Home

Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

This is a discussion on Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings. within the EA Sports College Football forums.

Go Back   Operation Sports Forums > Football > EA Sports College Football
ESBC Roster - The Best We've Ever Seen in a Boxing Game?
PES 2021 Team Spirit Guide - Understand Chemistry on a New Level
MLB The Show 21 Diamond Dynasty Budget Beasts
Poll: What's more important to you, when the time comes to purchase a game? (Click to vote)
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-30-2011, 05:00 PM   #1
BOOM!
 
AuburnAlumni's Arena
 
OVR: 43
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Posts: 11,947
Blog Entries: 1
Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

This is a welcome addition that not a lot of folks seem to have noticed when looking at the vids.

Even teams like Bama, etc. who are rated Top 5 in the game have backups that are more in the 75-79 range. Very refreshing to see this. Top rated players at certain positions are in the 92-94 range and not 99s. Excellent.

We all know how the old USC/Florida/Florida State rosters back in the day would have the 3rd string TE rated as an 88 overall.


Now obviously, the actual individual player ratings of many guys are a bit off, but that's not the point. Taken as a whole, I'm seeing a much broader range being used.


My only question is this. Will the CPU generated players be on the same level as the initial roster set? By that I mean...looking at some of the top rated true freshman in the game, such as Florida's Jeff Driskell and Auburn's Kiehl Frazier..both regarded as blue chip, Top 5 QBs....are 75 and 72 respectively. I have no problem with that at all. However, after year 1......will the CPU generated Top 5 QBs be rated in the mid 80s?

I'm hoping that since the initial roster ratings are lowered and more spread out, this falls in line with how the CPU generated recruits are created.

Our Online Dynasty group already plans on simming a few seasons to get a gauge on how the top true freshmen are rated.

If CPU generated recruits are still coming in at 80+, we'll go back through the initial roster set and rerate the top 2011 Freshmen accordingly.


But overall...well done EA. Thank you for using a wider range initially.
__________________
AUBURN TIGERS
2010, 2013 SEC CHAMPIONS
2010 NATIONAL CHAMPIONS
AuburnAlumni is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove
Old 06-30-2011, 05:02 PM   #2
Pro
 
OVR: 9
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: San Diego
Re: Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

Couldn't agree more. I think people are freaking out about missing players and stuff and sure there is a lot of work to make the rosters, but I like that the ratings are better spread out and will take that over good rosters where you have to re-do so many ratings.
__________________
SCHUMJ's 1995 roster : http://www.operationsports.com/forum...box-360-a.html
schumj is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2011, 05:03 PM   #3
Pro
 
OVR: 8
Join Date: May 2011
Re: Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AuburnAlumni
This is a welcome addition that not a lot of folks seem to have noticed when looking at the vids.

Even teams like Bama, etc. who are rated Top 5 in the game have backups that are more in the 75-79 range. Very refreshing to see this. Top rated players at certain positions are in the 92-94 range and not 99s. Excellent.

We all know how the old USC/Florida/Florida State rosters back in the day would have the 3rd string TE rated as an 88 overall.


Now obviously, the actual individual player ratings of many guys are a bit off, but that's not the point. Taken as a whole, I'm seeing a much broader range being used.


My only question is this. Will the CPU generated players be on the same level as the initial roster set? By that I mean...looking at some of the top rated true freshman in the game, such as Florida's Jeff Driskell and Auburn's Kiehl Frazier..both regarded as blue chip, Top 5 QBs....are 75 and 72 respectively. I have no problem with that at all. However, after year 1......will the CPU generated Top 5 QBs be rated in the mid 80s?

I'm hoping that since the initial roster ratings are lowered and more spread out, this falls in line with how the CPU generated recruits are created.

Our Online Dynasty group already plans on simming a few seasons to get a gauge on how the top true freshmen are rated.

If CPU generated recruits are still coming in at 80+, we'll go back through the initial roster set and rerate the top 2011 Freshmen accordingly.


