no content
AdBlocker active?
It seems you are using software to block advertisements. You could help us if you could switch it off when visiting redzoneaction.org.
The reason is very simple: Advertisements help us running the site, to offer you the game in a good quality for free. So if you like the game, please support us by purchasing a Supporter Account or disabling the AdBlocker on this site.
Thank you very much!
| Main / Discussions / New engine - Skills undervalued? Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 11 12 13 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2018-05-22 15:33:56 (ID: 100128930) Report Abuse |
|
We have different views of the ratings I think.
An 80+ rated team is a top 20 All-Time team in the history of RZA in terms of talent. A 60% team means a below average team. To me, if you translate that to real life it would be a SuperBowl winning team playing against an average College Football team and I'm sorry but if that happened even if the SB winning team played all game from the same formation calling the same play it would not only win but dominate. Coaches and strategies certainly matter but at the end of the day the game is played on the field by the players and if one side is stronger, faster, more agile, more intelligent and more skilled even if the coach calls shitty plays that side should win. It's not about my team winning or losing to be honest, my team started to be shit last season so that was before the new engine, this is about skills not mattering enough imo. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2018-05-22 15:57:39 (ID: 100128932) Edits found: 1 Report Abuse | |
|
One of the issues I see and have seen for most my time here is the defensive formations aren't quite reflective of what they really are designed for.
5-3-3 is a run stop and at best a short screen pass but you see it play good pass D ALOT. I really notice it vs SG formations (When that D formation should mostly only get burned) 4-4-3 is another run defense with short pass defensive capabilities. 4-3-4 is a base heavy vs run formation and solid vs 2 WR sets. 3-4-4 is a base heavy vs short/medium pass D and outside run contain. 3-3-5 is a strong pass D susceptible (weak) vs run but still able to limit it. Dime and 3-1-7 covered passing lanes and very weak run stop capabilities that normally give up big runs. Very vulnerable to draws. But what we see a lot of here is backwards. This is of course only my interpretation of things. Last edited on 2018-05-22 15:58:38 by punch drunk |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Superpippo
|
posted: 2018-05-22 16:08:15 (ID: 100128933) Report Abuse |
|
I disagree.
You beat a 60% team by a 40+ margin even though you had some bad luck. That seems about right. And you lost against a 67% rated team that outcoached you. All game long. That seems about right too. To me its more like the 49ers hiring a good coach, getting a few good players or just having a good day and beating the Giants, with all time top 20 qb eli manning, because they started getting lazy. (That never happens right?) I sincerely hope all those teams like Xenos that rank so far beneath you don't get any better in the future, or god forbid you have a slight setback. Because with your current mentality it would mean you wouldn't win a game against them at all and then you'd have no excuse. 
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2018-05-22 16:21:47 (ID: 100128934) Report Abuse |
|
When you look at the top 100 team ratings of RZA I'm 11th All time.
The 100th team is rated ~75 I'm sorry but I don't think that the 11th best team in the world would lose to a team far outside of the top 100 in American Football even with a shitty coach. This is not soccer, individual match-ups are a big part of the game. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
oakbark
|
posted: 2018-05-22 16:27:01 (ID: 100128935) Report Abuse |
|
Meitheisman wrote:
We have different views of the ratings I think. An 80+ rated team is a top 20 All-Time team in the history of RZA in terms of talent. A 60% team means a below average team. To me, if you translate that to real life it would be a SuperBowl winning team playing against an average College Football team and I'm sorry but if that happened even if the SB winning team played all game from the same formation calling the same play it would not only win but dominate. Coaches and strategies certainly matter but at the end of the day the game is played on the field by the players and if one side is stronger, faster, more agile, more intelligent and more skilled even if the coach calls shitty plays that side should win. It's not about my team winning or losing to be honest, my team started to be shit last season so that was before the new engine, this is about skills not mattering enough imo. I am not sure I quite share your views on relative strengths of teams. I think rather than comparing teams in a closed system such as the NFL which doesn't have different tiers of rofessional play but rather a sport such as Soccerball, Which has a premier league, championship, div1 etc. here shocks do happen albeit rarely. The NFL/College analogy i struggle with here more because of the way this game is structured. I tend to view it as follows in the closest analogy I can find Elite - Champions League 1.1 - NATIONAL premier league's 2.x - NATIONAL division ones. That being said I do think that a 80 rated team with a solid game plan should beat a 60 rated team pretty much without fail. I do think that an 80 rated team with a shocking game plan should be in a position where a slick well thought out gameplanned 60 rated team could beat them. I guess largely we have different views here on the levels in game which with hundreds of users will happen . I am not saying that what has happened thus far this season equates to this. I would need to see a lot more games to be able to form an opinion here. Are the results reported here replicated as the norm or are they aberrations? How sure are we that is entirely down to engine and not old gameplanning ideas not yet optimised for the changes? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2018-05-22 16:40:24 (ID: 100128936) Report Abuse |
|
Can we agree that there's a point where coaching doesn't even matter anymore and the players being faster, stronger, more intelligent, more agile and more skilled is enough to win in real life, period?
