Cpu vs cpu sliders

Collapse

Recommended Videos

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • shaunhill256
    Rookie
    • Sep 2017
    • 447

    #1

    Cpu vs cpu sliders

    who’s rosters is best to fix interception problem and who’s sliders r beat for it?
  • SteelCityChamp
    Rookie
    • Jan 2008
    • 358

    #2
    Re: Cpu vs cpu sliders

    Originally posted by shaunhill256
    who’s rosters is best to fix interception problem and who’s sliders r beat for it?
    DEFAULT ROSTERS

    I did some research & this seems to be the way to go as far as CPU vs CPU. First of all on the gameplay settings I have EQ - ON, Multi Hot Routes - ON, & Coach Mode - On. Game time is 9 min per quarter.

    Sliders are 35 for Human & 40 for CPU. Injuries - 20, Fumbles - 23, INT - 0

    I am testing right now but it seems as though the QBs are making better throws & the defensive players aren't making a lot of INTs. I will confirm this after more games but this seems to be the magic we have all been wanting for 15 years now.
    NFL - Pittsburgh Steelers
    CFB - Miami Hurricanes
    MLB - NY Yankees
    NBA - Los Angeles Lakers
    CBB - NC Tarheels
    Bundesliga - FC Bayern Munich
    MLS - Seattle Sounders

    Comment

    • isherdish
      Rookie
      • Mar 2004
      • 213

      #3
      Re: Cpu vs cpu sliders

      How's it looking? Do you make any adjustments to the playbooks?

      Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

      Comment

      • SteelCityChamp
        Rookie
        • Jan 2008
        • 358

        #4
        Re: Cpu vs cpu sliders

        Originally posted by isherdish
        How's it looking? Do you make any adjustments to the playbooks?

        Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk
        Sorry for delay. I have been away for a while. I am back to testing. So far the sliders are still the same. As far as the playbook is concerned, I usually change both teams to West Coast & it plays pretty well.

        Keep in mind, I am still testing. Just been away for a while. (Change of work schedule.)
        NFL - Pittsburgh Steelers
        CFB - Miami Hurricanes
        MLB - NY Yankees
        NBA - Los Angeles Lakers
        CBB - NC Tarheels
        Bundesliga - FC Bayern Munich
        MLS - Seattle Sounders

        Comment

        • shaunhill256
          Rookie
          • Sep 2017
          • 447

          #5
          Re: Cpu vs cpu sliders

          Originally posted by SteelCityChamp
          Sorry for delay. I have been away for a while. I am back to testing. So far the sliders are still the same. As far as the playbook is concerned, I usually change both teams to West Coast & it plays pretty well.

          Keep in mind, I am still testing. Just been away for a while. (Change of work schedule.)
          Any updates on this?

          Comment

          • SteelCityChamp
            Rookie
            • Jan 2008
            • 358

            #6
            Re: Cpu vs cpu sliders

            Originally posted by shaunhill256
            Any updates on this?
            Just started testing again. Sorry for delay. I will have results of my findings by the end of next week.
            NFL - Pittsburgh Steelers
            CFB - Miami Hurricanes
            MLB - NY Yankees
            NBA - Los Angeles Lakers
            CBB - NC Tarheels
            Bundesliga - FC Bayern Munich
            MLS - Seattle Sounders

            Comment

            • SteelCityChamp
              Rookie
              • Jan 2008
              • 358

              #7
              Re: Cpu vs cpu sliders

              No luck! One would have to fix the ratings of almost every player to get CPU vs CPU to play even close to "good". This game just wasn't tuned well enough to play against itself. Sucks but it is what it is.

              Peace!
              NFL - Pittsburgh Steelers
              CFB - Miami Hurricanes
              MLB - NY Yankees
              NBA - Los Angeles Lakers
              CBB - NC Tarheels
              Bundesliga - FC Bayern Munich
              MLS - Seattle Sounders

              Comment

              • questforsliders
                Just started!
                • Oct 2019
                • 1

                #8
                Re: Cpu vs cpu sliders

                I've had some success with this recently and I would like to share (and have more folks test if they would be so kind, as game length leads to small sample size).


                I'll preface that this is a league of entirely fictional players (simmed until all original players retired) and that I did have to use Finn's editor to reduce the Catch stat of all defensive players by 50%. 8 minute quarters do a good job of replicating the number of plays run in the modern game.



