Tone down player Ratings please!!!

[BDawg35]

Quote: Originally Posted by Deegeezy

B-Dawg....You getting back in the Dynasty game?

The plan - subject to avoiding a financial emergency - is to buy a new PS3 in time for NCAA's release.

Then, yeah ... it's ON!!!

You posting a 'chise or 'nasty anywhere or are you laying low 'til NCAA/Madden '11s come out?

[SA1NT401]

Quote: Originally Posted by khaliib

One of the biggest problems the game has been having deals with the progression of players. The in-game player generator creating freshman with an OVR in the 70's, then 2-3 yrs, they're rated in the 90's. This basically broke the offline Dynasty because schools in small Conf's became Power schools within 5 yrs. With that said, I'm suggesting that they tune the player generator to create 5 Star players with lower ratings so that the game does not have a bunch of 90'ish players in 5 yrs. - I wish there would be no more than ten 90 rated players in any given year. - Having fewer players in the 90's, makes it that much more special to get a player rated in that range, those game changers (Ex. Reggie Bush, Dion Sanders, Rocket Ismail type that make you change your gameplan) - Of course this could be any position/player, not just players with speed. Attributes that are tied into the Locomotion feature should be toned down so that we do not have TE's playing with the attributes of a 180 lb WR or a FB juking and changing direction like a 175 lb RB. This also adds replay life because building a lower tier school will take some years to build. Also, certain postional ratings needs to make sense. - QB's with low throw power does not mean they can't throw the ball deep, their throws just have more air under them. - Power and Jump ratings etc.... I just don't want the game to be full of Superstars after 5 yrs with high AGL/ACC ratings.

You stole my post...JK.

Agree 100%.

There should be NO MORE than 6-8 90++ovr players in the entire game in any given year...That should be reserved for the ELITES of the country.

Average players SHOULD be rated in the lo to mid 60's ....Above average should be in the low end of the 70s and so on.

Part of the reason EVERY SINGLE players and team for that matter feels IDENTICAL after 2-3 yrs in dynasty (same goes for madden).

But the biggest thing required is this....

Ratings need to actually mean something....90% of the ratings right now are worthless.

Hope something changes.

[Deegeezy]

Quote: Originally Posted by BDawg35

The plan - subject to avoiding a financial emergency - is to buy a new PS3 in time for NCAA's release. Then, yeah ... it's ON!!! You posting a 'chise or 'nasty anywhere or are you laying low 'til NCAA/Madden '11s come out?

Laying low right now.

I quit my Madden 10 franchise like in January I think, though unintentionally. Work/Life got extremely busy for about 2 months and I had no time for it and by the time things slowed down, I had lost interest.

I sort of just abandoned my Bengals chise and left my readers hangin' with no explanation unfortunately.

I'm trying to decide which game to play this year and I'd say right now I'm about 65-70% sure it will be NCAA.

I probably will go in a different direction as far as team. I have this strange desire to play with a small school in a small conference, like Western Kentucky. Won't be much fun for my readers but I kind of want to use a low-key school that's playing for other things besides a national championship.

[bucknut7]

In my opinion the best sports game right now is Fifa '10, and I think part of this is due to the ratings. The best player in the game is like an 89-90 and this is Lionel Messi who is a superstar. Still, players in the 70's and 80's are still very effective, but they are mostly specialty players. A player like Ryan Babel is a 77 overall, but he has acceleration in speed in the low 90's (very good in that game), so he can be a game changer on the wing if used correctly.

This style of ratings should be used in '11. The highest rated players should be rated in the low 90's and they should be players that are good at multiple things, such as A Mark Ingram or a Beanie Wells, who have great speed, vision, and solid power.

A running back that is exclusively a fast scat back (think Demps) should be somewhere in the high 70's - low/mid 80's. They might not be the highest rated running back on the team, but they can still be game changers.

[khaliib]

I wish they would include the ratings editor that's in LIVE 10.

You could adjust an attribute accross the board for a team vs opening up each individual player, which takes forever.

Hopefully, when there is an opportunity to communicate with a developer, someone will ask a question pertaining to lowering ratings and progression because this issue just ruins the replay for the off-line game with 200+ players rated above 85.

[NEOPARADIGM]

Progression was discussed to death last year, so, presumably, there will be some changes for this year's game. We'll likely hear something about it when we finally start getting info on Dynasty mode.

[krc1130]

I did something similar last year but the dang incoming Freshman ruined my rating gap

Anyway, I basically went through and rated everyone on ability, not production. NCAA seems to rate players on their face value. Tim Tebow and Sam Bradford are not on the same level. Bradford is a better QB than Tebow.

My QBs were rated something like:
Bradford-96
Clausen-96
Locker-95
Tebow-94
McCoy-91
Pike-90
J.Brown-90

and that was it for my 90 rated QBs. Crazy thing about this? All these QBs got drafted.

90+ should be reserved for NFL caliber players aka USC circa 2004-2005

[cparrish]

Darrell Scott is a perfect example of players who do not progress at all in College. I completely with the idea of not every player going from an 80 as a frosh, and staying an 80 his college career. This, like the OP said, would make Dynasties so much more realistic, and much more enjoyable to play your Dynasty for 10+ seasons; 20+ if they add the Coaching Carousel!