 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Football Beta Testing » Football Beta Test Discussion » Statistics comparison
Admin
- Passing attempts: Half of the beta teams attempted more passes than the highest number of attempts in the NFL last season. Oddly enough, a team that I thought I had set up for a heavy pass attack, the Airstrike, was fourth from the bottom.
- Likewise, six of the 16 teams had more rushing attempts than any NFL team (including the aforementioned Airstrike).
- Overall, we had 7161 rush attempts and 9990 pass attempts. That's 17,151 offensive plays in 128 games, or 133 offensive plays per game. The NFL had 13920 rush attempts and 17269 pass attempts for 31189 offensive plays in 256 games, or 121 plays per game. So although the most common time related complaint is that plays take too long, they are actually not taking long enough. If each play lasted 2 to 3 seconds longer, we'd probably be closer to reality.
- In the NFL, passes represent 55% of all plays. In beta, we had 58% passing plays. With the Abusers running all passes, that means we are pretty close to reality in the pass to run ratio.
- Average passing yards per game in the NFL: 221.5. Average in beta: 229.2. Closer than I expected.
- Average rushing yards per game in the NFL: 114.5. Average in beta: 115.5. Way closer than I expected. Since the rushing changes were made mid-season, that means we are probably too high now.
So team performances are right on the money yards-wise, but individual players way outperform their NFL counterparts. The obvious answer is that the ball isn't getting spread around enough. Likely reasons:
- Less injuries. Injuries are dialed down compared to reality. If injuries were run at a realistic level to the NFL, my feeling is people would just howl. Right now there are 12 injured players; in real life at least 10% of all NFL players are injured at any given week (From http://judiciary.house.gov/issues/issues_nfl.html) so we should have around 80 or more players injured at any given time to be realistic! 27% of those injuries would be for 10 days or more. Soi maybe we need to ramp up the injuries and get closer to reality?
- Not enough fatigue: Everyone hates fatigue as it is, but the truth is that players probably don't sub out enough.
- Fatigue not carrying over: Right now fatigue doesn't carry over at all. but perhaps the following week's Conditioning should be affected when players overplay?
--Chris
Statistics comparison
March 27, 2011 at 10:52PM View BBCode
Looking at stats between the just completed season and real life, here are some notes:- Passing attempts: Half of the beta teams attempted more passes than the highest number of attempts in the NFL last season. Oddly enough, a team that I thought I had set up for a heavy pass attack, the Airstrike, was fourth from the bottom.
- Likewise, six of the 16 teams had more rushing attempts than any NFL team (including the aforementioned Airstrike).
- Overall, we had 7161 rush attempts and 9990 pass attempts. That's 17,151 offensive plays in 128 games, or 133 offensive plays per game. The NFL had 13920 rush attempts and 17269 pass attempts for 31189 offensive plays in 256 games, or 121 plays per game. So although the most common time related complaint is that plays take too long, they are actually not taking long enough. If each play lasted 2 to 3 seconds longer, we'd probably be closer to reality.
- In the NFL, passes represent 55% of all plays. In beta, we had 58% passing plays. With the Abusers running all passes, that means we are pretty close to reality in the pass to run ratio.
- Average passing yards per game in the NFL: 221.5. Average in beta: 229.2. Closer than I expected.
- Average rushing yards per game in the NFL: 114.5. Average in beta: 115.5. Way closer than I expected. Since the rushing changes were made mid-season, that means we are probably too high now.
So team performances are right on the money yards-wise, but individual players way outperform their NFL counterparts. The obvious answer is that the ball isn't getting spread around enough. Likely reasons:
- Less injuries. Injuries are dialed down compared to reality. If injuries were run at a realistic level to the NFL, my feeling is people would just howl. Right now there are 12 injured players; in real life at least 10% of all NFL players are injured at any given week (From http://judiciary.house.gov/issues/issues_nfl.html) so we should have around 80 or more players injured at any given time to be realistic! 27% of those injuries would be for 10 days or more. Soi maybe we need to ramp up the injuries and get closer to reality?
- Not enough fatigue: Everyone hates fatigue as it is, but the truth is that players probably don't sub out enough.