                CPU blocking 8
                Passing 24
                Running 32
                Catching 40
                Coverage 0
                Pursuit 0
                Tackling 0
                Kicking 20
                Fatigue 8
                Injury 20
                Fumble 24
                Interception 0



                Some of the performances produced:
                QB1 (ovr 77) 17-28 (61%), 205 yds, 2 td, 0 int, 7.3 ypa, 1 sack

                QB2 (ovr 84) 25-44 (57%), 345 yds, 2 td, 1 int, 7.8 ypa, 1 sack
                QB3 (ovr 78) 13-32 (41%), 157 yds, 1 td, 2 int, 4.9 ypa, 3 sacks
                QB4 (ovr 82) 19-32 (59%), 255 yds, 1 td, 1 int, 8.0 ypa, 1 sack


                Some theory:
                Interception slider seems to impact interception rate negligibly.


                Passing being too high seems to increase INT rate. I think too much precision leads to more throws directly into the DB coverage lanes. At 0, though, I was seeing completion rates hover in the low 40s. I'm not exactly sure where the sweet spot is.


                YPA may be inflated. In the modern game, 7+ YPA is the realm of the top QBs alone, not the average ones. More sample size is needed. If it's a problem, my first attempt to fix it would be to modestly increase Pursuit to see if it would cut back on YAC.


                Tangentially, running may need to be increased to 40. I saw some 95+ ovr backs held to <3.5 ypc. Then again I also saw an 80 ovr go for 9.5. Many variables and small sample size. I hesitate to increase blocking because it may reduce pressure/sacks too much.


                Also the AI will nearly always attempt low percentage passes at end of half/game, no matter how dire their position, and this leads to elevated INT and decreased completion % overall.


                I hope you guys will try these out and add to our data.

                Comment

                • SteelCityChamp
                  Rookie
                  • Jan 2008
                  • 358

                  #9
                  Re: Cpu vs cpu sliders

                  Originally posted by questforsliders
                  I've had some success with this recently and I would like to share (and have more folks test if they would be so kind, as game length leads to small sample size).


                  I'll preface that this is a league of entirely fictional players (simmed until all original players retired) and that I did have to use Finn's editor to reduce the Catch stat of all defensive players by 50%. 8 minute quarters do a good job of replicating the number of plays run in the modern game.



                  CPU blocking 8
                  Passing 24
                  Running 32
                  Catching 40
                  Coverage 0
                  Pursuit 0
                  Tackling 0
                  Kicking 20
                  Fatigue 8
                  Injury 20
                  Fumble 24
                  Interception 0



                  Some of the performances produced:
                  QB1 (ovr 77) 17-28 (61%), 205 yds, 2 td, 0 int, 7.3 ypa, 1 sack

                  QB2 (ovr 84) 25-44 (57%), 345 yds, 2 td, 1 int, 7.8 ypa, 1 sack
                  QB3 (ovr 78) 13-32 (41%), 157 yds, 1 td, 2 int, 4.9 ypa, 3 sacks
                  QB4 (ovr 82) 19-32 (59%), 255 yds, 1 td, 1 int, 8.0 ypa, 1 sack


                  Some theory:
                  Interception slider seems to impact interception rate negligibly.


                  Passing being too high seems to increase INT rate. I think too much precision leads to more throws directly into the DB coverage lanes. At 0, though, I was seeing completion rates hover in the low 40s. I'm not exactly sure where the sweet spot is.


                  YPA may be inflated. In the modern game, 7+ YPA is the realm of the top QBs alone, not the average ones. More sample size is needed. If it's a problem, my first attempt to fix it would be to modestly increase Pursuit to see if it would cut back on YAC.


                  Tangentially, running may need to be increased to 40. I saw some 95+ ovr backs held to <3.5 ypc. Then again I also saw an 80 ovr go for 9.5. Many variables and small sample size. I hesitate to increase blocking because it may reduce pressure/sacks too much.


                  Also the AI will nearly always attempt low percentage passes at end of half/game, no matter how dire their position, and this leads to elevated INT and decreased completion % overall.


                  I hope you guys will try these out and add to our data.
                  This sounds like a great starting point. Thanks for your efforts. I will be doing some testing based on your sliders. I want so desperately to do CPU vs CPU with this game. It is my favorite football game of all time. Thanks again.

                  BTW, do you have any updates so far?
                  NFL - Pittsburgh Steelers
                  CFB - Miami Hurricanes
                  MLB - NY Yankees
                  NBA - Los Angeles Lakers
                  CBB - NC Tarheels
                  Bundesliga - FC Bayern Munich
                  MLS - Seattle Sounders

                  Comment

                  Working...