GAMEPLAY POSSIBLY FIXED.....CHECK OUT THE COACH SLIDERS AND TENDENCIES.

[RAZRr1275]

And also after looking at the spreadsheet my first impression is that this isn't going to work. It just looks crazy. I personally think that guys ratings are too low and that the tendencies are a bit off too but it also looks to have potential as it's a way that no one has thought before. I'm really interested to try this.

[Neon1]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

Neon what did you base your potential ratings on. Formula wise....

Thats why i like you...you look and notice the little stuff that others dont look at.


Now for my take on the potential rating...

First you have to consider all this rating does..
- Its HEAVLY weighted (along with overall rating) into the A.I. Trade Value.

- It also effects the severity of thier net worth (contract $$$ demands) on the open free agent market.

-It effects the difficulty level of your players skills getting better.

-Very possibly effects the players star power with fans and in the league (ticket sales/trade value/Free Agent Market Value)



My current formula:
=((TFP/10)+(TFP+Next Level+50)+(29-Age at Start)-(Personality))*0.905

What that ish means:
This stuff means nothing reading it but what that mess up there means, is this. The overall potential rating is best used as a player value around the league. The imposrtance of Which is even more important with my rosters because the players overall isnt as widespread, so the (potentential+overall)/2) is basically like a hidden market value rating.

TFP is a value for the players Total Statistical Production. Not per48 but ACTUAL per game production. Think of it as Fantasy points.

Next Level: this is one of the times where a correction factor comes into play. Its a scale for bonus points.

+12: The top 5 players in the game. AKA the truley untouchable players. The only way your getting them is by throwing some serious pieces in place. "The Franchise" LBJ,D12,PAUL,KOBE,KG and TD all have this bonus added in.

+8: Top 3 Draft Pick. This is the you havent proved a thing but we "THINK" you can be special bonus. Everybody picked here has this weighted in. Yes even Darko.

+6: True All Stars. Perenial All Star guys. Stars not True Superstars or Franchise guys. Roy etc.

+4: borderline all stars and falling stars. Shard Lewis, Iggy, etc.

+2: You used to be somebody and high valueud role players: Marbs, Francis, Toine, Bowen, Battier, etc.

+0: Who cares? players. Minimum contracts etc. Super old guys.


AGE AT START: Just what it says. Its a bonus/minus weighted scale depending on your age to start the year. For example If your 19..you get +10, If your 39 its...If your 50? That mean YOU Mr. Mutombo and Mr. Oden.
-10.

PERSONALITY: Cancer guys or High Maitenence cats. Lots of work to keep their morale up. To get this rating career technical fouls divided by the number of games played. Seems like on court and off court dont apply to each other but id say of the 200 players or so rated with this its dead *** on the money. Logically it gives you a glipse into who they really are. If you naturally complain (to the point of crossing the line, and getting a tech) its mostly the same anytime things dont go the way youd like, you lose composure.

Laid Back: calculate out to either a .000-.001.
Neutral: .002
Expressive: .003
Unpredictable: .004

Then you have a small few guys that rate as high as 7-9.
Toine: 8
KMart: 8
Tinsley: 7
SJax: 7
Odom: 7
G.Wallace: 7
Zo: 7
Kobe: 6
Melo: 6
Cassell: 5
Etc...Even guys you wouldnt think about like Desmond Mason rate as Unpredictable...Then think about why does he get moved so much...


Anyway as you can see a ton of factors go into the formulas. Most formulas are created this same way with variables.

[Neon1]

Quote: Originally Posted by RAZRr1275

And also after looking at the spreadsheet my first impression is that this isn't going to work. It just looks crazy. I personally think that guys ratings are too low and that the tendencies are a bit off too but it also looks to have potential as it's a way that no one has thought before. I'm really interested to try this.

Its because of the brain washing bro...Everybody really needs to stop the mentality of thinking to get more of something you just jack it up to the extreme.

But i dont know what your doubting at this point when all these people are playing it off those tendencies and ratings and getting MORE statistcal production. I mean if this simmed stats and actual a.i. gameplay arent proof enough what does it take?

[Bearsfan1]

Neon, are you a mathematical engineer? This is some crazy good stuff that you come up with

[ffaacc03]

Quote: Originally Posted by Neon1

Thats the $1,000,000 question. No i havent touched any playbooks yet...unless Simballer22/flacco had already edited them before i used his Dec 24th roster to start my work over (since he had edited all the accesories already). Did we ever figure out if the A.I. actually uses those plays assigned or not?

Nope, at least I didnt ... and ... nope, it doesnt ... it is an option only functional on HUM vs HUM ... and even then, you would have to mannually select the plays !

[RAZRr1275]

Quote: Originally Posted by Neon1

Its because of the brain washing bro...Everybody really needs to stop the mentality of thinking to get more of something you just jack it up to the extreme. But i dont know what your doubting at this point when all these people are playing it off those tendencies and ratings and getting MORE statistcal production. I mean if this simmed stats and actual a.i. gameplay arent proof enough what does it take?

I'm just a little skeptical
1. Because I always am when it comes with these theories.
2. Because most that have been talked about here don't work and they had plenty of supporters.
3. I just like to try things myself.
4. It's not what I'm used to


Put all these together and you get a doubter until they test

[balage76]

Quote: Originally Posted by Neon1

Thats the $1,000,000 question. No i havent touched any playbooks yet...unless Simballer22/flacco had already edited them before i used his Dec 24th roster to start my work over (since he had edited all the accesories already). Did we ever figure out if the A.I. actually uses those plays assigned or not?

#1

Hmmm !

I'll be very happy, if we can find some way to change CPU's playbooks. Assigned the best plays, and it 'll be better, than CPU 'll usemany play as he can.

