JD



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.851563