Bill Harris' Realism Sliders

[miaturne]

Re: Bill Harris' Realism Sliders

can somebody tell me what the threshold needs to be at on fast? I know it needs to be at 70 for very fast.

[brinks]

Re: Bill Harris' Realism Sliders

I put it down at 65 or 60. Not sure which is working better yet.

[DrewBledsoe]

Re: Bill Harris' Realism Sliders

Forgot to add that I was getting an average of 121 plays per game through the first six games of my franchise with 12 and 15 sec. runoff. I think how quickly each person selects plays will affect that, though.

Thanks for the nod Bill. Btw, I didn't mean to sound a bit "know it all" (been a long day) of course the speed with which you pick your plays makes all the difference. I use 20 sec run off 15 mins qrts (all stat junky). If they patch it so that the cpu QB actually takes a few secs at the LOS, I'd gladly use 15 sec runoff, and call more audibles, even though you can get a lot done in a few seconds, when your used to having to do so all the time.

Holy cow, DB, are those your stats? Man, I've played a ton of games and never even thrown for 400 yards.

Yeah my points were, that I used to play QB (not The Real DB btw), and always found myself "waiting mentally" for receivers to be where they should be on slow speed. Hence, I was really attracted to fast speed, because it does seem about right. Pre-read, Snap, Drop while reading, hit back foot,throw.

BUT the receivers are just so quick (on very fast), that with a little swerving and hitting receivers precisely out of their breaks, almost any pass gets 10 yds or more. This causes the ai to start sending insane amounts of guys after the QB, which makes it easier and so on. They did eventually adjust in that game, and stopped blitzing, and dropping the coverage deep, but then I was getting 15 yd crossing pattern completions. The pursuit angles are even more obviously messed up on very fast, than other speeds. The defender runs to where the receiver is now, not where he will be. Leads to lots of big gains, and when the guys are faster, that means more yds and tds.

Anyways, really good luck to you, hope you prove me wrong that Very Fast speed can be made playable.

I've never thrown for more than 378 yds in a game before, in my squillion test games for my own sliders (all at slow game speed).

[T9R]

Re: Bill Harris' Realism Sliders

I [...] always found myself "waiting mentally" for receivers to be where they should be on slow speed. Hence, I was really attracted to fast speed, because it does seem about right. Pre-read, Snap, Drop while reading, hit back foot,throw

Agreed, faster game speed seems to make passing easier for some players. When I've been playing on slow, my brain starts to freak out when waiting for receiver to make his cut. It's easier to get into a rhythm on fast.

[jr86]

Re: Bill Harris' Realism Sliders

Agreed, faster game speed seems to make passing easier for some players. When I've been playing on slow, my brain starts to freak out when waiting for receiver to make his cut. It's easier to get into a rhythm on fast.

Agreed i think this set has to be played on a minimum of fast setting. Quick game i had Sd(ME) v Dal on fast 10-14 at the half. I then decided to put it to normal to see how it would play out. First play of the 2nd half Rivers goes down, so in comes Volek or should i say Tom Brady because Volek proceeds to pass for 200yds 2TD's and a game winning 14 play drive in the last 2mins to win me the game 30-27!
I think in order to play this at normal several things would have to be changed...just my o

[g2thecore]

Re: Bill Harris' Realism Sliders

So I tried these last night, and I agree with a lot of you guys. The speed is very unrealistic looking. I hate seeing guys running around like they're high on speed.

I also find it way too easy to pass, and run the ball. The return game is also too easy.

That being said, I'd be willing to use these sliders if I could use them on slow speed. My question is, if I use slow speed, what should I put the threshold to? I appreciate the help.

[budsticky]

Re: Bill Harris' Realism Sliders

I have been praising these sliders and I'm not about to change that now. The only thing I've been concerned with was the lack of receiver ability to get into longer and more complex routes because of the intense pass rush.

This afternoon I tested these sliders with the human pass block backed off by 10. In past Madden games backing something off by 10 points would be akin to shoveling **** against the tide..it would be totally pointless. But in this Madden that gave me probably a little too much time. So I went half way and backed them off by 5 points and now I'm at a place I like. I still have to think fast. The receivers don't get into their more complex routes all the time but sometimes I can get them to do so. I still get pressured and I still have to decide on a receiver quick unless I want to get put on my rear end.

