TDawg's Madden 17 XP Sliders

[abrod266]

Just gonna add my hand-written, poorly-organized results to the fray, just to offer some help if I can:

http://imgur.com/jSEl2tz

300% for offensive linemen proved to be too much for me, except for centers, as only 10 centers eclipsed 85 overall, and none made it to the 95-99 range. Also, I tried 250% for wide receivers, but that seemed to be a bit high (even though it's cool that 3 receivers got over 95 overall). For the rest of the results, check them out on the imgur link, and I forgot to include the base ratings at the start in the hand-written chart, so my bad on that one. Hope this helps TDawg out, even in the slightest way possible

[abrod266]

Just realized why, at least in my results, there were so many 85+ offensive tackles: draft classes in this usually have many more early round OTs (especially LT, arguably the most important position on the O-Line) than they have OGs or centers. Because of this, and because many of these draftees may have quick or superstar development, more 85+ OTs are developed than other O-Linemen. So, we should probably have the OT slider lower than the OG and C sliders, if we want to keep the offensive line more balanced. You guys may have picked up in this earlier, but I just thought of this now and again wanted to contribute a bit to these sliders.

[rich8682]

So QB on 86 got me 1 99, 2 90-94, 9 85-89 and 28 80-84. I think 90% is a good spot for it, worked well in my previous sim. I want a couple more 95+.

HB on 200: 2 95+ (1 was a 99) 6 90-94, 12 85-89 and 17 80-84. I'm not sure about this. If I do another sim I'll go 180%.

FB is on 100%, saw an 87, 2 85s and a bunch of 80s. I didn't count cause I honestly don't care about the fullback position. Maybe I'll up it to 110-120%.

WR at 220%: 2 95 OVR. 13 90-94, 30 85-89, 41 80-84. This needs to come way down. I think 200% will be the next one I try.

I'll post the rest in a second



Sent from my SM-G386W using Tapatalk

[rich8682]

TE at 110: 5 90-94, 6 85-89, 20 80-84. Worth noting that there were 9 that were exactly 80. I think something like 106-108 will be the sweet spot.

T at 250: 4 95+, 14 90-94, 26 85-89, 31 80-84. Way way way too high. I like the 4 elite guys, but for there to be 70+ good starters is ridiculous. Probably try this at 200 next time.

G at 250: 2 95+, 6 90-94, 17 85-89, 25ish 80-84 (didn't feel like counting).
Not as insane as tackles, but still far too high. Probably try this at 220 next time.

C at 250: 4 90-94, 6 85-89, 24 80-84. Too high, gonna try 220 next time.

I'm gonna break it up into front seven, then secondary+K/P

Sent from my SM-G386W using Tapatalk

[rich8682]

DE at 120: 3 95+, 11 90-94, 23 85-89, 23 80-84. Gonna go 110 next time.

DT at 130: 2 90-94, 8 85-89, 24 80-84. I think I'm gonna go 140 next time. This is alright, but not what I want.

OLB at 90: 1 95+, 8 90-94, 6 85-89, 24 80-84. This is so close to perfect. Compare it to the base: 3 95+, 8 90-94, 11 85-89, 23 80-84. I think next sim I'll go 94%.

MLB at 110: 7 90-94, 8 85-89, 10 80-84.
I don't know what to do with this one. On the one hand the 85-89 and 80-84 look good. But there's way too many 90-94. I think I'll drop it back down to 100.


Sent from my SM-G386W using Tapatalk

[bdubbs]

To those of you who are concerned about too many players above 80 at a position, especially at the WR position have to start thinking more logically about how the mechanics of this game work.

Most players available in rounds 1 and 2 of the draft every year will hit an 80 rating in their career. There is a wealth of 75+ prospects coming out of the draft every year, and in many cases the only thing keeping those players from an 80 rating is about 15 points of awareness.

I ran a slider set for 20 years with WR at 140%. The first 10 years wasn't so bad, there were still 3 wideouts left in the league above a 90 rating. Sim another 10 years and I find that I have no WRs above 90 and 83% of WRs above 80 are in the 80-84 range.

Run a 10 year for halfbacks at a modest 140% and you'll probably still find you have at least 1 RB over a 90 rating, maybe even 95. But his name will be ezeikeil elliot every time and once he retires there will be nobody to take his spot.

You guys are forgetting that in 10 years you have current active nfl players inflating your stats in the upper tiers. Once those players retire and the NFL is comprised only of players that have been drafted over the years you start to see a much bigger regression towards 80 OVR at many positions.

Personally I always have 1 franchise where I sim the games and just manage the roster, the offseason, and the draft to see if I can turn a bad team into a real competitor in the league. For anyone else playing that way I'd really recommend pumping those sliders at a few positions. If you're going to play every game and you know you're not going to go 15 seasons deep then there's no need to worry about it so much.

[rich8682]

CB at 180: 3 95+, 5 90-94, 25 85-89, 23 80-84. I really like how the top end looks, but the 80-89 ovrs are just too much. I think I'll go 164% next time.

FS at 110: 5 90-94, 12 85-89, 15 80-84.
Actually not bad. Same amount of 90-94 and 80-84 as base. 85-89 is a problem, along with the lack of any true superstars there. I wanna see an Earl Thomas. There is one that would be there with more awareness but he's already 26.

SS at 92: 1 90-94, 10 85-89, 19 80-84.
Not terrible. Again, no real superstars. Also worth noting that there are 10 guys who are 80 on the dot. So we could potentially see only 9-10 80-84 guys in another sim.

K/P at 140: 1 90-94, 2 85-89, 26 80-84.

Punters are noticeably better, imma try putting kickers at 160 next sim.

Sent from my SM-G386W using Tapatalk

[tdawg3782]

Quote: Originally Posted by catcher_0_3

How big do you think the differences will be if you switch from end of season progression to weekly? I'm in a CFM and my guys won't do end of season.

Quote: Originally Posted by SonOfWisconsin

I second this. I enjoy doing the XP every week for my players, also I feel like it's more realistic because players especially rookies improve a lot as the season goes on in real life. Am I going to mess up my results using these with weekly progression? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think these would work at all with weekly. You'd have to do a whole other sim to try to nail those down. Keep in mind guys that this is for the cpu only. We as humans can progress what we want when we want. We can save XP or spend it however. Doesnt matter. But to get the best out of the cpu end of season is a must in my opinion. Just progress your guys however you want. It shouldn't make any difference what so ever.

Quote: Originally Posted by A ONE MAN R ME

Hey man, I did my own 10 year sim and recorded all the results. Let me know if u want me to share them in this thread. I could also email them to you if you'd rather! I don't want to hijack your thread but I figured that the more trials we have, the better!

I have no problem with anyone posting their data. Just please don't tell me my methods or what I'm doing is wrong because it's all subjective. Keep it all civil.

Quote: Originally Posted by extremeskins04

TDawg amazing work man. I know you're still testing, but would you recommend doing a 4 week progression or end of season progression? Just curious.

4 week could work as I was getting some good data on my first 2 sims but I just think end of season is superior in the grand scheme of things.

Quote: Originally Posted by rich8682

aye tdawg how close are you to a final set? not tryna be pushy or anything just asking Sent from my SM-G386W using Tapatalk

I'm hoping to have this wrapped up by the weekend. Think about 10 sims should nail it down. But remember you don't have to wait. Unless you're going to just start simming a bunch right off the bat a few games with the XP sliders not completely set shouldn't matter much. Remember I'm very close on the positions that are still a wip so it should be okay.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk