Jump to content
MrFish

Top Games You'd Like to Have for Atari 8-Bits

Recommended Posts

"However, the bottom line is that 3 in 1 has lived up to be a solid text-based football simulation. Granted, it does not currently incorporate every single

player on the field. Namely, does not include offensive linemen and individual blocking ratings. What 3 in 1 does include however, is every skill player rated

(rb, te, wr, qb, kr, pr, k, p, etc) and then have all players with sacks and interceptions and we used overall team ratings to account for the effectiveness

of the offensive and defensive lines."

 

Thanks, I was already aware of most of these facts, based on reading the review from Analog magazine, and by having a look into the data files myself.

 

 

"But to me, the minimal number of individual ratings, and complete lack of subjective ratings, is the area in which 3 in 1 loses some of its

appeal. For example, IIRC a running back is rated in exactly four categories: number of carries, yards per carry, number of receptions,

and yards per reception. In a short-yardage situation, it makes more sense to put in a Barry Sanders than a John Riggins, since the game

doesn't evaluate whether or not a player always gets 3-4 yards, or will lose three and then break off a forty-yard run."

 

Yes, this is a particular shortcoming of using a strictly average-based model. Shannon (the LHF rep) replied that they were adding a feature (common to other sims) where backs would have an "inside", "outside", or "both" rating. To me, this should already be partly addressed if a player is designated as a fullback (Riggins), and thus be weighted for selection in short yardage situations. Obviously the LHF engine doesn't do this either, though.

 

The poster further went on to suggest that standard deviation could be used to account for the type of runner Sanders was (it would account for Riggins too, of course). It's a good suggestion idealistically, but the problem would be obtaining the necessary data for all players (what were the lengths of all their individual attempts, or at least some reasonable generalization of them), adding it, and programming the engine to take it into account.

 

 

here's a couple of the posts i found in this old Google Discussion:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.sports/FMq7uEyn91o

 

I read some of the thread. Good information, seeing dialogue directly with someone from LHG. I'll read more of it later.

 

 

There were a couple of points about accuracy as well, but am struggling to find them

 

I'd appreciate if you can come up with something specific. There's a big difference between the quality of the model/engine and incorrect or inaccurate ratings for players.

 

It's obvious, reading through the thread, that most people feel that LHF uses accurate ratings and a solid game engine. Even the guy pointing out the problem with accurately representing Barry Sanders running style admitted this to the LHF rep:

 

>So, in closing, the need is definitely there to "expand" the football game. I

>assume you would be in agreement with me though that the game engine and

>statistical model itself is right on?

Oh, absolutely. The trick is keeping it that way when you "expand"

the game

Edited by MrFish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you go by stats, then the Steelers should be very much represented in this game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I played a full game (first time) of LHF for the C64 tonight.

 

Some information about the C64 version -- and some info that will hold true for any version.

 

First of all, the C64 version current teams disk is from 1989. I had a look at the Apple II version, and its current teams are from 1985. This turns out to be a good thing; because we essentially have full current teams disks for 2 separate years. Being that it's the same base program, we should be able to use them both. [Note: That the review in Analog, for the Atari version, was using teams from 1986. So, if that ever turns up, we'd have data for 3 years available.]

 

There are some differences in the way the data is stored on disk: the Apple II version uses a single file on disk, which contains all teams together. The C64 version uses files with 3 teams per file. So, to use the Apple data file with the C64, some reformatting would be necessary. It wouldn't be difficult in general, but possibly a little time consuming considering how many teams are on the current teams disk (222 on the C64 version). It'd be considerably easier to create a version of the C64 data for use with the Apple version.

 

I figured out pretty easily where all the NFL teams are and what numbers need to be used to select them. They're in alphabetical order by team name -- not by location. So, we end up with:

 

168 Bears, Chicago
169 Bengals, Cincinnati
170 Bills, Buffalo
171 Broncos, Denver
172 Browns, Cleveland
173 Buccaneers, Tampa Bay
174 Cardinals, Phoenix
175 Chargers, San Diego
176 Chiefs, Kansas City
177 Colts, Indianapolis
178 Cowboys, Dallas
179 Dolphins, Miami
180 Eagles, Philadelphia
181 Falcons, Atlanta
182 Forty Niners, San Francisco
183 Giants, New York
184 Jets, New York
185 Lions, Detroit
186 Oilers, Houston
187 Packers, Green Bay
188 Partriots, New England
189 Raiders, Los Angeles
190 Rams, Los Angeles
191 Redskins, Washington
192 Saints, New Orleans
193 Seahawks, Seattle
194 Steelers, Pittsburgh
195 Vikings, Minnesota
I won't attempt any such list for the college teams, atm. :skull:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as regards the accuracy. i've spent hours going through the Yahoo group and can't find the posts - but I know I read one making comments about some older college stats being "off" and another comment saying similar. will have another look later - but, it's maybe not worth it when considered that the game is so highly respected by most.

 

as regards your team data list. wow! nice work.

am quite happy to compile others seasons data - if you wish. just say what format you require, which categories and subcategories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/20/2019 at 3:24 PM, MrFish said:

 

17 colors, but 7 of those are what they call "1/2 colors" -- since they are just additional luminances of the base hues in their areas. Those 1/2 colors add a lot to the display though; if all those 1/2 colors were just white, it wouldn't look nearly as colorful.

 

If I set each panel to a unique color, I could get the display up to 24 colors; but not likely practical for a good design.

 

Filling out the field a little here, and end zones with team colors.

 

post-6369-0-93107300-1553110341.png

did we ever get this ball rolling?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

am thinking the Lance Haffner conversion would be easier to follow in its own thread?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...