RFF's M18 32-man CFM USER v USER Sliders - Page 5 - Operation Sports Forums
Home

RFF's M18 32-man CFM USER v USER Sliders

This is a discussion on RFF's M18 32-man CFM USER v USER Sliders within the Madden NFL Football Sliders forums.

Go Back   Operation Sports Forums > Football > Madden NFL Football > Madden NFL Football Sliders
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-07-2017, 01:38 PM   #33
AWFL Commish
 
Aestis's Arena
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 538
Re: RFF's M18 32-man CFM USER v USER Sliders

Quote:
Originally Posted by bucknut7
We kicked off Week 2 last night with your sliders and the game feels great. Will stay tuned for any changed you make, but coverage felt very good
Would love to see a few scores, understanding you guys run a slightly lower snap count. Coverage not too brutally tough?
__________________
RFF / Aestis
XBL ID: AestisFF
Twitch Channel


Commissioner
After Work Football League
(M18 / XB1)
AWFL Discord Server
AWFL Daddyleagues
YouTube Channel
Aestis is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2017, 03:08 PM   #34
Rookie
 
Chin2112's Arena
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: London
Posts: 137
Re: RFF's M18 32-man CFM USER v USER Sliders

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aestis
I've set our CPU sliders to Charter's CPU set. I felt like it gave users a challenge to where they might lose. Depending on the goal of CPU games (some leagues want a virtual auto-win for the user due to opponent not being able to play, some want a challenge, etc.) you could adjust them to be easier.


Also with the new tuner update giving a noticeable bump to zones, I am probably going to drop our coverage sliders to start and see how week 1 games go. Everything is a little nebulous until I really get data. This is the uncomfortable fact most slider makers prefer to ignore.
Our league has decided to drop coverage as we weren't getting any luck in the passing game. Most test games ended with 6+ INTs which is crazy. Some ended with 10+ We've dropped it to 60 and it feels a lot better but we're likely going to up it to 65.
__________________
Chelsea FC
New Orleans Saints
New Orleans Pelicans
Miami Marlins

PSN: PS4 - Chin2112
Chin2112 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2017, 03:31 PM   #35
AWFL Commish
 
Aestis's Arena
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 538
Re: RFF's M18 32-man CFM USER v USER Sliders

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chin2112
Our league has decided to drop coverage as we weren't getting any luck in the passing game. Most test games ended with 6+ INTs which is crazy. Some ended with 10+ We've dropped it to 60 and it feels a lot better but we're likely going to up it to 65.

I am also considering dropping PDRT to 40-45 in lieue of dropping coverage below about 60-70 to begin with, now that some zones react better. The idea is you want to keep zones from being so effective that they are just objectively better than man. This way both remain viable.

TBD on how possible that is, but that's the logic & what I will try to start
__________________
RFF / Aestis
XBL ID: AestisFF
Twitch Channel


Commissioner
After Work Football League
(M18 / XB1)
AWFL Discord Server
AWFL Daddyleagues
YouTube Channel
Aestis is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2017, 05:52 PM   #36
Rookie
 
Chin2112's Arena
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: London
Posts: 137
Re: RFF's M18 32-man CFM USER v USER Sliders

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aestis
I am also considering dropping PDRT to 40-45 in lieue of dropping coverage below about 60-70 to begin with, now that some zones react better. The idea is you want to keep zones from being so effective that they are just objectively better than man. This way both remain viable.

TBD on how possible that is, but that's the logic & what I will try to start


Yeah thats pretty much where we are, 45 PDRT and 60 coverage. Man still worked well but it was a little too easy so we're gonna bump I think to 65
__________________
Chelsea FC
New Orleans Saints
New Orleans Pelicans
Miami Marlins

PSN: PS4 - Chin2112
Chin2112 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2017, 10:03 PM   #37
Pro
 
OVR: 3
Join Date: Jul 2007
Re: RFF's M18 32-man CFM USER v USER Sliders

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aestis
Would love to see a few scores, understanding you guys run a slightly lower snap count. Coverage not too brutally tough?
Here are a couple of box scores from our best, most equally matched users. We've had a few blow outs this week, mostly b/c some teams are throwing 4-5 picks. Not sure if that's do to over the top good coverage, or because people need to get used to not forcing things

http://daddyleagues.com/chomp/gamerecap/544830870
http://daddyleagues.com/chomp/gamerecap/544830910
bucknut7 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-07-2017, 11:23 PM   #38
AWFL Commish
 
Aestis's Arena
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 538
Re: RFF's M18 32-man CFM USER v USER Sliders

Quote:
Originally Posted by bucknut7
Here are a couple of box scores from our best, most equally matched users. We've had a few blow outs this week, mostly b/c some teams are throwing 4-5 picks. Not sure if that's do to over the top good coverage, or because people need to get used to not forcing things

http://daddyleagues.com/chomp/gamerecap/544830870
http://daddyleagues.com/chomp/gamerecap/544830910

Thanks! Run game at least in the ballpark though still boom-or-bust (thx juke/spin moves).

