M17 XP Slider Discussion

[Hulk2489]

Quote: Originally Posted by tdawg3782

Injuries are on. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

What league settings do you have like Qtr length? I checked that same 10 yr sim with HB at 120% and ended up with only 2 HB 80-84 nobody else was above it. I'm gonna do it again just to make sure I didn't do something wrong

[catcher_0_3]

Any plans to run the simulation again?

[Hulk2489]

I'm a ******* lol Player Progression was set to off from the User settings. Time to try again

[tdawg3782]

Quote: Originally Posted by catcher_0_3

Any plans to run the simulation again?

Yes. I actually already did another one and got the data half plugged in. Should get it up later tonight. Went way high with OL % like MikeLowe suggested and got some pretty good results. May have to go even higher though lol.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[tdawg3782]

Quote: Originally Posted by bdubbs

For most positions 80 would roughly be when you start considering a player a worthy starter but comparing an 80 ovr QB to an 80 ovr at another position just isn't comparing apples to apples. From my experience simming 3 seasons most QBs under 90 rating performed meh, and occasionally one or two of the 85-89ers popped off. What concerns me is the influx of 80-84 players at so many positions. Right now in the first few seasons most teams start several players in the 70-79 range. If the average rating rises by too much at too many positions it will water down the value of the 90+ player. I think this effect would have the least impact at QB though, and the most impact with WR, OL. LBs. and DBs though. WR, OL, and DBs all need a boost to see a few studs on the upper end, but also bring in a pretty large cluster of talent on the lower 80s end. LB's can almost definitely be run under 100% especially OLB's, I was able to raise mine up very easily and I think this has something to do with weekly training. From what I can tell linebackers will get a bonus no matter what defensive gameplan you choose for the week. On offense you're always excluding multiple position groups. From what I can tell so far the improvements can either be QB/WR, WR/TE, RB/OL however with defense you can train a run defense which improves your DL/LB core or a pass defense which improves your DB/LB group. So LBs seem to get more benefit from gameplanning than any other position from what I can tell. One other thing that plays a factor here is the draft. In my 3 offseason drafts there's been a trend for the first 2 rounds to be loaded and the vast majority of the 3rd and 4th round comes up as undrafted quality players. Realistically though there's 30 and possibly even more 75+ ovr players coming into the league every year. This could be the source of the influx in 80-84 players, which is made up of the wealth of first and second round draft picks with normal/slow development traits. Oh and I'd imagine yearly awards has a lot to do with who has a realistic shot of becoming 95+ I drafted an OLB my first season in the first round, 79 ovr with superstar development, pretty good. By the end of the year he was an 84 but that's only because I spend 15k xp on speed and acceleration. The next year I get pick 4 and the #1 rated prospect in the draft falls to me so I have to take him. 83 ovr, superstar development. The sim gods made him really good, I was expecting him to win DROY for a nice bonus but got one better when he won AFC DPOY as well. I had him as one of my 3 players to give bonus xp to, and he got 600xp every single week bc of the way defensive gameplanning is so he totaled out a whopping 62k xp on the season. Even with the xp spent on expensive physical attributes I was able to push his ovr to 93 after his rookie season. A QB is always going to win MVP which helps keep a healthy number of them in the 90+ range. A LB is usually going to win DPOY which helps their elite status. TLR There's a few variables at play when it comes to progression other than xp sliders, namely yearly awards (possibly weekly awards as well). The draft introducing 30+ players who will likely progress between 80 and 90 within 3-4 seasons may be a cause of the influx of players in the 80-84 range, especially at QB where hitting that ovr is achievable with 6k xp into awareness for multiple QBs in every draft. Linebackers are the only position group that is never excluded in game planning giving them bonus xp. What this means as far as xp sliders: If I'm right about the influx of 80-84 players being independent of the xp slider and basically something that is going to be unavoidable because of the quality of players available in the first 2 rounds of the draft then you no longer have to concern yourself with the impact of xp sliders on the number of players in the 80-84 range. Basically those players are going to be there no matter what you do unless you lower the slider to the point studs no longer appear. What you can control with the xp slider is how many of those players get bumped into the 85-89 and above ratings. Basically my theory is you have a lot more direct control over who gets to 85+ with the xp slider than who makes it to 80+ and further increasing of the slider should show a bigger impact on who makes it past 85 ovr than 80 ovr. If I'm right you can get more 90+ players without creating too many more 80s. The risk you run is pushing too large of a portion of players into the 85-89 range in the process.

This whole post makes so much sense. I think the 80-84 may be irrelevant and I am really going to focus on the 85+ range.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[Hulk2489]

Do you think it's a good idea to do just 3 groups instead 85-89, 90-94, and 95-99?

[tdawg3782]

Quote: Originally Posted by Hulk2489

Do you think it's a good idea to do just 3 groups instead 85-89, 90-94, and 95-99?

You can go either way really. I will say that a lot of the 80-84 range consists of 80-81 guys for what it's worth. My goal is for each position to have a couple elites, some all pros, and some pro bowl capable players. I don't want a position to suffer because I'm focusing to much on that bottom tier, avg player range. It's never going to be perfect but by doing year end progression I think I can lock down some really good percentages to give everybody the progress they desire or close to it.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[zackebarsch10]

Quote: Originally Posted by tdawg3782

You can go either way really. I will say that a lot of the 80-84 range consists of 80-81 guys for what it's worth. My goal is for each position to have a couple elites, some all pros, and some pro bowl capable players. I don't want a position to suffer because I'm focusing to much on that bottom tier, avg player range. It's never going to be perfect but by doing year end progression I think I can lock down some really good percentages to give everybody the progress they desire or close to it. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Thanks for your hard work tdawg.
This means your numbers are only viable for end of the year progression?
I've always used 4 week progression because I thought that the progression is more natural.
But I'm not sure about this. Last year some guys tested the different progressions and their results led to my decision to use 4 week progression.
Do you have dates which progression is better?