Cricket 24 - General Discussion

[Wealey]

Oh, come on guys don't be too hard on the Twitter guys. They give me a laugh when I get in and catch up on Twitter news when I get to the studio. So many features and things I didn't know we are going to do. It's crazy how they have lots of apparently confirmed information before I do.

Careful, that may become the next feature we will release, spaghetti simulator mode.

@wasteyouryouth can we sort out a community professional tag please for @JNT BA i don't know who to believe at the moment!

 

[wasteyouryouth]

@wasteyouryouth can we sort out a community professional tag please for @JNT BA i don't know who to believe at the moment!

I almost did this earlier but I thought someone might see that and think there's a legit crossover in Community Professional community.

 

[AnmolJ]

I think if pitches were basically grouped like this:

1) Very Favourable to Pace
2) Somewhat Favourable to Pace
3) Balanced
4) Somewhat Favourable to Spin
5) Very Favourable to Spin

Assuming most teams would want five bowling options (4 + an all rounder), you could have bowling line ups suited to each one:

1) 4 Pace bowlers + all rounder, weighted to a seamer
2) 3 Pace bowlers, best spinner, + 1 all rounder seamer
3) 3 Pace Bowlers, 1 Spinner + best all rounder
4) 2 Pace Bowlers, 2 Spinners + best all rounder
5) 1 Pace Bowlers, 3 Spinners + best all rounder

Obviously you'd want pitches to suit the skills. More grass, quicker pitches, slow wear for seamers. Lower bounce, quicker wear, more turn for spinners.

Weather could play a part, that might be the weighting that tips the type of all rounder they choose. Very favourable pitch for seam bowling, plus cloudy skies for swing bowling then they'd pick a Colin de Grandhomme instead of Mitchell Santner.

We can’t assume that a team would need 5 bowling options. Over the years we have seen how a 6th or 7th bowling option pops up in the death overs of a T20 or an ODI.

I’ve seen Kane Williamson bowling on a grassy track in a test match.

I think first BA needs to fix the AI who chooses whom to bowl and when they get to bowl. Then these things you mentioned can be applied.

 

[Bigby Wolf]

It baffles me how many people post here about a cricket video game compared to the literal forum for discussing cricket.

Cricket games are actually the reason where most of the folks joined the site.

For me it was 2009 Ashes Cricket mods back in 2013 then the journey from DBC 14 to up untill now.

 

[wasteyouryouth]

We can’t assume that a team would need 5 bowling options. Over the years we have seen how a 6th or 7th bowling option pops up in the death overs of a T20 or an ODI.

I’ve seen Kane Williamson bowling on a grassy track in a test match.

I think first BA needs to fix the AI who chooses whom to bowl and when they get to bowl. Then these things you mentioned can be applied.

I think they are interconnected, the conditions determine the team selection and then how bowlers are used should follow. If they aren't linked in some way then it feels inconsistent. So, Condtions 2 (off my list), they pick 4 seamers and 1 spinner, and the spinner bowls fewer overs - it might be they don't feature heavily until day 4 or 5 and only bowl before breaks and before the new ball. Condtions 5, a seamer might bowl a short new ball spell, come back after 40 overs to see if there's reverse swing (IRL) and it could be a 50/50 call if they take the second new ball.

The real complexity probably comes from keeping bowlers going when they're doing well and taking them off when they're doing badly. That's where having part timers actually be a part of the game would help. Bowler 5 has been so expensive the AI will not use them, so the best part timer comes on.

When it comes to limited overs, a basic way would be to have the best seam bowlers bowl the last 4 overs in a T20, the last six to eight in an ODI (might be three bowlers sharing these). Spin bowlers and the 5th and 6th bowlers bowl the middle overs and not the powerplay or death overs. If you get a straightforward, probably predictable, but not overly complex process working you can then build on it. It often feels like the bowling selections are a bit all over the place, I agree.

Ideally, I would love to see specific roles developed through proficiencies, so you might have Powerplay bowlers (always bowls 2 in the powerplay, often 3), Death Bowlers (might only come into the attack for the last ten overs), Middle Over specialist (bowling from overs 7 - 14) and Front/End bowlers (2 in the powerplay, 2 at the death).

--

Thinking about team selection a bit more, I would say, from a test match/first class perspective, the ideal balance teams look for is seven batters and five bowlers - meaning one player needs to be competent in both. England has Stokes, Australia has Green, India has Jadeja. That would be my starting template.

So, it would make sense, to me, that the best all rounder is the first choice and then that ticks a box for their bowling resources. Going back to this:

1) Very Favourable to Pace (5 seam bowlers)
2) Somewhat Favourable to Pace (4 seam + 1 spin)
3) Balanced (3 seam + 2 spin)
4) Somewhat Favourable to Spin (2 seam + 3 spin)
5) Very Favourable to Spin (1 seam + 4 spin)

I would say 1 & 5 are very rare. Although, New Zealand have often played five seamers at home. But, to keep things simple (like would Australia leave out Shane Warne for fourth seamer?), you could say that 1 and 5 would have the same resources as 2 and 4, respectively.