- Fatigue not carrying over: Right now fatigue doesn't carry over at all. but perhaps the following week's Conditioning should be affected when players overplay?
--Chris
Fulla
IMO there are far too many D stamina guys. The NFL has their share of big fat guys too, I just think that we could shrink the minimum/maximum stamina window.
for example my 6 WRs stamina; C, D+, C+, B+, C-, B+
some of these guys can't complete a drive
[Edited on 3-27-2011 by Fulla]
[Edited on 3-27-2011 by Fulla]
March 27, 2011 at 11:15PM View BBCode
Try adjusting player stamina so there are very few A- or better stamina guys. That will get more subs into the game.IMO there are far too many D stamina guys. The NFL has their share of big fat guys too, I just think that we could shrink the minimum/maximum stamina window.
for example my 6 WRs stamina; C, D+, C+, B+, C-, B+
some of these guys can't complete a drive
[Edited on 3-27-2011 by Fulla]
[Edited on 3-27-2011 by Fulla]
tworoosters
The Beta league had 5 rushers with over 416 carries last year, that's the NFL record for a single season, and 6 players with over 400 carries - the NFL has had only 5 in it's entire history.
The cumulative affect of carrying the ball more than 25 times a game in the NFL are guys like Larry Johnson and Jamaal Anderson whose careers are over at age 28 .
With receivers the NFL in it's history has had one player catch more than 123 balls in a year, the beta SIM had 8 last season alone and no NFL receiver has ever topped the 2,000 yard mark but 3 beta SIM receivers did last year. Despite all the catches and yards however the top SIM TD receiver had 12, a total bettered 80 times in NFL history .
I think that not only does fatigue have to be increased and carried over but injuries, and performance, must be dialled up much higher when players fatigue increases.
March 27, 2011 at 11:15PM View BBCode
I agree on the injury/fatigue issue particularly with RBs and WRs.The Beta league had 5 rushers with over 416 carries last year, that's the NFL record for a single season, and 6 players with over 400 carries - the NFL has had only 5 in it's entire history.
The cumulative affect of carrying the ball more than 25 times a game in the NFL are guys like Larry Johnson and Jamaal Anderson whose careers are over at age 28 .
With receivers the NFL in it's history has had one player catch more than 123 balls in a year, the beta SIM had 8 last season alone and no NFL receiver has ever topped the 2,000 yard mark but 3 beta SIM receivers did last year. Despite all the catches and yards however the top SIM TD receiver had 12, a total bettered 80 times in NFL history .
I think that not only does fatigue have to be increased and carried over but injuries, and performance, must be dialled up much higher when players fatigue increases.
redcped
There even should be some thought on season-to-season carryover. A RB who carries the ball 400 times for 2-3 seasons should probably have a short career span because he's gonna take an awful lot of hits.
I think more often than not in the NFL, the starting offensive line plays the whole game. You see very few substitutions there. I actually think we are seeing these guys over-subbed. Part of the problem is that there's currently no way to get the starters out of there on special teams, so they rack up extra time on kickoffs and punts when they should be resting.
March 27, 2011 at 11:30PM View BBCode
I agree that cumulative wear and tear on the RB and WR should go up a notch. You should see those guys taking more breathers and accumulating fewer stats.There even should be some thought on season-to-season carryover. A RB who carries the ball 400 times for 2-3 seasons should probably have a short career span because he's gonna take an awful lot of hits.
I think more often than not in the NFL, the starting offensive line plays the whole game. You see very few substitutions there. I actually think we are seeing these guys over-subbed. Part of the problem is that there's currently no way to get the starters out of there on special teams, so they rack up extra time on kickoffs and punts when they should be resting.
Admin
Right now, when a player is at 50% energy, his stats take a 20% hit across the board, so a player with, say, 85 throw accuracy plays like he has a 68 throw accuracy. 50% energy is the default sub-out level.
As far as injuries go, the injury rate is relatively accurate, but the injury generator makes a lot of these into in-game injuries rather than loss0time injuries, and even among the loss-time injuries there are a lot of extra short injuries that have artificially been added. The base set of injuries was based on a couple of detailed studies of football injuries, but they were pretty harsh.
Also, the injury system is designed to be able to do lasting damage to players, i.e. let's say you have an agility of 85. You get a knee derangement or an ACL tear and you are out for a month, when you come back your agility is only 40. It slowly builds up until it gets back to 77 and then stops. So you have the temporary effect of the injury being at 40 and the permanent effect of it going from 85 to 77. Your overall health rating would drop with each injury as well, and if your health reaches 0 you retire for health reasons. This is why injuries are specific as to what part of the body is injured; those descriptions are meant to correspond to the losses in abilities. But I haven't actuall implemented the ability losses yet; it needs to be done before multiseason though.
--Chris
March 27, 2011 at 11:37PM View BBCode
Starting stamina is position-dependent. For example, the OL starts at 25-65. RB's built on the fullback template are 45-85, while RB's built on the HB template range all the way from 0 to 100. The numbers are generated as flattened bell curves; I can easily increase the height of the curve to move fatigue more toward the middle though. But if there are too many D's now, this will increase overall stamina and worsen the problem.Right now, when a player is at 50% energy, his stats take a 20% hit across the board, so a player with, say, 85 throw accuracy plays like he has a 68 throw accuracy. 50% energy is the default sub-out level.
As far as injuries go, the injury rate is relatively accurate, but the injury generator makes a lot of these into in-game injuries rather than loss0time injuries, and even among the loss-time injuries there are a lot of extra short injuries that have artificially been added. The base set of injuries was based on a couple of detailed studies of football injuries, but they were pretty harsh.
Also, the injury system is designed to be able to do lasting damage to players, i.e. let's say you have an agility of 85. You get a knee derangement or an ACL tear and you are out for a month, when you come back your agility is only 40. It slowly builds up until it gets back to 77 and then stops. So you have the temporary effect of the injury being at 40 and the permanent effect of it going from 85 to 77. Your overall health rating would drop with each injury as well, and if your health reaches 0 you retire for health reasons. This is why injuries are specific as to what part of the body is injured; those descriptions are meant to correspond to the losses in abilities. But I haven't actuall implemented the ability losses yet; it needs to be done before multiseason though.
--Chris
tworoosters
I'd say performance across the board should decline by 10% at 80% stamina and continue to by 1% for each 1% stamina declines so at 65% stamina a player is only at 75% efficiency and by the time he's at 50% he's at only 60% efficiency.
Then add in an increased injury component for players at less than 60% stamina and you'll see the subs in .
[Edited on 3-27-2011 by tworoosters]
March 27, 2011 at 11:46PM View BBCode
I think performance needs to start taking a hit earlier, say 80% and get extreme by 50%.I'd say performance across the board should decline by 10% at 80% stamina and continue to by 1% for each 1% stamina declines so at 65% stamina a player is only at 75% efficiency and by the time he's at 50% he's at only 60% efficiency.
Then add in an increased injury component for players at less than 60% stamina and you'll see the subs in .
[Edited on 3-27-2011 by tworoosters]
Hamilton2
March 28, 2011 at 12:11AM View BBCode
The fatigue complaints and "too many substitution" complaints that I have seen are all related to QB's. I think that we could definitely dial up the subs at RB and WR without too much flak. I also think that fatigue should carry over week to week. A guy with 35+ carries in a game needs to have a max conditioning level of 10% lower than the previous week, even if he is training at conditioning. After a week or two of that kind of abuse, RB's wouldn't be able to carry that often with any amount of success.
Admin
90%: 4% hit
80%: 8% hit
70%: 12% hit
60%: 16% hit
50%: 20% hit
A 10% hit at 10% would make it really simple: a 5% drop in performance for every 10% drop in energy, so at 50% you are taking a 25% performance drop, wich is pretty severe. I'll set us to that in Beta.
--Chris
March 28, 2011 at 12:28AM View BBCode
Right now the performance hits are linear. At the default 95%, the player is already taking a 2% hit. After that:90%: 4% hit
80%: 8% hit
70%: 12% hit
60%: 16% hit
50%: 20% hit
A 10% hit at 10% would make it really simple: a 5% drop in performance for every 10% drop in energy, so at 50% you are taking a 25% performance drop, wich is pretty severe. I'll set us to that in Beta.
