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 / How we can to improve passing game. Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< 2 3 4 5 6 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
|
dark_wing
|
posted: 2011-12-08 10:12:37 (ID: 19337) Report Abuse |
|
So why we need it:
Because the game without passing – non-realistic. Because the game without passing – decrease interest of the gameplay. The idea “in the beginning passing is impossible” is the mistake. Imagine the 10 years old boys somewhere in Oregon (for example). They are playing football for fun. They are never playing in NCAA and NFL. Can they play with success passes? Of course YES! Because they are not playing vs NCAA or NFL defenders. Football is like the battle between offence and defence. The success of rushing or passing offence, anti-passing or anti-rushing defense doesn't depend on level of abilities of players. It depends on a difference in their levels of abilities. Offence of amateur team will destroyed by defense of NFL team. And it is doesn't depend from rushing or passing of offense of amateur team. Defense of amateur team will crushed by offence of NFL team. And it is doesn't depend from rushing or passing of offense of NFL team. But amateur team can play vs amateur team with passing and rushing. And NFL team can play vs NFL team with passing and rushing. Who want to discus it – welcome. But another problem is decreased interest for the game. Imagine the car fair brochure in which it is written that only after some years you can go with a speed above 40 km/h. How do you think, how many such cars will be sold? 
I think now, we are have limited information, how engine works inside. And the best way – to find the simple way to solve the problem for now. We can generate solution how the good engine have to work in passing play, but it need many time for implementation. So why passing is “not working” now? I don’t know how this engine works, but I know how engines works usually. It based on skills calculation and random. So skills have some “weight” for rushing, blocking, pass coverage e.t.c. This “skills’ weight” can be seen in players’ “rating stars”. In my team where are 31 player with 2,5 or 3 “rating stars” as CB! So to develop a CB is easiest task in the game. The CB-s are back-bone of anti-passing game. But I have just 1 WR with 2,5 “rating stars”. So to improve the passing game we need to decrease “weight” of skills for CB. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Buffalo
|
posted: 2011-12-08 10:30:37 (ID: 19339) Report Abuse |
|
I think the lack in the passing game is the passing rage between 10 and 30 yards. This is the most usal range for passing. Here it are most time <10 yards or 40+ medium pass for a TD.
One Idea is, that you can choose for your LB and DB if they defend with zone or mancoverage. With mancoverage you can prevent the long passes better and with zone coverage the short ones. With short pass against man coverage and with deep passes against zone coverage you have more success. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
dark_wing
|
posted: 2011-12-08 10:46:23 (ID: 19341) Report Abuse |
|
Buffalo wrote:
I think the lack in the passing game is the passing rage between 10 and 30 yards. This is the most usal range for passing. Here it are most time <10 yards or 40+ medium pass for a TD. In NFL avg passing range < 10 yards. But you are rigth, we not have passes with range between 10 and 30 yards. But ve have to many rushes with range between 10 and 30 yards. In NFL avg rushing range aprox to a half of avg pasiing yards. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2011-12-08 11:38:00 (ID: 19350) Report Abuse | |
|
My test in the test stage of this game showed two things.
1) with passing it is much harder to get first downs than with rushing 2) turnover rate with passing plays, especially with returns for TD, are much higher than with rushing plays. My guess is that with passing there are more players involved, which leads to more players with bad random results, leads to less successfull passes and less first down. In rushing less players are involved which leads to less bad results in the random calculation and that way more first downs. First downs lead to more scoring opportunities. But this is can't be the only reason. I'm with Buffalo, that the average yards per pass is to less. I'm not sure, if the average yards per rush are too high, because there are also games where rushing doesn't work and the avarage is low. For receivers the normal routes are 3-10 yards away from the line of scrimmage for short passes, and much higher but also less successfull for deeper routes. Less yards are normaly a result by plays like screens or when running backs coming out of the back field. And don't forget the yards after catch. There are WR with 80% of their receiving yards gained with YAC (screen specialists) and also players with 80% or their receiving yards are gained through catching the ball (position receivers). So the expectiation would be, to have that area covered by the engine. Since we can't pick plays, it would result into mixed statistics. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
dark_wing
|
posted: 2011-12-09 10:11:13 (ID: 19448) Report Abuse |
|
jack6 wrote:
In rushing less players are involved which leads to less bad results in the random calculation and that way more first downs. How it works? jack6 wrote:
First downs lead to more scoring opportunities. But this is can't be the only reason. There are two main reasons. 1.More rushing - more first downs 2.To many intercepts. And to many good interception returns. jack6 wrote:
I'm with Buffalo, that the average yards per pass is to less. I'm not sure, if the average yards per rush are too high, because there are also games where rushing doesn't work and the avarage is low. Tell me more about games with bad rushing. jack6 wrote:
For receivers the normal routes are 3-10 yards away from the line of scrimmage for short passes, and much higher but also less successfull for deeper routes. Less yards are normaly a result by plays like screens or when running backs coming out of the back field. And don't forget the yards after catch. There are WR with 80% of their receiving yards gained with YAC (screen specialists) and also players with 80% or their receiving yards are gained through catching the ball (position receivers). So the expectiation would be, to have that area covered by the engine. Since we can't pick plays, it would result into mixed statistics. I am not sure that we are ready to discuss as it to realize in the engine now. Am I right? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2011-12-09 11:12:08 (ID: 19458) Report Abuse | |
