|
|
| Line 14: |
Line 14: |
| [[User:Johnnybravo/HistoricalElo| HistoricalElo: Elo ratings for every team for every cup]] | | [[User:Johnnybravo/HistoricalElo| HistoricalElo: Elo ratings for every team for every cup]] |
|
| |
|
| ==Rule Change Tests== | | ==PES 2016 1.04== |
| <big><big><nowiki>What is broken</nowiki></big></big>
| | http://www39.zippyshare.com/v/VGHCj2F8/file.html |
| *Conversion rates are extremely high, leading to unrealistic scorelines despite normal (or even lower) amounts of shots compared to previous versions of PES
| |
| *Defenders are prone to retarded spaghetti, particularly when counter-pressed by opposing strikers
| |
| *Goalkeepers are noticeably worse than in previous PES versions
| |
| *Offensive AI is less inventive than previously and significantly worse at decision making, particularly regarding midfield passing
| |
| *Gold medals are incredibly good
| |
| <big><big><nowiki>Proposed changes</nowiki></big></big>
| |
| *82/88/94 stat system
| |
| Provides a moderate boost to nonmedals and moderate nerf to gold medals. This has the dual goal of limiting defender incompetence and lowering the conversion rate with an eye toward more moderate scorelines. The idea that compression could be the solution to the described issues was brought up repeatedly in the rules open house, and this is an attempt to use something more moderate than the 88/94/99 that Hessen has tested and found poor.
| |
| <br>
| |
| <big><big><nowiki>Test data</nowiki></big></big><br>
| |
| http://pastebin.com/rC0krnLB | |
| <br>
| |
| <big><big><nowiki>Conclusions</nowiki></big></big><br>
| |
| This is by no means a finalized proposal. There are some benefits that I have noticed from this system, however a number of issues remain:
| |
| <br><big><u>Pros</u></big><br>
| |
| *Scorelines are quite reasonable. The average goals per game was exactly 4 (60 goals / 15 games).
| |
| *Goalkeepers feel more effective than under the current ruleset, but not overly so. Silver keepers are an option if roughly 2 saves/game is not considered optimal.
| |
| *Instances where defenders are bullied off the ball by opposing strikers resulting in free goals were almost nonexistent in the games I ran.
| |
| *Conversion rates felt lower than in Winter
| |
| <big><u>Cons</u></big><br>
| |
| *Most attacks die around the backline just from gang-tackling rather than intelligent positioning.
| |
| *Golds don't feel <i>Gold</i>. There is a certain level of play we normally see from 4cc golds, but in this system we would obviously not get that. Individual displays of skill are far more rare. 82/90/99 is something I would like to try at some point.
| |
| *Shot rates are lower than in Winter
| |
| >What's next?<br>
| |
| I'd like to get this ruleset on stream at some point so people can give their opinions on the actual gameplay. Additionally, tweaks to this system could and should be explored.
| |
| <br>
| |
| <big><big><nowiki>Comments</nowiki></big></big><br>
| |
| :While I get the idea behind the reduced Gold stats, I still think it's a bad idea. Reduced stats will reduce AI which is the opposite of what we want: smarter AI. Most viewers of the 4CC just want to see amazing goals, which is only really possible when the stats are as high as possible. But if reducing the stats gap works, try buffing the 77s a bit more. [[User:Test Pony|Test Pony]] ([[User talk:Test Pony|talk]]) 10:29, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
| |
/fit/ manager