I hear what some of you are saying about the very fast settings looking weird and I agree it can look a little crazy at times. I care more about the results being in line with real football more than the way the results play out on screen. I know there are those out there that look at replays after every play to see where an animation might have went awry, but that isn't me. I guess I'm just old school. I used to play Strat-O-Matic football which is basically a dice and chart game. You had to use your imagination to see what was happening, but it all made sense with the numbers and the results. That's what I'm liking about these sliders. I've had 17-10 games, I've had 33-25 games, I've won comfortably, and I've been blown out. The bottom line is that it has all been believable. Could I have gone to the instant replay and found where a guy motion shifted slightly to pick up a block? I'm sure I could. But why would I when I'm enjoying the game so much.

As for those of you putting up these gaudy stats with these sliders...all I can say is wow and props to you. You all must be really good Madden players. I've had a couple 300+ yard games but that's with Tom Brady and he can do that. FWIW I also had one game where he got picked 4 times. Again, this was an odditty so I was able to take it for what it was. That's what I'm liking about how these sliders are making my games turn out.

[LingeringRegime]

Re: Bill Harris' Realism Sliders

I guess I'm just old school. I used to play Strat-O-Matic football which is basically a dice and chart game. You had to use your imagination to see what was happening, but it all made sense with the numbers and the results. That's what I'm liking about these sliders. I've had 17-10 games, I've had 33-25 games, I've won comfortably, and I've been blown out. The bottom line is that it has all been believable. Could I have gone to the instant replay and found where a guy motion shifted slightly to pick up a block? I'm sure I could. But why would I when I'm enjoying the game so much.

That's what I am thinking too. It's a great set, and I am getting a great variety of games, and I have to earn everything I get. I am playing on fast speed and loving the games. The best part is I don't get cheated by the Superhuman Cheating AI.

Looking forward to Bill's tweaks for fast speed, and I will use these bad boys for my franchise.

[brinks]

Re: Bill Harris' Realism Sliders

The offensive side of the game is great-- especially at super fast.

CPU offensive performance is another issue. I've left it alone, but I'm 8-0 and the CPU hasn't topped 21 points yet. I think the CPU QB accuracy and break tackle need to be upped and the user INT slid down.

I'll try that first.

[budsticky]

Re: Bill Harris' Realism Sliders

There's one other thing I forgot to mention in my last post to see if Bill or anybody else has noticed. I'm finding the CPU gets many of it's touchdowns on big plays a bit more than I'd like. They do get some of those long drive TDs, but it seems they really get a lot of those pass or run plays where a guy sheds a tackler and then takes it to the house for a big gain. This isn't the case for me on the human side, just the CPU. I'm just curious to see if anybody else has noticed this with these sliders.

[brinks]

Re: Bill Harris' Realism Sliders

Wanted to give these sliders one more game as they stood in tough conditions... played as the Raiders at New England. And this was my first "uh oh" game with the sliders.

I won 38 to 21.

Total yards
Raiders: 348
Pats: 421

Russell: 15 for 29, 240 yards, 4 TDs 0 INTs
Brady: 32 for 50, 351 yards, 1 TD 3 INTs

Rushing yards
Raiders: 116
Pats: 76

Of note, Heyward-Bey caught 5 balls for 174 and 3 TDs-- his speed was a killer. And Welker caught 12 balls for 111.

It could have been worse, but I missed two field goals.

The yardage looks good, but obviously the 3 INTs for Brady-- one a pick six killed them. Need to adjust for less CPU INTs for sure. I need to think about what else based on 9 games with these sliders.

[StiffArm]

Re: Bill Harris' Realism Sliders

So I tried these for a bit, and the first thing I thought was, "way too fast; how can that be realistic?" Then I watched the instant replay, and while watching from a fixed camera angle it didn't look so bad. So I looked up some highlights of Kevin Smith on youtube (I was using the Lions), and compared them to instant replays from a makeshift "broadcast booth" type angle, and indeed the replays of plays made on Very Fast looked the most true-to-life (this was all in practice mode, btw). So I conceded and went on to play a game with these settings...

