Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. I think if I did tackle that, I'd want to do a lot more than I'm willing to do right now. For now, I've got enough info to tweak the adjustment of sim stats just based on ratings. So far: SimOffense - minor changes (I like factoring in QB, best RB, and best WR) SimDefense - don't see it anywhere SimPassDefense - pretty good as is (leaving out DL's) SimPassRush - use combo of RS,MS, and HP PKSimKick - is AKB meaningful? If not, just use KA QbSimRun - good (uses MS/5) RbSimCatch - this is the one I think we would like to affect KR/PR (maybe MS) RbSimRun - good (uses HP and either MS+BC or RS+HP (I assume for FB's)) SimKickRet - this one should be yds/rec; with ratings, use MS SimPass - with the new PA hack, use PS,PC,&PA (again, is APB meaningful) SimPocket - I'm not excited about scaling this from MS, but what else? SimPuntRet - this is the REC target value; REC/(sum starters' REC)*32 (so long as the ROM has made the adjustment to the sim-scale [posted elsewhere] this should work okay) WrTeSimCatch - again, this will hopefully be KR/PR (MS again) WrTeSimRush - it says "2" ... but it doesn't actually change it to "2" - error? I'm not opposed to others' input
  2. just a few questions as I get started: 1) Leftover INT target values for LB's and DB's are being given to the LILB. (Maybe, this is to boost his sim season as a coverage MLB). Would leftover target values get distributed the same way leftover receiving target values get spread out RB1-TE? (if sum < 255) 2) If so, then let's round down and leave the values alone. If not, should the leftovers go to the primary CB1? 3) Does the SS need a sim number for sacks? can we give the extra points to RE or ROLB? 4) I thought I read this somewhere; are APB for QB's and AKB for P/K useful values during gameplay? Or do we treat them as decoration like Quickness? 5) jstout, did you ever figure out a way to use the 2nd sim value (skill positions) for KR/PR? I'm going to try to finish up formulas based solely on assigned ratings, but it would still be nice to use an imported stats spreadsheet or database. Is that too difficult to mess with? Oh well, I'll keep trucking along until I hit another pothole.
  3. alright ... found it; very cool. changing formulas shouldn't be too difficult. what I'm worried about is adding on a feature to import stats from a spreadsheet or database with which to run calculations. I'll play with it a little.
  4. As a teacher, I take part of my planning period to read new posts; but until recently, I never had a lot of time to post myself. I'll see if I can find some time here and there to put some logic statements together. Curious ... where would I find "reflector?" Is that available as freeware? ... Okay, I'll not be lazy and start looking online
  5. speaking of which ... should the community begin tweaking that tool before the next version comes out? I know we are all skeptical about an automated ratings generator, but it would be nice to only have to make minor adjustments to the sim ratings instead of working from scratch. As of now, I use a compilation of a couple of spreadsheets from other members as well as a few formulas of my own, but I would love to be able to just press one button and have the receiving target values and defensive sums (in particular) auto-calculated to shorten the stat-tweaking process. In my (non-professional) opinion, the calculator should use a season stats spreadsheet to form a base line and then make incremental adjustments based on ability ratings. I'll look up the site I get my spreadsheet from in a minute. Anyhow, just a thought.
  6. I think I might have tried to correct the wrong problem. It looks like you used the 3rd numbers to get a sum of 32. It's the 4th number that gets used as the target value. Sorry for the lengthy response. Good luck!