BTW is it a method to change this ? Or what Simballer22 did ?
----------------


#2

I played a game: Heat vs. Hornets.

In the first half I was the Heat. 1st quarter:

I set Hornets playbook to HORNETS.

They shot from mid, shot many threes. Just these 3s arn't unrealistic, but I think my defense was the real problem, but I think it needs to do something with this "3point-fest" by the CPU.

1st Q: Hornets (CPU)
14/23 FG
5/9 3pt
12 ast (Paul 10 ast !!! )
12 reb
12 PiP

1st Q: Heat (User)
10/24 FG
7 ast
8 reb
16PiP


2nd quarter:
Hornets-->
11/22 FG
3/8 3pt
7 ast (Paul just 1)
9 reb
2 stl
14 PiP

Heat (user) -->
11/20
7 ast
10 reb
14 PiP


In the 2nd hald I switch to Hornets, because I'd like to see how play the Heat.

In the coaching profile, their playbook was MIAMI.
Unfortunately they shot many from the paint, just 2 from midrange. And many 3s.

In the last quarter I changed their Playbook to STANDARD. It was a little bit better, but not significantly.


Wade playing like Wade, scores 28 pts, from 20+ attempt, so it was O.K, and his style was "Wadeish"


Things I saw during the game:

- Rebounds are absolutley O.K. I really love, that I 'm able to grab the defensive rebounds. Because before, with another rosters and sliders, it was a little bit difficult. CPU has so many Off reb, and I haven't. With your ratings rebounding is like in real life.

- Blocks: On thing I set in the global sliders: Blocking. Like I said before, there were too many blocks. I set blocking slider (Both user and CPU) to 25, and it was O.K. Like in real life

Steal attempt was O.K, It was many reaching fouls. Paul "on ball steal" is 98, therefore he always try to steal the ball, and therefore he got 3 reaching fouls. I lower the NBA RULES "reaching foul sliders" to 60 and it was O.K. (I think default 50 is so low.)

I really like the "some open shots missing" thing.
-----------

In the game I played, there were so many assists. 28 or more, I don't remember. BUT: there are many points, 110, so I think it's not a big problem. (But in the first half, Paul has 11 ast !!! )

I think the lot of assists are because of RUN PLAYS are on 53 (both Hornets and Heat.)
Before Neon's ratings I realize, that Run plays effects the assists in the game. When Run Plays set to 50 or more, there are way too many assist. In real life there are about 20-25, or maximum 30 ast.

Set Run play to under 50 is better. I think.


Heat shots too much from the paint AGAIN. Today I played 2 games, and Heat played frequent inside game. Haslem, Beasley scores too much frm the paint.


Last thing: FOULS.

I think it needs to make better. Maybe with the contest shot ratings or commit fouls. I don't know.

AND: I think, some thing could be set by the global sliders. Or not ?

As I mentioned, I set the blocking and it was O.K. I think close, mid, 3pt, etc sliders don't have to change, but some other things makes better I think. (Fouls, etc)

Tomorrow, I'm going to test some thing further.

Peace

[Neon1]

Quote: Originally Posted by Bearsfan1

Neon, are you a mathematical engineer? This is some crazy good stuff that you come up with

Not even close. Matter of fact i never took anything higher than algebra 1 in high school, And get D's and "Partials".

I used to get too frustrated. The teachers i had in highschool would tell me..."OK..How did you get this answer correct?..because you didnt solve it the way you told you too...this way doesnt make sense, so you get a partial." "I was always like...how could i have solved it "wrong" if the answer is right?

Morons.

Until i got to college, where they appreciate free thinking instead of only being a slave to what they were told is the right/only way.

So my highschool teachers might tell you im dumb *** a brick, College teacher might tell you im borderline genius.

I learn/see "differently" than the norm is what the college said, i cant follow/retain patterns on how to get an answer, but if you give me an answer im able to figure out how to get to it. Like my brain learns in reverse so to speak.

[RAZRr1275]

Quote: Originally Posted by Neon1

Not even close. Matter of fact i never took anything higher than algebra 1 in high school, And get D's and "Partials". I used to get too frustrated. The teachers i had in highschool would tell me..."OK..How did you get this answer correct?..because you didnt solve it the way you told you too...this way doesnt make sense, so you get a partial." "I was always like...how could i have solved it "wrong" if the answer is right? Morons. Until i got to college, where they appreciate free thinking instead of only being a slave to what they were told is the right/only way. So my highschool teachers might tell you im dumb *** a brick, College teacher might tell you im borderline genius. I learn/see "differently" than the norm is what the college said, i cant follow/retain patterns on how to get an answer, but if you give me an answer im able to figure out how to get to it. Like my brain learns in reverse so to speak.

I'm the same way. I don't like doing things the conventianal way math ways and am always attempting to find other, shorter ways. I also always got math better when applied to sports but when it was discussed in class I lost track occaisionally.

[ffaacc03]

Quote: Originally Posted by Neon1

Its because of the brain washing bro...Everybody really needs to stop the mentality of thinking to get more of something you just jack it up to the extreme. But i dont know what your doubting at this point when all these people are playing it off those tendencies and ratings and getting MORE statistcal production. I mean if this simmed stats and actual a.i. gameplay arent proof enough what does it take?

I too was shock at first ... because of the narrow gap ratings ... but then again, this is addressed by the potential rating ... and if it plays and sims good ... it is perfect for me !

On the other hand, Neon, 2 question comes to my mind:

1. Could it be possible that this programm tends to favor the more all around players and not neccesarilly the better ones ? ... I mean ... Would Magic have a better total rating than MJ, because he could rebound and pass the ball better while being a good offensive and defensive player ... or Wade more than MJ ...

2. Does it alters your programm results if we switch the positions of the players ?