I mean, if you have 5 OL who are stronger, faster, more agile, more skilled and more intelligent than the DL it doesn't matter what the coach says, the DL will get dominated play after play and that will create time for the QB or room for the runners. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
oakbark
|
posted: 2018-05-22 16:41:52 (ID: 100128937) Report Abuse |
|
punch drunk wrote:
One of the issues I see and have seen for most my time here is the defensive formations aren't quite reflective of what they really are designed for. 5-3-3 is a run stop and at best a short screen pass but you see it play good pass D ALOT. I really notice it vs SG formations (When that D formation should mostly only get burned) 4-4-3 is another run defense with short pass defensive capabilities. 4-3-4 is a base heavy vs run formation and solid vs 2 WR sets. 3-4-4 is a base heavy vs short/medium pass D and outside run contain. 3-3-5 is a strong pass D susceptible (weak) vs run but still able to limit it. Dime and 3-1-7 covered passing lanes and very weak run stop capabilities that normally give up big runs. Very vulnerable to draws. But what we see a lot of here is backwards. This is of course only my interpretation of things. I don't disagree with this and the general weaknesses/strengths of differing defences currently. I think we struggle with replicating inside DL pressure which weakens the 4 man front D as it takes a way a big part of the system. I think we have an issue whereby a LB can cover inside WR as well as a CB. I think the play of safeties in the engine renders certain formations weaker. So what we have is a system whereby the 344 is far more effective than it has a right to be in matchups it would traditionally struggle against or be exposed to. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
jagreen
|
posted: 2018-05-22 16:48:33 (ID: 100128938) Report Abuse |
|
My issue is the way the engine changed so quickly. I know there was a friendly engine up and running, but good teams shouldn't get bad so quickly.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
oakbark
|
posted: 2018-05-22 16:54:47 (ID: 100128941) Report Abuse |
|
Meitheisman wrote:
Can we agree that there's a point where coaching doesn't even matter anymore and the players being faster, stronger, more intelligent, more agile and more skilled is enough to win in real life, period? I mean, if you have 5 OL who are stronger, faster, more agile, more skilled and more intelligent than the DL it doesn't matter what the coach says, the DL will get dominated play after play and that will create time for the QB or room for the runners. I am in total agreement that superior players should have an advantage and the greater the stat gap the greater the advantage. If we take 40 as a bottom end rating and 80 as a top end rating (purely as an example here) I would say we start with No Hope and work from there. I don't have thoughts deeper than that currently as am open minded about what it should be. I find the correlation between physical skills and skills interesting and what changed here. I always have observed Exp as the single biggest determining factor in performance. This year I am starting to wonder whether this gap has shrunk somewhat which would itself cause the change in performance. I think for me I need to be clear on what has changed to determine exactly how i feel about it. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2018-05-22 17:11:05 (ID: 100128945) Report Abuse |
|
oakbark wrote:
Meitheisman wrote:
Can we agree that there's a point where coaching doesn't even matter anymore and the players being faster, stronger, more intelligent, more agile and more skilled is enough to win in real life, period? I mean, if you have 5 OL who are stronger, faster, more agile, more skilled and more intelligent than the DL it doesn't matter what the coach says, the DL will get dominated play after play and that will create time for the QB or room for the runners. I am in total agreement that superior players should have an advantage and the greater the stat gap the greater the advantage. If we take 40 as a bottom end rating and 80 as a top end rating (purely as an example here) I would say we start with No Hope and work from there. I don't have thoughts deeper than that currently as am open minded about what it should be. I find the correlation between physical skills and skills interesting and what changed here. I always have observed Exp as the single biggest determining factor in performance. This year I am starting to wonder whether this gap has shrunk somewhat which would itself cause the change in performance. I think for me I need to be clear on what has changed to determine exactly how i feel about it. Exactly, I'm perfectly fine with that and considering that between the least talented team in RZA (a noob who created his team today ~42.5 overall) and the most talented team ever in RZA (Chester Ducks ~85 overall) there's only a ~42.5 difference in rating. If we compare it to real life how would it look? 42.5% - has never played the game 50% - Average High School Team 55% - Good High School Team 60% - Bad College Team 65% - Average College Team 70% - Good College Team 75% - NFL Team 80% - NFL SB Contender 85% - Best team ever Contender |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 11 12 13 > >| | |
| Main / Discussions / New engine - Skills undervalued? | |