|
dark_wing wrote:
jack6 wrote:
In rushing less players are involved which leads to less bad results in the random calculation and that way more first downs. How it works? As far as I understood Peter, the engine has to check for rushing only lines and backs, while for passing it also has to check QB, receivers and dbs. So more calculations and random numbers for passing involved. Means bigger chances for one or more bad throws of that random number generator. dark_wing wrote:
jack6 wrote:
First downs lead to more scoring opportunities. But this is can't be the only reason. There are two main reasons. 1.More rushing - more first downs 2.To many intercepts. And to many good interception returns. yes, but it is also the case that passing in general does not generate enough yards. Why, I don't know. From my point of view, rushing looks fine, maybe a little bit to strong, but passing seams to stutter. It also looks like turnovers by QBs and RBs are much lower that interceptions. dark_wing wrote:
jack6 wrote:
I'm with Buffalo, that the average yards per pass is to less. I'm not sure, if the average yards per rush are too high, because there are also games where rushing doesn't work and the avarage is low. Tell me more about games with bad rushing. I had severak games here and on the test stage, where I lost with 100% rushing against other teams throwing more than me. My rushing yards are sometimes 140-200 yards per game, while the opponent had more with rushing and passing in sum. Just check my defeats last season here. And look for the average yards per carry of the RB. dark_wing wrote:
jack6 wrote:
For receivers the normal routes are 3-10 yards away from the line of scrimmage for short passes, and much higher but also less successfull for deeper routes. Less yards are normaly a result by plays like screens or when running backs coming out of the back field. And don't forget the yards after catch. There are WR with 80% of their receiving yards gained with YAC (screen specialists) and also players with 80% or their receiving yards are gained through catching the ball (position receivers). So the expectiation would be, to have that area covered by the engine. Since we can't pick plays, it would result into mixed statistics. I am not sure that we are ready to discuss as it to realize in the engine now. Am I right? This statement i don't get. Do you mean, that we can't discuss the current mechanism of the engine?  |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
dark_wing
|
posted: 2011-12-09 11:59:53 (ID: 19465) Report Abuse |
|
jack6 wrote:
As far as I understood Peter, the engine has to check for rushing only lines and backs, while for passing it also has to check QB, receivers and dbs. So more calculations and random numbers for passing involved. Means bigger chances for one or more bad throws of that random number generator. dark_wing wrote:
yes, but it is also the case that passing in general does not generate enough yards. Why, I don't know. From my point of view, rushing looks fine, maybe a little bit to strong, but passing seams to stutter. It also looks like turnovers by QBs and RBs are much lower that interceptions. Question for Pete. Can we decrease "total rating of CB-s" and test the engine in friendlies? Like it was with blitzing. jack6 wrote:
I had severak games here and on the test stage, where I lost with 100% rushing against other teams throwing more than me. My rushing yards are sometimes 140-200 yards per game, while the opponent had more with rushing and passing in sum. Just check my defeats last season here. And look for the average yards per carry of the RB. My victory vs rushing-only team. But it isn't the bad rushing... jack6 wrote:
This statement i don't get. Do you mean, that we can't discuss the current mechanism of the engine? Is it realized now? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2011-12-09 12:57:13 (ID: 19469) Report Abuse | |
|
140+ yards rushing
In this match I had very little success. I have beaten the same team later with the same players, so it might be that this is part of the randomes of the game. I don't know, how the passing yards and the points of the catches are implemented. I doubt that the receivers are really runnung routes. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
dark_wing
|
posted: 2011-12-09 13:18:14 (ID: 19472) Report Abuse |
|
jack6 wrote:
140+ yards rushing In this match I had very little success. I have beaten the same team later with the same players, so it might be that this is part of the randomes of the game. But still it isn't bad rushing. jack6 wrote:
I don't know, how the passing yards and the points of the catches are implemented. I doubt that the receivers are really runnung routes. I think, we need some comments from Pete. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Admin
Contact |
posted: 2011-12-09 15:02:45 (ID: 19477) |
|
Guys, it is very easy. Just break down the gameplay into the different situations
Rush: Snap (C-QB) - handover (QB-RB) - block calculation (5 OL - 3-5 DL) - Blitz calculation - rush vs DL - rush vs DBs Pass Snap (C-QB) - receiverselection - block calculation (5 OL - 3-5 DL) - blitz calculation - coveragecalculation (WR - CB/OLB) - catching calculation - interception calculation - rush calculation, based on the point of catching and the left backfield This means for pass: there are many more stages where an "stop this play" flag could be thrown inside the engine, and many more different players and skills are involved. This is why at low level teams as ours are at the moment, the pass does not work as expected. When you learned football, what was the first thing you tried? Throwing a pass. Then you learned how hard it is to throw an exact bomb, how hard it is to catch those bombs while you are at the new record for 40 yards...and you switch to learn rushing. This being said, we are working on the right way to tweak the overal average catching distance, but this will take some time, and for sure we won't do such upgrades on the engine during the season. This is not changing a single line, as Jacks results from yesterday are showing very impressive. What we need: discussion, patience. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< 2 3 4 5 6 > >| | |
| Main / Discussions / How we can to improve passing game. | |