  7. I looked at your rom, and here's what I found: RB1 Parker [7, 1, 4, 6 ] RB2 Washington [1, 5, 4, 9 ] WR1 Ward [1, 11, 7, 7 ] WR2 Holmes [1, 8, 11, 9 ] TE1 Miller [1, 7, 6, 6 ] With your SIM set the way it is, the 4th numbers add up to (6+9+7+9+6) 37 or (48+72+56+72+48) 296. You only have 255 to work with; or 32 SIM points with the adjustments at x18117. If you do a simple stat conversion for catches, you get: 3+40+81+55+48 = 227 catches for starters, and ... Parker 3/227 x 32 = 0.42 Washington 40/227 x 32 = 5.64 Ward 81/227 x 32 = 11.42 Holmes 55/227 x 32 = 7.75 Miller 48/227 x 32 = 6.77 As another thought - I've seen a couple ideas on how to adjust the third number (controls receiving yardage). For my SIM values, I take the yds/catch and subtract 4. It's not perfect, but it helps me scale yardage output somewhat. For the steelers: Parker 4.33 - 4 = 0.33 Washington 15.78 - 4 = 11.78 Ward 12.88 - 4 = 8.88 Holmes 14.93 - 4 = 10.93 Miller 10.71 - 4 = 6.71 If you round down (except for 0) for target values and round for rec yardage I get this: RB1 Parker [7, 1, 1, 1 ] RB2 Washington [1, 5, 12, 5 ] WR1 Ward [1, 11, 9, 11 ] WR2 Holmes [1, 8, 11, 7 ] TE1 Miller [1, 7, 7, 6 ] This gives you a target sum of 1+5+11+7+6 = 30 and the remaining 2/32 is randomized. Try it now, and see if it simulates a little more realistically.
  8. Just a thought, I was just looking through some old notes on the formation locations x21642 and x30FF8. There are 6 comparison statements in the x21642 section to change to format of the starter screen (2rb 2wr 1te, 1rb 3wr 1te, or 1rb 4wr). However, at x30FF8 there are only 5 comparison statements to label players with the correct positions (rb, wr, or te). It draws that information from x3104B. Ever noticed that SD in the original is 1-3-1 yet Bernstine is labeled as a RB? A 2TE set can be easily added if you overwrite x31056 and x3105D as 03's instead of 02's. This basically replaces the 4WR set with 1rb 1te 2wr 1te. I used this back when Dallas claimed it was going to use Witten and Fasano in a 2TE set for most of its plays (Jones, Witten, Owens, Glenn, Fasano). Useful? I use 2rb for almost all the teams - RB by committee makes it difficult to put in a lot of FB's. 1-3-1 makes up another 2 or 3 teams. On that note, after looking at those spreadsheets, I am wondering if there is a systematic way to set breaking points from stats to automatically set up formations. I loved the point-range system for adjusting OFF/DEF SIM values and adding 1 sack to the front 7 before calculating values is probably a good idea.
  9. In regards to your TE question: I haven't seen that problem arise in the original. Their production fits their ratings. Try: 1. Check the SIM numbers in the original (the 4th SIM number - receiving target value); the Chargers TE is rated a 4 and the Redskins TE is rated 1. 2. Check x175CB. If it reads 04, then throws that are randomized (after spreading the ball based on the receiving target values) don't reach the TE. Change the byte to 05. 3. Check the corresponding values of your receiving target ratings. My initial theory about the sum of 32 was a little off. The values 0-15 actually correspond to these values: 00 14 19 21 26 2E 33 3B 40 47 4C 54 59 66 73 80 ... meaning that if the sum of your first 4 starters goes over 255, your TE won't get anything. Check these values with both lineups 2-2-1 and 1-3-1. It could be that your sum with Nate Washington goes over 255 before reaching Miller but stays under 255 with Moore. 3b. On a side note, I changed those values at x18117 to multiples of 8. Now, every increment on the receiving target value corresonds to 1/32 of the throws. 00 08 10 18 20 28 30 38 40 48 50 58 60 68 70 78 The highest rating of 15 now corresponds to 78 (120 in decimal) out of FF (255). 4. Check to see how you are changing formations. I've gotten accustomed to changing formations manually, so I'm not sure which tool you are using. If done properly, 4a. If you are not using a global 2RB set, the coding from x21642 to x21661 should revert to the original. Just change the comparison statements (C9 xx) to reflect the teams you want changed. 4b. Make similar changes at x30FF8. Again, (C9 xx) is compare team # xx. This section is to assign the proper position to players in each formation. If all else fails, send a copy of your rom for someone to look at. Good luck
  10. You might have a 32-team rom that was released before the fix. In cxrom's original coding the SIM bytes for the NFC West were stored in one place, but the pointer was looking elsewhere for them. Thank jstout for discovering this fix: Now, you should be able to adjust offensive preference for all 32 teams.
  11. NFC West starts at x199C1 and follows the same pattern. Offensive preferences are at 27526 and x27FDB (NFC West). However (as I recently discovered), you need to change a few bytes. Per jstout: Now, edits to these values actually get used. Great find, guys. I'll take a look at those spreadsheets.