--Chris
tworoosters
Honestly I don't think that's enough but let's see where it leads us.
March 28, 2011 at 12:32AM View BBCode
Originally posted by Admin
A 10% hit at 10% would make it really simple: a 5% drop in performance for every 10% drop in energy, so at 50% you are taking a 25% performance drop, wich is pretty severe. I'll set us to that in Beta.
--Chris
Honestly I don't think that's enough but let's see where it leads us.
Fulla
I am currently draft ranking a league and just in the Linebacker pool there are 18 A+ stamina guys plus another 21 at A stamina & 23 with A- stamina. Thats just the LBs! At least 62 LBs will play most of the season barring injury.
March 28, 2011 at 01:09AM View BBCode
Could you fix the player pool generator so that it doesn't create any A+ stamina guys.I am currently draft ranking a league and just in the Linebacker pool there are 18 A+ stamina guys plus another 21 at A stamina & 23 with A- stamina. Thats just the LBs! At least 62 LBs will play most of the season barring injury.
Admin
--CHrris
March 28, 2011 at 04:30AM View BBCode
They may be over-improving stamina, I'll check it out... thanks!--CHrris
redcped
Sounds to me like we have some important testing to do with multiseason leagues between the scouting and the injuries and seeing if players are developing at the ideal rate.
I've had some players improve quite significantly just in one season, and I wonder how things will look a few seasons done the road.
March 28, 2011 at 04:58AM View BBCode
Originally posted by Admin
Also, the injury system is designed to be able to do lasting damage to players, i.e. let's say you have an agility of 85. You get a knee derangement or an ACL tear and you are out for a month, when you come back your agility is only 40. It slowly builds up until it gets back to 77 and then stops. So you have the temporary effect of the injury being at 40 and the permanent effect of it going from 85 to 77. Your overall health rating would drop with each injury as well, and if your health reaches 0 you retire for health reasons. This is why injuries are specific as to what part of the body is injured; those descriptions are meant to correspond to the losses in abilities. But I haven't actuall implemented the ability losses yet; it needs to be done before multiseason though.
--Chris
Sounds to me like we have some important testing to do with multiseason leagues between the scouting and the injuries and seeing if players are developing at the ideal rate.
I've had some players improve quite significantly just in one season, and I wonder how things will look a few seasons done the road.
KLKRTR
Also, I think if we had more passes to the TEs as well as more targets to the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th receivers.
Also, as far as injuries, I think more injuries to non-glamour players is needed.
The extra time per play should probably average about a second more, but I also wonder if there's a way to install hurry-up? (That would mean less time, but more mistakes and more fatigue--for both offense and defense).
March 28, 2011 at 05:53AM View BBCode
We need to have fatigue factor in from game to game, like Hamilton said.Also, I think if we had more passes to the TEs as well as more targets to the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th receivers.
Also, as far as injuries, I think more injuries to non-glamour players is needed.
The extra time per play should probably average about a second more, but I also wonder if there's a way to install hurry-up? (That would mean less time, but more mistakes and more fatigue--for both offense and defense).
Admin
There is a hurry up, but it has no ill effects (because it's not something you can control, it's all automated logic).
Injury distribution is:
9.9% Offensive Line
17.5% QB
19.6% RB
14.4% WR
11.3% DL
15.5% LB
11.7% DB
This is based on a study of football injuries I located a while back.
(Positions not on this list like kickers I've assigned 10%.)
Now these are the base values, but they are modified by health and aggressiveness and the play itself, i.e. sacks get a higher injury chance to both the sacker and sackee. Injuries are also assigned by role and play in some cases, i.e a placekicker is going to go down with a foot or leg injury, not a broken arm; holders are prone to hand and finger related injuries, etc.
--Chris
March 28, 2011 at 06:13AM View BBCode
Originally posted by KLKRTR
We need to have fatigue factor in from game to game, like Hamilton said.
Also, I think if we had more passes to the TEs as well as more targets to the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th receivers.
Also, as far as injuries, I think more injuries to non-glamour players is needed.
The extra time per play should probably average about a second more, but I also wonder if there's a way to install hurry-up? (That would mean less time, but more mistakes and more fatigue--for both offense and defense).
