Post patch LT regression

[drustrk3]

Re: Post patch LT regression

I tested some and some guys were still the best OVR option for their team even with 60-70 PBK but others were cut or relegated to backup duty. If they stay in at least it minimizes how many T's get decimated, but the downside to that is they may give up even more sacks until they've been effectively chased out of the league.

Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk

Got it...starting based on overall rtg and thats not dropping.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[EricFreakingBerry]

Re: Post patch LT regression

Got it...starting based on overall rtg and thats not dropping.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

Well the OVR is dropping too, but even a 20 point PBK drop may only affect a guy 5-7 OVR. Lewan as an 85 went to 80 in my test for example. What's sad is those guys could still make capable guards if they can run block at all, but that means 32 team control and micromanaging all the OLs.

Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk

[bucky60]

Re: Post patch LT regression

Great work, CM. Yet another mishap from the backward progression/regression system that's based on stats/XP. Guys don't get worse from giving up sacks... they give up sacks because they're bad. If the game ever gets this kind of mindset (that stats are a reflection of ability, not the other way around) a lot of these issues can be remedied.

YES. I'm glad to see I'm not the only one confused by this line of thinking.

Ratings should drive performance, not the other way around.

This XP system just has to go. It really makes absolutely no sense in a sports game of any kind.

Thank you. Not only is the current system unrealistic, but if a progression/regression system was based on realism (realistic variables and potential) and not XP/Goals/Stats the game would be far easier to balance.

I'm not a proponent of removing something that's existing and a lot of people like that unrealistic RPG feedback loop, so I don't purpose getting rid of it completely. But give us others a realistic option for progression/regression that will also create less opportunity for bugs/imbalance as fewer systems need this unrealistic connectivity that we find in gameplay/stats/goals and franchise progression/regression.

It's nice to know I'm not alone on this distaste for XP.

[bucky60]

Re: Post patch LT regression

This. EA did a good job addressing things quickly, but CFM is a pretty bloated and complicated old heap of code at this point.

This CFM code isn't some old/outdated code. They just created this BRAND NEW for the new generation of consoles. It's not like they are working with 10 or 20 year old stuff. CCM/CFM was created pretty recently. This fact doesn't make it any less bloated or complicated. I'm just saying that it was RECENTLY designed this way.

Looking at this post, it's somewhat off topic, so mods feel free to delete if you'd like.

[drustrk3]

Re: Post patch LT regression

Well the OVR is dropping too, but even a 20 point PBK drop may only affect a guy 5-7 OVR. Lewan as an 85 went to 80 in my test for example. What's sad is those guys could still make capable guards if they can run block at all, but that means 32 team control and micromanaging all the OLs.

Sent from my LG-H811 using Tapatalk

Anyone free to test offline cfm with the tuner deleted? Might be having some different results (better). I will run tests when I get home later.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[drustrk3]

Re: Post patch LT regression

Anyone free to test offline cfm with the tuner deleted? Might be having some different results (better). I will run tests when I get home later.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

http://www.operationsports.com/forum...p?p=2047649906

That was from the patch thread.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[ajk49er]

Re: Post patch LT regression

goals are screwed up with DB's, I can only guess its the same elsewhere(DB's with INT goals having PD's counted instead of INT's, and S's getting tackles counted instead of INT's, I have no idea how wide spread it is)


4 years into my CFM, there are 4 QB's over an 80!!! FOUR! I saw Austin Davis throw for over 3500 yards, a 3 to 1 INT ratio, and lose 2 points in overall. that is just so wrong.


I tried to boost Marcus Peters at CB, after 4 seasons of boosting only stats that change overall, and a 6 and 7 INT season back to back, DB of the year, ETC, I got him from the starting 75 overall, to an 82....Progressing players is pretty depressing, I am totally OK with it being impossible to make a scrub into a 90, but when I win WR of the year and lead in catches and yards and TD's and lose points...I just struggle to understand how any of this is "working as intended.

[homeycool]

Re: Post patch LT regression

I simmed 10 seasons in an online CFM. This problem only seems to affect real NFL players. At 10 seasons there were plenty of highly rated left tackles, but not a single starting tackle left that was an actual NFL player.

Off topic, the same thing was true of QB's with awareness. The highest awareness attribute of a real player was Derek Carr at 77, then Luck at 69, and Wilson at 55. There were no other real life starting QB's.

For whatever reason, generated players don't suffer from the same over the top regression.

[drustrk3]

Re: Post patch LT regression

I simmed 10 seasons in an online CFM. This problem only seems to affect real NFL players. At 10 seasons there were plenty of highly rated left tackles, but not a single starting tackle left that was an actual NFL player.

Off topic, the same thing was true of QB's with awareness. The highest awareness attribute of a real player was Derek Carr at 77, then Luck at 69, and Wilson at 55. There were no other real life starting QB's.

For whatever reason, generated players don't suffer from the same over the top regression.

Saw that too. I need to try an offline Sim with the tuner deleted later. Who knows..worth a shot to see if it's different

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[bad_philanthropy]

Re: Post patch LT regression

This CFM code isn't some old/outdated code. They just created this BRAND NEW for the new generation of consoles. It's not like they are working with 10 or 20 year old stuff. CCM/CFM was created pretty recently. This fact doesn't make it any less bloated or complicated. I'm just saying that it was RECENTLY designed this way.

Looking at this post, it's somewhat off topic, so mods feel free to delete if you'd like.

CFM is not a mode built from scratch. It is definitely built on the legacy code of franchise/owner mode.

[bucky60]

Re: Post patch LT regression

CFM is not a mode built from scratch. It is definitely built on the legacy code of franchise/owner mode.

Exactly what legacy franchise code did they pull forward from M12? Could not have been very much. Surely not XP/Goals progression/regression, scouting, drafting, confidence.

[drustrk3]

Re: Post patch LT regression

Exactly what legacy franchise code did they pull forward from M12? Could not have been very much. Surely not XP/Goals progression/regression, scouting, drafting, confidence.

Keep it on topic if we can fellas. Trying to see if there's any fix here.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

[Hooe]

Re: Post patch LT regression

Yeah, given that this bug veritably doesn't have anything to do with XP player progression / goals / scouting, I'm not quite sure why those topics are being discussed here.

[ajk49er]

Re: Post patch LT regression

you wonder why we are putting progression/regression together?


..........

[Hooe]

Re: Post patch LT regression

you wonder why we are putting progression/regression together?


..........

XP and Goals literally have nothing to do with how this bug is triggered.

So no, a discussion of the merits of the XP / Goals / Progression system at large is not on-topic for this thread.