  12. You guys are great. I would have never found that on my own. I changed the byte at x175CB from 04 to 05, and it seems to work fine now. Thanks. I'm assuming that if every team is properly adjusted so that all 256 (not 255) values are used, this subroutine wouldn't be needed at all in the game. On a different note - because SIM rating edits are so time consuming, I'd like to find some way to implement this into the JeidTSBToolRosters spreadsheet (maybe put stat entry on each position page). I found some info while searching the threads about stats used for attributes. What are some stats we could use for SIM ratings? Here's what I'm thinking so far: Team offensive and defensive yardage ranking QB rating; QB rush att/game; QB rush avg RB rush yds/game RB, WR, TE rec/game; yds/rec Defense - TKLs (is there a stat for TKLs for loss); sacks; passes defended (INT are too infrequent) FG%; FG long; Punt avg Sometimes I feel like I'm working for hours trying to find a way to save a few minutes. But, if you think it's worth it, feel free to make suggestions. Or ... maybe someone with more coding experience will adopt this project (I know time is not a luxury). Otherwise, I'll stick with the little I know about formulas in Excel. I'll check back after the weekend.
  13. Ok, now I feel silly. It DOES work like the defense (out of 255) except that you have to translate to a 15 point scale. If I take another look at the 91 Bills starters (8,2,6,10,6) that translates into (64,25,51,76,51) which is 267. IND (2,10,10,10,2) is (25,76,76,76,25) - a sum of 253 before TE Pat Beach is reached (that explains why he catches about 1 pass every 3 seasons). Does this mean that the original programmers still goofed? If the sum was to be "x" (a # less than 255), then (255-x)/255 of the time there should be a remainder of passes to be randomly distributed. Look at KC starters (0,0,6,10,0) = (0,0,51,76,0) with a sum of 127. This should mean that 127/255 of the passes stop at the two WR and (255-127)/255 are randomly distributed, right? But the TE still gets nothing. I suppose if I wanted to make mathematically even distribution, I would have to rate RB1 to stop the random # 1/5 of the time, RB2 1/4 of the remaining time, WR1 1/3 of what's left from that, and so on. Here's what I get: (51/255, 51/204, 51/153, 51/102, 51/51) which is my original test #s (6,6,6,6,6). It's that leftover randomness that still puzzles me.
  14. If the random number is from x00 to xFF, then I don't get why WR2 and TE aren't getting any of the randomized catches (given that all are set to 15). Is there something (the sum) stopping the selector from finding "more receivers" to compare their values to? I'm going to try compressing the range of values at x18117 to see if that allows for a higher ratings sum.
  15. You're right. All 10 players add up to 42, but the starters add up to 32. Some of the other teams total 32 for all 10 players, and the Redskins starters would add up to 32 if Gary Clark had a 10 instead of a 1 (type-o ... don't know). None of the teams have a starting sum greater than 32, so maybe this is just the limit. We had been comparing players on different teams and found no discernable pattern. I tried a team-autonomous view by rating each player with a 2 - then all 3's, 4's, 5's and so on to find a threshhold. The TE got the ball a lot with 2's; at about 6, all starters were even. At 8's, the TE got nothing. At 15, the RBs hogged the ball, WR1 got very little, and WR2 and TE got nothing. The same odd occurence appeared when trying to rate a great defense. I concluded that higher numbers lead to more touches (catches, sacks, INTs), but with a sum limit. For defense, that limit was 255; for offense, it looked like 32. So, why the sum of 42 for BUF? Because only 5 of those 10 play at one time. All 11 defenders start, so their proportions are easy to calculate. On offense, the 5 starting skill players share chances for passes. I know it sounds odd, but it does explain why edited roms with player 4th number ratings of 10, 8, 14, 12, 10 complain that the WR2 and TE never get the ball (all 32 points are being used by higher roster postions). Whether or not this system was an original programmer's intention, it has proven reliable on my edits for about a year, and I have yet to suffer from statistical anomalies. My hope was that this would spark someone to update the existing SIM editor or create one based partly on statistical data (averages, proportions) as well as assigned attributes. Any feedback would be welcomed.
  • Create New...