My initial impression of tuned recruits

[mgoblue678]

Quote: Originally Posted by Ramminyou

For WRs: The low elusiveness, juke, etc. ratings for WRs was intentional, and the EA team balanced it out by having CBs with low tackle. For AWR: apparently all it affects is QB play in the sim logic anyway. Note: the above two are from Russ in the Tuner update thread. The CPU depth chart is still a mystery though. If that is still messed up post-tuner, that's a shame.

I don't think that is the optimal way to achieve balance though . Almost all the WR's have a higher BTK rating by a good margin than they have in those other ratings. Most WR's in real life juke or evade tackles, they don't normally break that many.

If they raised the low tackling ratings for db's and lowered wr's break tackle ratings than they could give WR's more appropriate ratings in those other categories. Having D- ratings for alot of receivers in those categories is not close to realistic.

[Johnny "Too Tall"]

Quote: Originally Posted by jared52

I have given serious thought to making this my sig. Well said.

Yea because that's so profound......

We don't understand these ratings because they never explain what they actually do. Awarness should be self-explainitory, but it was so low that it made you wonder why. Well Apparently it either does nothing for any position other than QB, or they themselves don't know what it does do. Or maybe they'll tell us at a later date...

[Johnny "Too Tall"]

Quote: Originally Posted by mgoblue678

I don't think that is the optimal way to achieve balance though . Almost all the WR's have a higher BTK rating by a good margin than they have in those other ratings. Most WR's in real life juke or evade tackles, they don't normally break that many. If they raised the low tackling ratings for db's and lowered wr's break tackle ratings than they could give WR's more appropriate ratings in those other categories. Having D- ratings for alot of receivers in those categories is not close to realistic.

Very good point.

[nb27]

Maybe that should get rid of an awareness rating except for QBs, maybe change it to a positioning rating for defensive players or something

[nb27]

Quote: Originally Posted by mgoblue678

I don't think that is the optimal way to achieve balance though . Almost all the WR's have a higher BTK rating by a good margin than they have in those other ratings. Most WR's in real life juke or evade tackles, they don't normally break that many. If they raised the low tackling ratings for db's and lowered wr's break tackle ratings than they could give WR's more appropriate ratings in those other categories. Having D- ratings for alot of receivers in those categories is not close to realistic.

One thing I do like about it is it makes running backs feel a lot more dangerous than a receiver if you get him the ball in the open field (which they should). But unfortunately they went way overboard with it. I would like to see WRs usually have juke and spin ratings in the 60-80 range, with only the really elite players higher than that. But the ratings now are silly.

I have noticed that spin moves are somewhat effective even with players with low spin ratings- they spin slowly but it still seems to fool the defenders .

[bvb24]

Quote: Originally Posted by nb27

One thing I do like about it is it makes running backs feel a lot more dangerous than a receiver if you get him the ball in the open field (which they should). But unfortunately they went way overboard with it. I would like to see WRs usually have juke and spin ratings in the 60-80 range, with only the really elite players higher than that. But the ratings now are silly. I have noticed that spin moves are somewhat effective even with players with low spin ratings- they spin slowly but it still seems to fool the defenders .

I like it the way it is. I don't see a ton of spin moves out of WR's and as you said. Players with low ratings can still perform the move. It's not like it's taken away from them.