My gut from the box scores says the INTs are a result of aggression: 17 completions for 275 yds, 21 for 379 yds, 22 for 270... NFL average is 11.4 yds per completion. 3 of the 4 guys in these box scores are at 18, 16, and 12.2... Browns the one exception at 9.5.

4 teams across 2 games obviously extremely limited sample, but based on that and the high # of 16-17+ yd completions I see littered across the WRs in the box score... INTs probably just the cost of aggression. All their 3rd down %'s were in the 44-57% range, NFL average is 40%. So I have a hard time believing defense & coverage is too good. 29.5 ppg off about 110-114 snaps is certainly well above NFL averages (22.8 ppg from 128 snaps).

So all in all, while this is merely a glimpse, it's hard for me to think coverage is too good yet. Note when I say "scoring is high," I don't mean too high or that offense is too good. Can't tell that from 2 games, especially if these are 4 of your better/best users, they could be near the top of the offensive spectrum for the league. All I'm saying is that none of this tells me that defense is too strong yet.
__________________
RFF / Aestis
XBL ID: AestisFF
Twitch Channel


Commissioner
After Work Football League
(M18 / XB1)
AWFL Discord Server
AWFL Daddyleagues
YouTube Channel

Last edited by Aestis; 09-07-2017 at 11:26 PM.
Aestis is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2017, 08:07 AM   #39
Pro
 
OVR: 3
Join Date: Jul 2007
Re: RFF's M18 32-man CFM USER v USER Sliders

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aestis
Thanks! Run game at least in the ballpark though still boom-or-bust (thx juke/spin moves).

My gut from the box scores says the INTs are a result of aggression: 17 completions for 275 yds, 21 for 379 yds, 22 for 270... NFL average is 11.4 yds per completion. 3 of the 4 guys in these box scores are at 18, 16, and 12.2... Browns the one exception at 9.5.

4 teams across 2 games obviously extremely limited sample, but based on that and the high # of 16-17+ yd completions I see littered across the WRs in the box score... INTs probably just the cost of aggression. All their 3rd down %'s were in the 44-57% range, NFL average is 40%. So I have a hard time believing defense & coverage is too good. 29.5 ppg off about 110-114 snaps is certainly well above NFL averages (22.8 ppg from 128 snaps).

So all in all, while this is merely a glimpse, it's hard for me to think coverage is too good yet. Note when I say "scoring is high," I don't mean too high or that offense is too good. Can't tell that from 2 games, especially if these are 4 of your better/best users, they could be near the top of the offensive spectrum for the league. All I'm saying is that none of this tells me that defense is too strong yet.
Yeah, we're going to hang tight on changing anything before you do, and we'll just follow your lead. I will say that my only concern is that my coverage, as the Browns, was really good. And I traded Haden, so i'm starting a 82 and a 70 out there, a 78 and 71 at safety. But one game sample size, too early to tell.
bucknut7 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2017, 08:32 AM   #40
AWFL Commish
 
Aestis's Arena
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 538
Re: RFF's M18 32-man CFM USER v USER Sliders

Quote:
Originally Posted by bucknut7
Yeah, we're going to hang tight on changing anything before you do, and we'll just follow your lead. I will say that my only concern is that my coverage, as the Browns, was really good. And I traded Haden, so i'm starting a 82 and a 70 out there, a 78 and 71 at safety. But one game sample size, too early to tell.

I do think you're right. I mean, early impressions as I wrote a couple posts up, I'm definitely going to ease coverage to start as a result of the tuner update. It made things noticeably tougher--defenders react to receivers in their zone better now, deep safeties are jumping routes, etc.... thus things like PDRT may need to be lowered.

We are going to start up our league tonight and get into games this weekend. I'll post the "starting" changes I settle on this evening and then we shall see what the data tells us!
__________________
RFF / Aestis
XBL ID: AestisFF
Twitch Channel


Commissioner
After Work Football League
(M18 / XB1)
AWFL Discord Server
AWFL Daddyleagues
YouTube Channel
Aestis is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

« Operation Sports Forums > Football > Madden NFL Football > Madden NFL Football Sliders »


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:14 AM.

Top -