Stats - how much time do you spend studying them?

Antonin · 01-06-2005, 11:12 PM

The availability of various stats is something I really like about TBCB. Sometimes when I don't feel like running and watching a lot of fights to advance the history of one of my groups I just pore over individual fighter stats and other numbers available on the 'stats' screen.

Number of rounds, stoppages for and against by round, punch landing percentages, performance points, I'm fascinated by all that stuff. IMHO you can never have too many stats.

erickdamac · 01-07-2005, 12:51 AM

What a loser!!!!

erickdamac · 01-07-2005, 12:57 AM

LOL Just joking, I do too find this interesting, I like looking at guys with ratings of 6 or 7 who have good records and beat guys that are 9 and 10, its really good to see someone you made, or if a guy is made a certain way he dont have to be a 10 to be a champ. In my Active Uni, My WW champ is a new comer who only been fighting for 2 years and he is the champ with a record of 22-1 only loss to Spinks, but he is a champ and he have a rating of 6 but he continue to beat this guys that are 10's, examples? Deigo Corlles, Tyzu, and Zab Judah, all by Un, he has no power, not agressive, Counter is 46 Punches is 46 misses 60, and cf 10, 10 endurance 10, KD and Ko bouth 2's.

I don't know but Its nice to see these guys find a way to win, and not just to win one fight, but to keep on winning.

Cap · 01-07-2005, 08:57 AM

Here's a question for you stat-hounds and the Community at large.

Do you think TBCB unfairly favours Boxers over Sluggers?

JCFLA · 01-07-2005, 12:54 PM

Good question Cap. My first experience with Trunzos game was in the Haffner days when I definitlely thought boxers had an advantage. Off the top of my head, I remember that back then Tunney did really well in my world and I always thought Langford and Stribling were overrated and performed better than they should have. When they went to APBA, lots of the ratings were tweaked and most importantly, the best defensive rating went from -8 -to -6. Ratings have improved even more with TBCB and I think results are pretty good. I guess somebody with loads of time will have to do a study whether boxers actually win more than they should.

One of my "concerns" with the game engine that may penalize sluggers is that I find fighters with good Killer Instinct don't always finish off hurt opponents as quickly as they should. This is due in my opinion to the coverup routine subtracting too many points from the attacking fighters punches landed. Yes, good defensive fighters should get -10 when covering up but poor or average defensive fighters should be -2 or -4. At the ends of one-sided bouts, I often find the victor's punch percentage too low.

Comments?

bear · 01-07-2005, 05:15 PM

This seems like a good idea. A skill level per cover up. Some thing to think about.

I think I wore out my APBA Boxing game boards playing with the cards. Grew up with APBA baseball and foot ball about 15 years before Title Bout came out in Avalon Hill. Nostalgia's nice.

bear

Quote:

Originally Posted by JCFLA

Good question Cap. My first experience with Trunzos game was in the Haffner days when I definitlely thought boxers had an advantage. Off the top of my head, I remember that back then Tunney did really well in my world and I always thought Langford and Stribling were overrated and performed better than they should have. When they went to APBA, lots of the ratings were tweaked and most importantly, the best defensive rating went from -8 -to -6. Ratings have improved even more with TBCB and I think results are pretty good. I guess somebody with loads of time will have to do a study whether boxers actually win more than they should.

One of my "concerns" with the game engine that may penalize sluggers is that I find fighters with good Killer Instinct don't always finish off hurt opponents as quickly as they should. This is due in my opinion to the coverup routine subtracting too many points from the attacking fighters punches landed. Yes, good defensive fighters should get -10 when covering up but poor or average defensive fighters should be -2 or -4. At the ends of one-sided bouts, I often find the victor's punch percentage too low.

Comments?

Lee · 01-07-2005, 06:22 PM

That is a good question Cap, and I agree that maybe, when killer instinct kicks in, the PL range could rise a bit, or have cover up provide a bit less protection. I don't feel there is a huge advantage for Boxers, but there is enough of one that some of the sluggers are hurt by it, besides the CF ratings already compensate for those boxers who did well against sluggers.

Some examples of guys that could box your ears off, but could not handle their opponents when hurt are Johnny Bumphus, Mark Breland and to an extent even Thomas Hearns. A tweak to the cover up ratings would really help balance things in cases like these, in effect measuring whether they were truly effective at it.

erickdamac · 01-07-2005, 09:45 PM

Well history tells us that boxers are better than sluggers, There only been a couple of long term heavyweights that were sluggers, Same for the lighter weights, So history tells us this we must follow it.

Cap · 01-08-2005, 10:06 AM

Ezzard Charles was a great boxer yet he failed to beat Marciano in two attempts. I agree that in many situations a good boxer will beat a good slugger. I was just asking brother Antonin, and any other stat guys, if he thought the game gave boxers too much of an edge. Just curious. Sometimes I think yes, sometimes no.

Cap

Antonin · 01-08-2005, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cap

I was just asking brother Antonin, and any other stat guys, if he thought the game gave boxers too much of an edge. Just curious. Sometimes I think yes, sometimes no.

Cap

Hmmm. Good question, but I've never thought about it.

