I know there is the aggression formula... Anyone ever try a consistency formula?

[FunNgun034]

that is true with the concistency as well as composure ... Works great with the O-line.

[daflyboys]

Quote: Originally Posted by baa7

It's all in the ratings. Lower the accuracy and consistency enough and punters will regularily send the ball 20 yards and out of bounds. In fact, my CPU kickers miss so many extra points on TDs, I'm having to raise their ratings now.

I lowered the kick accuracy for punters, but not consistency.... I'll give that a look-see. But yes, kickers have to be bumped up to 127 max on accuracy. Too many cpu kickers are missing FG's in the 30's too often. Upper 40's I could see.

[SteelCityChamp]

With all of these consistency settings and ratings changes isn't that going to eliminate the chance of a bad game here or there? I mean, if we are going for simulation, even the best teams have a bad game every blue moon. I would hate to see consistent stats throughout every single game of a 16-game season to be so close there is no true variation. Simulation is good but poor performance from time-to-time is part of that. Just my 2 cents.

[spit_bubble]

^ In my testing the effects are relatively minimal, and inconsistencies are still there.

The general idea behind it was to help the CPU offense, which has a tendency to be too inconsistent and sloppy. It really is just another small way to raise the challenge.

[baa7]

Quote: Originally Posted by SteelCityChamp

With all of these consistency settings and ratings changes isn't that going to eliminate the chance of a bad game here or there? I mean, if we are going for simulation, even the best teams have a bad game every blue moon. I would hate to see consistent stats throughout every single game of a 16-game season to be so close there is no true variation. Simulation is good but poor performance from time-to-time is part of that. Just my 2 cents.

My take on that: first, even with Consistency ratings at 90 minimum, players are still prone to mistakes. That said, my feeling is that the gameplay actually gets better when some of these "mental" ratings (Leadership is another) are raised up quite high for all players.

Think about it. A player who is not capable of maintaining a consistent 90% effort on the field would not be playing. He'd be cut from the team. The effect some of these lowered ratings have on gameplay is nothing short of ridiculous, as well as absolutely unrealistic.

Run tests with ratings that are easy to check: Run Route, for example. Many players have Run Route ratings in the 40, 50 and 60 range. Now go into practice mode and watch those players perform. They run totally, completely wrong routes as much as 50% of the time. Again, a player who screws up his route ONCE might not get benched. A player who screws up his route TWO DOZEN TIMES a game -- and some of these players are THAT bad -- would be flipping burgers at McDonalds, not playing football.

[spit_bubble]

Quote: Originally Posted by baa7

My take on that: first, even with Consistency ratings at 90 minimum, players are still prone to mistakes...

The thing that balances it all out is the overall player rating. In other words if you have an offensive line with a high consistency rating, you'll still see "mistakes" when big time defensive linemen blow by a guard or a tackle with a lower rating.

I've capped the defensive consistency at around 80, with lower rated players going even lower than that, and I like what I am seeing so far.

All in all I think the offensive consistency should be higher than defensive consistency, because they are the ones running the plays with the defense reacting.

And like I say, overall ratings will help the defense play up to their ability for the most part... You'll still see highly rated defensive players dominate like they should... Even to the point of shutting an offense down for an entire game... It's just that the consistency seems to give the computer offense that little boost that it needs.

edit: And then you balance it out with sliders, so that you aren't getting that same boost.

[kid_legacy]

The best thing that Madden has been good for is their player attributes ratings. What i have done was downloaded the roster update that was created by Puja and changed the player ratings by using Madden 09 (I used 09 roster from Puja). What I have discovered is that it made the game that more realistic and I will continue to play 2k5 until they are allowed to make another 2k football game. The heck with Madden and I would strongly suggest that you all try this. For example, in Madden the player has an attribute called acceleration that equals to aggression for 2k, morale=composure, carrying=secure ball, trucking=break tackle, injury=durability, toughness=consistency, importance=leadership, pursuit=run coverage, awareness=pass read coverage, elusiveness=scramble and so on. Some of the attributes is self explanatory like catch, jump, tackle, pass block, etc and the other attributes like kick return, celebration, catch in traffic is worthless just like the Madden series. Great roster updates Puja and I thank you for doing such a good job and the time that is required to create the rosters.

[crowblack413]

I am creating a test roster (using VC last 04-05 roster update) with consistency used as experience. Rookies get a score of 70 and for every year in the league, consistency goes up by 3 points. I'm hoping that with the consistency leveled for all the players, the attributes will show through more during gameplay, and veterans will be more savy than the younger guys.
On a side note, can someone tell me if pass read coverage just affects cpu qbs? I was going to raise it to 127 for all qbs in the league if that is the case.