But while playing it still just didn't seem right; it looked way too fast. So I ran lots of plays and looked at lots of replays, and while I have no way to actually prove it, I think the instant replay slows the action down slightly. Bill, I know you said the Instant replay was at the same speed as the in-game action, but are you completely sure? I could swear it's slightly slower. And if it is, then that means the 40 times you got from watching the replays would be inaccurate, and perhaps Fast would be closer to a realistic setting. I don't know. Like I said, I have no way of proving one way or another, it just.... LOOKS slightly slower on the replay, no matter the camera angle.

At any rate, even if this is so, it's a shock to me as I was convinced slow was the most realistic prior to reading your blog post.

Regardless, I really appreciate your commitment to realism and to the game, and I look forward to seeing where your sliders go from here.

[billharris44]

Re: Bill Harris' Realism Sliders

The offensive side of the game is great-- especially at super fast.

CPU offensive performance is another issue. I've left it alone, but I'm 8-0 and the CPU hasn't topped 21 points yet. I think the CPU QB accuracy and break tackle need to be upped and the user INT slid down.

I agree on CPU offense. I think my defense is too strong against teams of similar skill. The problem with adjusting the break tackle any higher is that I did quite a bit of testing with both Larry Johnson and Adrian Peterson, and if you go any higher, guys are breaking a BUNCH of tackles with regularity. Where I have it now, I see guys make great plays at times, but it's not constantly. Some of these sliders are really sensitive in terms of having thresholds.

I think the biggest problem right now is that the CPU QB doesn't scan the field that effectively at times. They have time to throw, but they don't find a receiver. I'm slowly lowering the human reaction slider for pass defense (making it worse), trying to help out the CPU offense a bit.

I played on Fast tonight for the first time and wore out the Jaguars 42-10. However, the Jaguars suck in this game--I play as the Chiefs and actually had marginally better personnel, and the Jaguars secondary (in particular) is just awful. So I really controlled the game.

I'm hoping this was a ratings-related domination and not Fast playing that much easier. I'll probably play two games tomorrow to take a look.

[billharris44]

Re: Bill Harris' Realism Sliders

There's one other thing I forgot to mention in my last post to see if Bill or anybody else has noticed. I'm finding the CPU gets many of it's touchdowns on big plays a bit more than I'd like. They do get some of those long drive TDs, but it seems they really get a lot of those pass or run plays where a guy sheds a tackler and then takes it to the house for a big gain. This isn't the case for me on the human side, just the CPU. I'm just curious to see if anybody else has noticed this with these sliders.

I noticed it when I was playing defenses that focused on the center of the field. When I tried to jam up the middle, I found that I was getting killed on outside runs. What would happen is that my defender would be in a one-on-one situation too often with a running back with no one behind him if he missed the tackle.

[billharris44]

Re: Bill Harris' Realism Sliders

So I tried these for a bit, and the first thing I thought was, "way too fast; how can that be realistic?" Then I watched the instant replay, and while watching from a fixed camera angle it didn't look so bad. So I looked up some highlights of Kevin Smith on youtube (I was using the Lions), and compared them to instant replays from a makeshift "broadcast booth" type angle, and indeed the replays of plays made on Very Fast looked the most true-to-life (this was all in practice mode, btw). So I conceded and went on to play a game with these settings...

But while playing it still just didn't seem right; it looked way too fast. So I ran lots of plays and looked at lots of replays, and while I have no way to actually prove it, I think the instant replay slows the action down slightly. Bill, I know you said the Instant replay was at the same speed as the in-game action, but are you completely sure? I could swear it's slightly slower. And if it is, then that means the 40 times you got from watching the replays would be inaccurate, and perhaps Fast would be closer to a realistic setting. I don't know. Like I said, I have no way of proving one way or another, it just.... LOOKS slightly slower on the replay, no matter the camera angle.

At any rate, even if this is so, it's a shock to me as I was convinced slow was the most realistic prior to reading your blog post.

Regardless, I really appreciate your commitment to realism and to the game, and I look forward to seeing where your sliders go from here.

I tried to "live" time guys in Practice mode to verify that it was the same, and I think it was. However, it's really, really hard to time live because of the camera angles--it's hard to see 40 yards downfield and stop the watch with the same accuracy you can in replay mode, because in replay, you can just set the camera right at the 40-yard point. So to the best that I could determine, it was the same.