I use stats to decide on good matchups, and I like to study them because they help tell each individual fighter's story beyond the simple win-loss numbers. It's a bit hard to explain why I like stats. I guess I'm just a geek that way. I love words and I love numbers. So, text-based sports management games with lots of stats are just my cup of tea.

A fighter's punch accuracy by round, and the number of times a fighter has stopped opponents in round three probably does not even matter in TBCB. But for me, it's fun to know such things.

Take two guys with 20-0 records. One guy has 14 KOs in the first two rounds, and the other has 2 KOs in late rounds and all the rest are UD victories. I'll want those guys on my next card because maybe watching them will be a lot of fun.

One thing I've never understood about TBCB is why there is not a running total of performance points in a fighter's record. On the 'history' screen you can see how many PPs he has won or lost per fight. Why doesn't the game keep a running total, the way it keeps a running total of number of bouts and rounds fought?

Does anybody know the answer to this one?

01-06-2005, 11:12 PM	#1
Antonin Hall Of Famer Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Ohio Posts: 2,544	Stats - how much time do you spend studying them? The availability of various stats is something I really like about TBCB. Sometimes when I don't feel like running and watching a lot of fights to advance the history of one of my groups I just pore over individual fighter stats and other numbers available on the 'stats' screen. Number of rounds, stoppages for and against by round, punch landing percentages, performance points, I'm fascinated by all that stuff. IMHO you can never have too many stats.

01-07-2005, 08:57 AM	#4
Cap Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Large Province in God's Country Posts: 8,020	Here's a question for you stat-hounds and the Community at large. Do you think TBCB unfairly favours Boxers over Sluggers? __________________ "...There were Giants in Those Days.." Last edited by Cap; 01-07-2005 at 10:05 AM.

01-07-2005, 12:54 PM	#5
JCFLA Minors (Single A) Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Melbourne, Fl Posts: 77	Good question Cap. My first experience with Trunzos game was in the Haffner days when I definitlely thought boxers had an advantage. Off the top of my head, I remember that back then Tunney did really well in my world and I always thought Langford and Stribling were overrated and performed better than they should have. When they went to APBA, lots of the ratings were tweaked and most importantly, the best defensive rating went from -8 -to -6. Ratings have improved even more with TBCB and I think results are pretty good. I guess somebody with loads of time will have to do a study whether boxers actually win more than they should. One of my "concerns" with the game engine that may penalize sluggers is that I find fighters with good Killer Instinct don't always finish off hurt opponents as quickly as they should. This is due in my opinion to the coverup routine subtracting too many points from the attacking fighters punches landed. Yes, good defensive fighters should get -10 when covering up but poor or average defensive fighters should be -2 or -4. At the ends of one-sided bouts, I often find the victor's punch percentage too low. Comments? __________________ JC

01-08-2005, 10:06 AM	#9
Cap Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Large Province in God's Country Posts: 8,020	Ezzard Charles was a great boxer yet he failed to beat Marciano in two attempts. I agree that in many situations a good boxer will beat a good slugger. I was just asking brother Antonin, and any other stat guys, if he thought the game gave boxers too much of an edge. Just curious. Sometimes I think yes, sometimes no. Cap __________________ "...There were Giants in Those Days.."

01-07-2005, 12:51 AM	#2
erickdamac All Star Starter Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 1,592	What a loser!!!!

01-07-2005, 12:57 AM	#3
erickdamac All Star Starter Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 1,592	LOL Just joking, I do too find this interesting, I like looking at guys with ratings of 6 or 7 who have good records and beat guys that are 9 and 10, its really good to see someone you made, or if a guy is made a certain way he dont have to be a 10 to be a champ. In my Active Uni, My WW champ is a new comer who only been fighting for 2 years and he is the champ with a record of 22-1 only loss to Spinks, but he is a champ and he have a rating of 6 but he continue to beat this guys that are 10's, examples? Deigo Corlles, Tyzu, and Zab Judah, all by Un, he has no power, not agressive, Counter is 46 Punches is 46 misses 60, and cf 10, 10 endurance 10, KD and Ko bouth 2's. I don't know but Its nice to see these guys find a way to win, and not just to win one fight, but to keep on winning.

01-07-2005, 06:22 PM	#7
Lee Global Moderator Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The Scorched Desert Posts: 4,652	That is a good question Cap, and I agree that maybe, when killer instinct kicks in, the PL range could rise a bit, or have cover up provide a bit less protection. I don't feel there is a huge advantage for Boxers, but there is enough of one that some of the sluggers are hurt by it, besides the CF ratings already compensate for those boxers who did well against sluggers. Some examples of guys that could box your ears off, but could not handle their opponents when hurt are Johnny Bumphus, Mark Breland and to an extent even Thomas Hearns. A tweak to the cover up ratings would really help balance things in cases like these, in effect measuring whether they were truly effective at it.

01-07-2005, 09:45 PM	#8
erickdamac All Star Starter Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 1,592	Well history tells us that boxers are better than sluggers, There only been a couple of long term heavyweights that were sluggers, Same for the lighter weights, So history tells us this we must follow it.