Jump to content
NHL'94 Forums

Check Ability


Brutus

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Premium said:

Just to clarify for you guys, is the check ability an indicator of the heaviest weight a player can check, or is it an indicator of the weight a player checks like? A player wih a check ability of 5 can only check guys 3 weight and under, correct? I would hope everyone drafting is on the same page for this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Premium said:

 

or is it an indicator of the weight a player checks like? 

It's this one. This number replaces the player's 'weight' in the calculation when he throws a check.

(for the player being checked, it just uses his actual weight)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, smozoma said:

It's this one. This number replaces the player's 'weight' in the calculation when he throws a check.

(for the player being checked, it just uses his actual weight)

So to be clear, the example Plabax gave is correct: "A player with a 'check ability' of 5 can only check guys 3 weight and under, "

Right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is interesting knowledge and increases the importance of high checking ability d-men, especially for the more mobile ones for players who can't B-check and for others as well who want to have the ability to play the man on onetimers instead of intercepting. Then there are the few heavyweight players who have resistance to B-checks as well (not 100%  obv).

Fetisov has chk rating 11.6 and he can take down Lemieux / Messier (weight 10). So that is perhaps rounded up then at least. I tried with Smehlik 10.9 for example and he could not do it, at least not on a regular basis (0 successes).

CHK Ability required to check down Lemieux, Messier, Jagr, Bourque = 11.6
CHK Ability required to check down Hull, Coffey = 10.6

D-men able to C-check at least 10 weighters and below (some plus):

10 = Bourque
11 = Stevens, Fetisov, Kasatonov, Richardson, Iafrate, Smith, Featherston
12 = Hatcher
13 = -
14 = K.Samuelsson, McSorley, Krupp (the slugs)

D-men in addition that can check players with 9 weight:

8 = U.Samuelsson
10 = Daneyko, Rouse, Diduck, Smehlik, Zalapski,
11 = -
12 = Ludwig, Zmolek

I have to say I'm surprised and have had this all the way wrong, I thought checking ability - checking resistance = succesfull check if the sum is positive. This would say that someone like Blake (10.3) can't succesfully check 9 weighters with C-check. Post here if you find this wrong via experience in the game, perhaps it's not absolute? According to my memory from past experience in Blitz, there is some variance in this, but this should be correct now then for the succesfull 100% checking results as least.

edit:

As an addition example for 11 weights (Andreychuk, Otto etc) = Succesfully only the slugs + Bourque & Stevens, not even Hatcher! And according to this it would only be possible for Kjell Samuelsson to C-check Lindros.

This only applies for open ice hits vs manually controlled players as well. As I have seen even AI controlled Hogue check succesfully some higher weights and board play is a completely different matter where lower weights are succesfull as well.

 

Edited by Depch
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just wanted to say I appreciate the detailed analysis!  (Someone should bake a grid of all this data. Not you, you did your share just writing it!)

Onyl one guy can check Lindros successfully? Sheesh. Guess we gotta A-Hold and pray.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aqualizard said:

Just wanted to say I appreciate the detailed analysis!  (Someone should bake a grid of all this data. Not you, you did your share just writing it!)

Onyl one guy can check Lindros successfully? Sheesh. Guess we gotta A-Hold and pray.

Yes, Kjell is the only one to have have the ability to consistently check Lindros succesfully as a manual check and Lindros being the puck carrier (perhaps as AI as well). I've had it all wrong for a long time. Lindros is still vulnerable to B-checks. But it's very hard to perform a B-check for a player that is coming in for the onetimer, I can't see much to be done there except focus on intercepting the pass. It's so much more easier to B-check the puck carrier due to the distance to the puck.

My Fetisov (CA 11.6) cannot C-check Andreychuk (11) succesfully, I have tested it in the morning multiple times.

But like I said, I think AI can have different results, boardplay is another thing and perhaps there is a difference is the player to be checked puck carrier or not, I have not confirmed that.

Edited by Depch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I posted this in the aim chat, but it's fitting here as well. I also had some time on my hand in the morning to make a list of the defencemen A/B have picked, I wanted to see if there is a difference in checking ability there and how this "new" information applies to that (basically just fixed information).

A:
Brutus: K.Samuelsson, Coffey = 12 &  6
Depch:  Bourque, Fetisov = 11 & 10
FPB:    Blake, Ellet =  8 &  8
Habs:   Zalapski, Duchesne =  9 &  5
Ice:    Iafrate, Hatcher = 10 & 10
J&J:    Kasatonov, Richardson, Manson = 10 & 10 & 8
Raph:   Stevens, Weinrich = 11 &  8
Lupz:   Suter, Chelios =  7 &  7
Tex:    G.Murphy, =  7 &
Zep:    Wesley, Leetch =  6 &  3

B:
Aqua:   U.Samuelsson & Smehlik =  9 & 9
Atomic: McSorley, Krupp = 11 & 11
CBK:    Desjardins, Housley =  8 & 3
Chef:   L.Murphy, Sweeney =  8 & 4
Coach:  Tinordi, =  8 &
Darko:  Smith, MacInnis = 10 & 6
JV:     Patrick, Numminen =  8 & 5
Jer:    Diduck & Macoun =  9 & 7
Pea:    Chiasson, Brown =  7 & 6
Skip:   Lidster, Johansson =  8 & 7

It is the other way around that I thought it "should" be. There is more talent in B-checking in A, so there is less requirement for C-ability except for the heavy stickhandlers. The number on the right side indicates what weight can the defence check. If you put a lineup above that to a guy who has no talent in B-checks, then you are expected to dominate, especially with the more slick heavy guys.