There is a hurry up, but it has no ill effects (because it's not something you can control, it's all automated logic).
Injury distribution is:
9.9% Offensive Line
17.5% QB
19.6% RB
14.4% WR
11.3% DL
15.5% LB
11.7% DB
This is based on a study of football injuries I located a while back.
(Positions not on this list like kickers I've assigned 10%.)
Now these are the base values, but they are modified by health and aggressiveness and the play itself, i.e. sacks get a higher injury chance to both the sacker and sackee. Injuries are also assigned by role and play in some cases, i.e a placekicker is going to go down with a foot or leg injury, not a broken arm; holders are prone to hand and finger related injuries, etc.
--Chris
Admin
- Increased the effect of fatigue to where a 50% fatigued player takes a 30% performance hit instead of 20%
- Removed a bit of fatigue on the offensive line
- Adjusted the fatigue at player creation to tend more toward the middle grades
- Added 2 to 3 seconds to all scrimmage plays when not in hurry-up mode
- Removed about 60% of the "extra" minor injuries that keep the overall injury lengths artificially low (I haven't changed the injury rate though)
- Added .2 yards to how far back the QB goes into the pocket; this will add up over the course of a season to bring the passing average down to match reality
Other changes like carrying over fatigue are going to take a bit longer.
--Chris
March 28, 2011 at 06:45AM View BBCode
Okay, based on these discussions, I've made the following changes:- Increased the effect of fatigue to where a 50% fatigued player takes a 30% performance hit instead of 20%
- Removed a bit of fatigue on the offensive line
- Adjusted the fatigue at player creation to tend more toward the middle grades
- Added 2 to 3 seconds to all scrimmage plays when not in hurry-up mode
- Removed about 60% of the "extra" minor injuries that keep the overall injury lengths artificially low (I haven't changed the injury rate though)
- Added .2 yards to how far back the QB goes into the pocket; this will add up over the course of a season to bring the passing average down to match reality
Other changes like carrying over fatigue are going to take a bit longer.
--Chris
Admin
Players have fewer "development" years and decline earlier than in baseball.
Right now, all players are created as college freshment and then go through the improvement routines a number of times to get to their initial creation age; the number of improves each year in initial creation is intended to simulate actual play, with the best players getting the most improves, etc. So a 30 year old player in multiseason who started in college shouldn't look much different from a 30 year old player in the initial draft.
Note that players with very low skills can get a big hop, as improves for very low rated players can be on the order of 2 full points per improve (it's a lot easier to go from bad to average than from average to awesome). Also note that speed improves at about half the rate of all other skills and declines sooner, so RB's are pretty much through by the time they hit 30. (Conversely, throwing accuracy can continue to improve into the 30's so QB's can have longer careers.)
--Chris
March 28, 2011 at 06:51AM View BBCode
Originally posted by redcped
Sounds to me like we have some important testing to do with multiseason leagues between the scouting and the injuries and seeing if players are developing at the ideal rate.
I've had some players improve quite significantly just in one season, and I wonder how things will look a few seasons done the road.
Players have fewer "development" years and decline earlier than in baseball.
Right now, all players are created as college freshment and then go through the improvement routines a number of times to get to their initial creation age; the number of improves each year in initial creation is intended to simulate actual play, with the best players getting the most improves, etc. So a 30 year old player in multiseason who started in college shouldn't look much different from a 30 year old player in the initial draft.
Note that players with very low skills can get a big hop, as improves for very low rated players can be on the order of 2 full points per improve (it's a lot easier to go from bad to average than from average to awesome). Also note that speed improves at about half the rate of all other skills and declines sooner, so RB's are pretty much through by the time they hit 30. (Conversely, throwing accuracy can continue to improve into the 30's so QB's can have longer careers.)
--Chris
Fulla
RB- avg 4.6 yds per carry
WR- avg 3.6 YACA
Def- 13 total sacks
March 28, 2011 at 05:16PM View BBCode
Post season stats after 4 games. Mid season changes will give inaccurate analysis of reg season.RB- avg 4.6 yds per carry
WR- avg 3.6 YACA
Def- 13 total sacks
Pages: 1