But overall...well done EA. Thank you for using a wider range initially.
Do you think we should ask the poster who has been posting so many vids of ratings, gameplay, etc, to test this out over a couple of years of dynasty in regards to incoming recruit ratings? Just a thought.

I agree with you, I like the stretched out ratings. I'm definitely going to be redshirting most of my backups that I legally can at Kentucky lol gonna take a while to build them up with our backups all in the 60s, but that makes it all the more fun when I do.
Wildcats302 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2011, 05:06 PM   #4
Hall Of Fame
 
illwill10's Arena
 
OVR: 31
Join Date: Mar 2009
Re: Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

I really like that ratings are spread out. I was planing on lowering OVRs anyway, so it saves a ton of time. Hopefully Roster makers dont improve ratings anymore. 86+ Seem to be the studs now.
Last year John Brantley would have been 90. This year a 80. I am loving it. Besides a few 90+ players, I wont have to really mess with Overalls. But I will mess with some ratings like ACC, Pursuit, BCV, AGI, PRC, and Jump
illwill10 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2011, 05:21 PM   #5
Rookie
 
OVR: 3
Join Date: Nov 2009
Re: Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

This is great if

1) as stated, new recruits on average are rated similarly
2) progression is done so some of these top recruits are 94-95 by their junior or senior year
3) player ratings matter more especially on the line

lastly, I noticed a couple juco's on Nebraska's roster at least are rated too low. Hopefully this does not mean they reverted to the mistake they made in earlier versions of the game with jucos rated FAR too low. Jucos are immediate impact guys EA.
SeaOfRed75 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove
Old 06-30-2011, 05:33 PM   #6
Hall Of Fame
 
illwill10's Arena
 
OVR: 31
Join Date: Mar 2009
Re: Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaOfRed75
This is great if

1) as stated, new recruits on average are rated similarly
2) progression is done so some of these top recruits are 94-95 by their junior or senior year
3) player ratings matter more especially on the line

lastly, I noticed a couple juco's on Nebraska's roster at least are rated too low. Hopefully this does not mean they reverted to the mistake they made in earlier versions of the game with jucos rated FAR too low. Jucos are immediate impact guys EA.
I think that is the reason why ratings were stretched. I dont think recruits ovrs were changed much, so they wanted to streched out roster
illwill10 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2011, 05:37 PM   #7
Rookie
 
OVR: 2
Join Date: May 2009
Re: Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

They really took a big step forward with these ratings. There are some curveballs (Ohio St's walkon OL, Donnie Evege at 87 ovr, Jordan Kovacs at 89 ovr, lol), but by and large this is pretty encouraging.

Now we need to see if the first year recruits dwarf the lowly rated underclassmen.
jwinslow is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2011, 05:41 PM   #8
The Trickster-6/9/21
 
jfsolo's Arena
 
OVR: 20
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 11,844
Re: Kudos to EA for making concious effort to space out roster ratings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaOfRed75
This is great if

1) as stated, new recruits on average are rated similarly
2) progression is done so some of these top recruits are 94-95 by their junior or senior year
3) player ratings matter more especially on the line

lastly, I noticed a couple juco's on Nebraska's roster at least are rated too low. Hopefully this does not mean they reverted to the mistake they made in earlier versions of the game with jucos rated FAR too low. Jucos are immediate impact guys EA.
Its always a guessing game. Sometimes you'll have a Lavonte David or a Dejon Gomes who blow up, and sometimes you'll have a Kenny Wilson or a Tyrell Spain who don't pan out.
__________________
Quote:
Jordan Mychal Lemos
@crypticjordan

Do this today: Instead of $%*#[email protected]& on a game you're not going to play or movie you're not going to watch, say something good about a piece of media you're excited about.

Do the same thing tomorrow. And the next. Now do it forever.
jfsolo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

« Operation Sports Forums > Football > EA Sports College Football »


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:50 AM.

Top -