gr18-lowered-aggression franchise file

[CrabbyPants]

Quote: Originally Posted by gr18

Since this has become a bigger topic for debate recently,I decided to put this 'new' old franchise file up.Meaning THIS IS NOT A NEW UPDATE.It's my last franchise file w/ lower aggression for those that don't like the higher aggression.This seems to be a split topic but I would like to know what others think .Please try it and compare.There still very well may be a split.At least each individual will see what's best for them. I didn't put it w/ my other thread because I thought there would be some confusion.I probably won't be doing an update for a few weeks because I don't like to do too much 'rating adjusting' based off of 3-4 weeks.

Excuse my ignorance, but i'm new to the game. What exactly does the aggression ratings affect?

[gr18]

Quote: Originally Posted by CrabbyPants

Excuse my ignorance, but i'm new to the game. What exactly does the aggression ratings affect?

A 64/127 aggression rating was founded after the editor was developed.It was said that this caused more impact at the line,defenders flying to the ball,more animations including catches,etc.Many found this to be a better experience but over time it's been picked apart by some,mainly for the db's play.It's been altered by roster makers and there has been some debate to what is better for gameplay.

[gr18]

Quote: Originally Posted by Wonderland

Oh actually, even with Janikowski the kicks don't travel very far, even when I hit it maximum... it's mostly the cpu that kicks off way too far, with people who really shouldn't be doing that.

Take notice if there's any wind affecting the kicks.I do know what you're saying though.It does seem like the computer has stronger kickoffs than you often leading a person to think that the kicking slider does affect length to a degree.I've never played with mine close to where I set the computers,at 32.I was going to put it at 40 because there is a very low pct. of missed fieldgoals these days.I think the average is around 85% success.I believe I have human at 16.I'd have to check.

[CrabbyPants]

Quote: Originally Posted by gr18

A 64/127 aggression rating was founded after the editor was developed.It was said that this caused more impact at the line,defenders flying to the ball,more animations including catches,etc.Many found this to be a better experience but over time it's been picked apart by some,mainly for the db's play.It's been altered by roster makers and there has been some debate to what is better for gameplay.

Okay, so what difference would I see by using this file as opposed to your previous "higher aggression" file?

[gr18]

Quote: Originally Posted by CrabbyPants

Okay, so what difference would I see by using this file as opposed to your previous "higher aggression" file?

There's been a number of threads lately that complain that a higher aggression number,64,for cornerbacks makes them bite too often and they play much better at a minimal number,1.

That's just one example but for every person that doesn't like it,there seems to be another that does.Some roster makers use high aggression,others don't.I wanted to put out two versions of the same roster and let people compare off of that and see which they prefer.Finn's editor will let you adjust to your hearts content as well.

[Wonderland]

I'm gonna have to guess that the kicking slider actually does affect power, because I have the human set at 0, and like I said, kickers who should be booming it don't (wind accounted for), and cpu kickers who shouldn't, do. I'll just go with the ratings adjustments I suppose.

[olig23]

Quote: Originally Posted by Wonderland

I'm gonna have to guess that the kicking slider actually does affect power, because I have the human set at 0, and like I said, kickers who should be booming it don't (wind accounted for), and cpu kickers who shouldn't, do. I'll just go with the ratings adjustments I suppose.

I too would concur that playing with Human kicking sliders at 0 does seem to affect the power of kicks. I play with the slider for human kicking at zero in order to make kicking more than just a subconscious event. I find it harder to kick long field goals but I would have to test it more to be sure.

Another thing i would mention is how many kickers actually do make field goals of over 50 yards?

I think the kicking ratings could certainly be worked to more accurately represent reality, though it will never be perfect. regardless, it is not the be all and end all since there are other aspects of games that are more significant worth correcting.

[the_future420]

Quote: Originally Posted by gr18

Yeah,I wouldn't turn computer kicking slider under 32 or he will become terribly inaccurate.You basically have to choose between giving kickers the ability to make 50-55 yarders or getting the opportunity to runback more kicks.Obviously,you can just shorten-up your kick to give the computer more returns. I personally would give longer fieldgoals the edge because while I like the fun of returning punts(occasionally getting a long return),returning kickoffs is another story.Getting more than 30 yards on a kick return is an accomplishment.

I've had my share of nice kick returns, including 2 for touchdowns in my last 30 some odd games. I agree with you though that they are much tougher than punt returns. I use the Bears mostly, and I feel like I can break any punt return with Hester, as it should be.

On kickoffs, I've found its best to bust a charged up right-stick juke move when the first initial wave of 2-3 defenders closes in on you around the 20 yard line. With a good returner, you can usually shake all 3 of these guys very quickly and then you have the opportunity to bust it right up the middle for a touchdown if your blocking is set up and you hit the right lane. Its very tough however to take it to the house down the sidelines. Somebody will usually have get the angle on you around midfield.