So, England pick Stokes and that ticks a seam bowling box. So, then in Balanced conditions, they would go with the two best seam bowlers and the two best spinners to complete their attack. India on the other hand would have one of the spin options covered by picked Jadeja first as the all rounder.

When it comes to ODIs and limited overs it's a perhaps more complicated because teams want the most batting and the most bowling. I think, as a starting point, you would want 6/6 split of players that can bat and bowl. That's kind of based on England's success - Woakes, Rashid, Plunkett, Wood, Archer, Stokes (Root was in the World Cup winning team too - ideally the game would have more part timers used. Although, Woakes, Rashid and Plunkett could all bat.

 

[Harshs1993]

No matter how much you discuss, you'll only get to know about the game 2 weeks before
Cheers

 

[AnmolJ]

No matter how much you discuss, you'll only get to know about the game 2 weeks before
Cheers

And the trailer of the game on launch day.

 

[Deleted member 185125]

Bro

View attachment 278768

That's Unfair consequence

 

[AnmolJ]

I think they are interconnected, the conditions determine the team selection and then how bowlers are used should follow. If they aren't linked in some way then it feels inconsistent. So, Condtions 2 (off my list), they pick 4 seamers and 1 spinner, and the spinner bowls fewer overs - it might be they don't feature heavily until day 4 or 5 and only bowl before breaks and before the new ball. Condtions 5, a seamer might bowl a short new ball spell, come back after 40 overs to see if there's reverse swing (IRL) and it could be a 50/50 call if they take the second new ball.

The real complexity probably comes from keeping bowlers going when they're doing well and taking them off when they're doing badly. That's where having part timers actually be a part of the game would help. Bowler 5 has been so expensive the AI will not use them, so the best part timer comes on.

When it comes to limited overs, a basic way would be to have the best seam bowlers bowl the last 4 overs in a T20, the last six to eight in an ODI (might be three bowlers sharing these). Spin bowlers and the 5th and 6th bowlers bowl the middle overs and not the powerplay or death overs. If you get a straightforward, probably predictable, but not overly complex process working you can then build on it. It often feels like the bowling selections are a bit all over the place, I agree.

Ideally, I would love to see specific roles developed through proficiencies, so you might have Powerplay bowlers (always bowls 2 in the powerplay, often 3), Death Bowlers (might only come into the attack for the last ten overs), Middle Over specialist (bowling from overs 7 - 14) and Front/End bowlers (2 in the powerplay, 2 at the death).

--

Thinking about team selection a bit more, I would say, from a test match/first class perspective, the ideal balance teams look for is seven batters and five bowlers - meaning one player needs to be competent in both. England has Stokes, Australia has Green, India has Jadeja. That would be my starting template.

So, it would make sense, to me, that the best all rounder is the first choice and then that ticks a box for their bowling resources. Going back to this:

1) Very Favourable to Pace (5 seam bowlers)
2) Somewhat Favourable to Pace (4 seam + 1 spin)
3) Balanced (3 seam + 2 spin)
4) Somewhat Favourable to Spin (2 seam + 3 spin)
5) Very Favourable to Spin (1 seam + 4 spin)

I would say 1 & 5 are very rare. Although, New Zealand have often played five seamers at home. But, to keep things simple (like would Australia leave out Shane Warne for fourth seamer?), you could say that 1 and 5 would have the same resources as 2 and 4, respectively.

So, England pick Stokes and that ticks a seam bowling box. So, then in Balanced conditions, they would go with the two best seam bowlers and the two best spinners to complete their attack. India on the other hand would have one of the spin options covered by picked Jadeja first as the all rounder.

When it comes to ODIs and limited overs it's a perhaps more complicated because teams want the most batting and the most bowling. I think, as a starting point, you would want 6/6 split of players that can bat and bowl. That's kind of based on England's success - Woakes, Rashid, Plunkett, Wood, Archer, Stokes (Root was in the World Cup winning team too - ideally the game would have more part timers used. Although, Woakes, Rashid and Plunkett could all bat.

I think something that could work really well is not allowing the 6th and weakest bowling option to not bowl during the death overs or the last third of a limited overs game.

 

[GuyIncognito]

@Ed Smith after a succulent Chinese meal and seeing the last page lol.

 

[Ed Smith]

Back on topic please.

 

[KapCha4242]

Back on topic please.

Thanks appreciate that.

 

[Loubs]

I am of the opinion games are just broke and never come complete, call me thickle but a steady diet of EA sport rehash has made me aware. However are all games companies coming to the same strategy? I would hope not but something is telling me this is the market norm and we will never reach a utopia where we can genuinly say (with confidence) this is a complete game with no problems and does what it says on the box. BA have forgone the urge to follow the EA rehash of an annual (lack of) effort game and opt for two years. Let us hope this is the one which makes the creative juices flow, we wait and hold our breath.

 

[venkniralac]

Do we get to fight with opponent team coach in the game if not send us separate DLC

 

[Loubs]

Do we get to fight with opponent team coach in the game if not send us separate DLC

So when have you ever seen this happen in the actual sport?