Mogilny is an exception with 7, he is so fast and agile that he can easily get away from the direct check so he often uses his stickhandling to just toddle like he would be b-checked. It happened a couple times vs Fetisov and Bourque testing on the exi rom.

In the future I will be appreciating weight more in certain situations, but I will never go to the "slugs", they are just too slow for me. I am also surprised how weak Manson, Blake & Ellet for example are in comparison to Suter for example. There are not any stick 5+ 8 weigh forwards, so the difference of to be able to take down 7 weights or 8 weights is nonexistant, at 9 weights I start to see some advantages again over 8.

Edited by Depch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just adding this up here from AIM chat.

Depch
- there is something more to c-checks than what smoz & plabs explained. I just c-checked kjell samuelsson with lidstrom. Yesterday I also saw that J&J did a CB and he checked Bourque in our exis, don't remember who that was and I know CB is fixed.

 
KingRaph - depch, if you c check kjell with lidstrom 20 times, how many times will kjell go down
 
Depch - Raph: 0, 1 or 2. Just saying there is something random added to it as well
 
KingRaph - I agree Depch, it's not an exact science formula -- even smozoma said in his weight bug fix explanation that there is some s**t in the check formula he doesn't understand -- and I also think CB check has a greater success than regular check, even if the "CB turned off" is applied.  CB off just means the weight bug is fixed for CB checks as wlel
 
Depch - Yes I'm probably just going to keep using CB-combination in this league as well
 
Depch - even though it's turned off, doesn't harm at all
 
Lupz  - It works on occasion Depch
 
Lupz - I got a couple open ice hits with Theo and Gilly last night against L Richardson
 
Lupz - But it is like 1 and 10 if not more
 
Depch - Yeah, I've noticed. It's just basically an AI check. Hogue does AI agro checks on heavier guys a few times a game
 
Lupz - But Suter, and Chelios take down more guys with C checks then I thought they would in open Ice, like if both have skating momentum already, and I square up the hit they take down Mario
Lupz 27 - It's chasing from behind where they don't succeed well like a Stevens does
Lupz - By head on they are capable

Depch - yes I think speed can make a difference as well, but not sure, this would explain why I've felt that Coffey would be good at checking, but just hypothetical with that
 
So something random is involved in checks sometimes in addition to all of the above. But the above still applies for what the players can check consistently.
 
Edited by Depch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, there's a whole section of checking code I the ROM that I couldn't understand. It just starts with a comparison of their weights. There's more to it, although the weight difference is a large component of it (in terms of effectiveness - it's a very small portion of the code!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be sure that the checking formula takes into consideration the vectors/angles that the players are heading, speed, proximity to boards, action of player (for example, when someone is winding up for a shot, I think they are more likely to go down, if not get injured), etc.  So a head-on collision (one person going north, the other south) would likely maximize any check success, whereas hitting someone from behind (south, south) or at an angle, would reduce that success. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, about 3 years ago, I had played SNES for the first time.  I was aggravated in just how "random" the ability to check seemed to be, whereas in Gens, it seemed MUCH more dependent on the WEIGHT of the players involved in the collision and whether the check was successful.  Anyone who remembers playing Gens back in the 90's, remembers JR was in god mode at all times.

 

Now that we've spent much more time in details studying the C check, the B check, the C/B check for Gens, and I've since gone back and played SNES, and in addition, I've since also played in several of Coach Mac's leagues in '92, 93 & 94, I've re-drawn my conclusions.

In SNES, MOMENTUM plays a much larger roll for successful check because there IS MORE MOMENTUM built into the game (you see it also in the shooting accuracy & AI of players).  In Coach Mac's leagues, he preferred a HIGH HOME advantage, and in these ROMS, MOMENTUM for the HOME team would play a LARGE roll in if checks were successful because HE PUT A LOT OF MOMENTUM INTO THE ROM.   In the SNES editor, there is NO option I saw to remove HOME/AWAY advantages (which makes me wonder if someone has a large edge over someone else in the SNES Dynasty league!).   SO, when you play SNES, whether in straight Classic or in a custom league, it's always with the Classic heavy advantages built into the game and momentum can be gained easier for the HOME teams and probably why the checking rules seem more "random".

In almost all of our GENS DRAFT LEAGUES, we remove the home/away advantage as much as possible, as it's an option in the Gen's editor.

So, during a LARGE portion of our games, we are able to check based MUCH MORE on weight as the main factor.  And as we add checking back into the equation (either via the C/B, or via Blitz style weight bug fixed), we are adding additional things to watch.  This has most of playing and TRYING to watch WHICH checks work and WHICH checks don't.

 

HOWEVER, if you are NOT also observing the MOMENTUM of the game, ALL of your observations will be skewed.  For example, if you have a large momentum advantage going, and check with a light player, you might succeed where it would fail in a low momentum situation or even if you were at the disadvantage. 

 

All checks have additional factors outside of momentum & weight, like Raph mentioned above (position to the boards, angle, speed, etc).  For me, the most basic part is if there is a HEAVY difference in weight, then you can C check from behind and almost NO angle will help you "take the check".  So, WHEN LINDROS in a Blitz rom comes a knocking, YOU WILL GO DOWN.

 

Anyhow, while we watch our games and make conclusions, I think it's important to try to keep your eye on the momentum of the game before reaching final conclusions on what you think will or won't work for you.

  • Like 2
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...