Jump to content
NHL'94 Forums

brilliance of NHLPA '93 ratings


Matt55

Recommended Posts

Maybe you all knew, but I haven't noticed anyone pointing it out ...

One of the keys to NHLPA 93's ratings is that it used the full range (using line changes, players go from a 1 to a couple of 95's; even without line changes, starters can vary greatly). It also had "a 0-15" scale, but did you notice that players' ratings were directly affected by the quality of their team?  

What I mean is that the 21 teams (leaving out expansion and all-star), split perfectly into upper (7-9 team rating), mid (4-6 team rating), and lower (1-3 team ratings) thirds (exactly 7 teams per tier).  Then the 0-15 scale was used like this:

   1.  Top Third uses ratings ending in 6's (26, 46, 66, 86)

   2.  Middle Third uses ratings ending in 0's  (20, 40, 60, 80)

   3.  Lower Third uses ratings ending in 3's (13, 33, 53, 73)

   (Throw in the 0, 6, 93, and 100 also.)

   * An unexplained exception is Philly, a lower third team that uses players ratings ending in 0's.

What does this mean?  A player who gets an 80 speed on an average team would get an 86 if he were on a good team or a 73 if he were on a bad team.  Net result is a wide spread of players AND a wide spread of teams.   I think that NHLPA's ratings created a superior variety of playing experiences.

I imitate this distribution when I make my own projects.  Don't allow yourself the breakaway move and choose a bottom third team, and you have a fun solitaire experience.  Playing against a friend who is much better or much worse than you?  Choose two teams that balance the scales.     

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Matt55 said:

Maybe you all knew, but I haven't noticed anyone pointing it out ...

One of the keys to NHLPA 93's ratings is that it used the full range (using line changes, players go from a 1 to a couple of 95's; even without line changes, starters can vary greatly). It also had "a 0-15" scale, but did you notice that players' ratings were directly affected by the quality of their team?  

What I mean is that the 21 teams (leaving out expansion and all-star), split perfectly into upper (7-9 team rating), mid (4-6 team rating), and lower (1-3 team ratings) thirds (exactly 7 teams per tier).  Then the 0-15 scale was used like this:

   1.  Top Third uses ratings ending in 6's (26, 46, 66, 86)

   2.  Middle Third uses ratings ending in 0's  (20, 40, 60, 80)

   3.  Lower Third uses ratings ending in 3's (13, 33, 53, 73)

   (Throw in the 0, 6, 93, and 100 also.)

   * An unexplained exception is Philly, a lower third team that uses players ratings ending in 0's.

What does this mean?  A player who gets an 80 speed on an average team would get an 86 if he were on a good team or a 73 if he were on a bad team.  Net result is a wide spread of players AND a wide spread of teams.   I think that NHLPA's ratings created a superior variety of playing experiences.

I imitate this distribution when I make my own projects.  Don't allow yourself the breakaway move and choose a bottom third team, and you have a fun solitaire experience.  Playing against a friend who is much better or much worse than you?  Choose two teams that balance the scales.     

 

 

Yes, I knew this and wholeheartedly would have agreed with you 5 years ago.
Smoz, has created the ability to do this same scale in 94 with his Smoz rom.
Now however,

23 minutes ago, Premium said:

NHL '94 has better ratings and is more fun.

I agree with Plabby.

The difference in a 86, 80, and 73 is almost nothing.  Might as well just make them a 4.
93 is a good solitaire experience with some parameters, but you can have a similar one with 94 by limiting your moves.
My #1 goal is to create a GREAT solitaire experience.

Anyway, Good find, keep digging , and having fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Blake said:

Let's not forget some players were literally a rating below 5.

IRL that would make them drain damaged. In the case of Tony Twist: ratings are way ahead of their time. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I already knew that most people prefer '94, so I posted this comment under the '93 posts.  I intentionally made no pokes against '94 because my point was just to observe and appreciate a part of '93 without taking any shots against the beauty of '94.

'93 is not great because I compare it to '94; it is just great.  

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as parameters for solitaire go, have you guys ever thought of playing '94 but ONLY allowing yourself one-timers when on the power play? 

I play solitaire a lot not because I like running up the score but because I don't expect others to understand my priority: making an up-and-down drama that could go either way.  I totally get why most like no-holds-barred winning, but I am getting old and am just doing it for the love of the game.  It's kind of like loving '93 without comparing it to '94; the value of one is not derived from beating another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 73 vs. 80 vs. 86 point is valid, Coach.  They are probably unnoticeable.

Also, weaknesses of '93 ratings have been pointed out other places: +/- rating to decide Defensive Awareness creates a bunch of illogical results.  Shooting % is a pure stat, but it creates illogical results when it is used exclusively to decide a player's shooting accuracy.

Of course, manual goalie is a must for head-to-head combat, so '94 has to get the nod there.  

I like the new feature of a wider range of ratings available in '94, thanks to SMOZ.  Does anyone actually use the low end of the range, though?  Does anyone play with line changes and therefore use a wider variety of players?  I just like the comment I read some where that the variety gives players and teams more personal character instead of a "stock" feel.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 6 years later...

Sorry to revive a 6 year old topic, but I just wanna say this is a great little discovery.

I've been working on a Madden '93 mod and figuring out the attribute patterns the original game used really helps convert the real life stats into the ratings, whilst also keeping the originally intended balance.

But it's been a bit more intimidating applying that to the NHLPA 93 mod I'm also working on. Partly because there aren't many obvious balancing patterns, partly because in Madden no player has more than 4 skills and they're mostly positionally unique, and partly because I'm working on something obscure, so there's not many stats to convert into ratings (and they don't easily carry over into emulating real life performance either.)

Considering stats like endurance, it would feel a bit arbitrary picking between a 20 or 26... but realising team ratings are split into tiers like this is making figuring out my ratings a breeze. Here's the table I'm using as my guide.

NHLPA 93 Ratings.jpg

It's essentially cutting the available ratings down from a choice of 16 to 8, or 6 if you count the highs and lows as minor tweaks of each other, but retaining the nuances and subtle differences between all the players in the game. When you consider that each player is only being rated 0-6, I can see why they streamlined this for NHL 94. However, I gotta disagree with the consensus that this streamlining was superior, and back the original statement that these ratings are brilliant - even moreso for modding. A bunch of guys rated nothing but 4s across the board in NHL 94 will all play subtly differently depending on their team in NHLPA 93. Sure maybe there's very little difference between a 20 and a 26, but there is a difference - games have been rating players out of 100 for over 2 decades now (and still drawing complaints from players), and NHL 94's contemporaries like Madden were rating players 0-15 until the last game on Mega Drive/Genesis.

Again, I get the streamlining for 94, and it was probably further influenced by the embarrassment/awkwardness rating a guy a 0 for intelligence caused with the NHLPA, so it was better to just slice the bottom end off (and change the name of the stat) to keep 'em happy. I'm not saying it's bad, it's just not my preference.

But looking at it purely from a modding perspective, separating them by tiers ensures you get those subtle differences, and it's removed a lot of the busy work trying to do so manually so I don't accidentally create a bunch of clones, of which there was some danger with in a 93 mod, and a high likelyhood of doing if I was working on a 94 mod.

Thanks @Matt55, this is a really underrated find! 🙂

Edited by EagleXIII
  • Love 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...