JoshC1977's Madden 19 Sliders (for CFM Only)

[MarketingWiz]

Quote: Originally Posted by TizziBoy

Quarter length is part of the slider set and fatigue is the major parameter affecting gameplay. I just played an 11 min. game, 156 plays overall, including kicks. Apart from the fact that fatigue is way stronger and the gameplay is better, down 10 points in 4th quarter the CPU played 4 downs football till the end of the game. I won, but at least they tryed. To be honest either Josh sees something I don't see or I really can't find any reason for not going this way. If I don't have the time to play a full game I can sim the first quarter or even the first half.

Not to bust into JoshC1977's thread, but my second set WILL HAVE a longer play clock and yes, there is a STATISTICAL and OBSERVABLE improvement to play calling by the CPU AI with a longer play clock.


At present, V.2 is up to 12 min quarters and am seeing 130+ plays on average... Considering going EVEN higher than 12 min quarters due to the improved CPU game play that I am seeing and the fact that at 12 min quarters (with accel clock) that I am staying under 160 total plays for game.



Wiz...out.

[JoshC1977]

Per pro-football reference:


Offensive Plays per team per game (run attempts + pass attempts + sacks):
2017: 63.4
2016: 63.9
2015: (for whatever reason, it won't show up)

2014: 62.6
2013: 65.0
2012: 60.9
2011: 63.6
2010: 63.1


I can go on....but point is that each team averages 60-65 plays per game on offense or a total of 126 per game. Now, special teams plays add to it and so on depending on the flow of the game.


If I add the total runs/passes/sacks I nail down the same ballpark number CONSISTENTLY with 9 min quarters. So, that is why I don't bother looking at different quarter lengths.


Now, if there are observations that using a higher quarter length provides improvements in other phases of the game, I'm down for exploring that over the next couple of months....PROVIDED that the total offensive plays per game stays in that ballpark. If total offensive plays drift into the 150s; that is a huge problem as it is more reflective of NCAA games than NFL.



Now, I'm going to have minimal time to play around with this stuff in the next two months....I am moving cross-country and starting a new job. I may have time to fart around a little bit, but I want to spend more time playing rather than testing....so anything we decide to investigate needs to be based on a solid sample size of games.

[TizziBoy]

Quote: Originally Posted by JoshC1977

Per pro-football reference: Offensive Plays per team per game (run attempts + pass attempts + sacks): 2017: 63.4 2016: 63.9 2015: (for whatever reason, it won't show up) 2014: 62.6 2013: 65.0 2012: 60.9 2011: 63.6 2010: 63.1 I can go on....but point is that each team averages 60-65 plays per game on offense or a total of 126 per game. Now, special teams plays add to it and so on depending on the flow of the game. If I add the total runs/passes/sacks I nail down the same ballpark number CONSISTENTLY with 9 min quarters. So, that is why I don't bother looking at different quarter lengths. Now, if there are observations that using a higher quarter length provides improvements in other phases of the game, I'm down for exploring that over the next couple of months....PROVIDED that the total offensive plays per game stays in that ballpark. If total offensive plays drift into the 150s; that is a huge problem as it is more reflective of NCAA games than NFL. Now, I'm going to have minimal time to play around with this stuff in the next two months....I am moving cross-country and starting a new job. I may have time to fart around a little bit, but I want to spend more time playing rather than testing....so anything we decide to investigate needs to be based on a solid sample size of games.

Sorry Josh, I don't want to insist too much on this and bother you, but, again, per pro football the average total amount of plays per game (all offense + all defense, including kicks) in 2017 was 150.
I played 3 games at 11 min and I had 156, 142 and 153. And if you still feel is too much you can slow down playcalling a bit.



On the other side gameplay is far better, there's a lot of yellows-orange-red, better DB-WR interaction and CPU playcalling is a different world or even a different universe.


Here's the link to the stats again:
https://www.pro-football-reference.c...order_by=yards

[JoshC1977]

Quote: Originally Posted by TizziBoy

On the other side gameplay is far better, there's a lot of yellows-orange-red, better DB-WR interaction and CPU playcalling is a different world or even a different universe.

Can you expand on this more? What is "better" about the interactions and playcalling?


You have lots of good feedback and I am taking these claims seriously, but help us understand what you're seeing. How many different teams and team schemes/playbooks have you played against?



On the play-calling in particular, some playbooks are just better than others to play against. Some playbooks still have too many shots and vert plays, so if you've tested vs only a handful of teams, it's possible you just drew a "good hand" in terms of teams/playbooks you've faced.

[mpd3892]

I've been able to get in a few games with a couple of different match ups. The setup has been exactly as posted by JoshC.

For the most part gameplay has been real good. The CPU run game continues to be an issue. I have yet to see the CPU average more then 3.0 ypc, even when I play a strong OL team against a weak DL team. I've been able, for the most part, to average in the 3.0-4.0 ypc range. A lot of the issue has to do with the backside defender being left unblocked and running the ball carrier down before he can hit the hole. This is likely a programming issue and not something we can fix. Otherwise OL/DL interaction has been okay. Still too many TFL and instant sheds when a runner gets near a DL.

An area I've really focused on is the WR/DB interaction, especially the reactions of DBs when a receiver makes a cut. For the most part this has been very good. At times coverage has been excellent. One issue, however, is there have been times where a receiver will make a cut and the DB will pause/stop before reacting. This leads to tremendous separation and an easy completion. It happens to both the CPU and HUM. It doesn't happen on every play and I've seen it happen more then once on the same play to 2 different defenders (occasionally happens to a LB in coverage).

Can the fatigue slider or substitution sliders help with this?

[JoshC1977]

Quote: Originally Posted by mpd3892

I've been able to get in a few games with a couple of different match ups. The setup has been exactly as posted by JoshC. For the most part gameplay has been real good. The CPU run game continues to be an issue. I have yet to see the CPU average more then 3.0 ypc, even when I play a strong OL team against a weak DL team. I've been able, for the most part, to average in the 3.0-4.0 ypc range. A lot of the issue has to do with the backside defender being left unblocked and running the ball carrier down before he can hit the hole. This is likely a programming issue and not something we can fix. Otherwise OL/DL interaction has been okay. Still too many TFL and instant sheds when a runner gets near a DL. An area I've really focused on is the WR/DB interaction, especially the reactions of DBs when a receiver makes a cut. For the most part this has been very good. At times coverage has been excellent. One issue, however, is there have been times where a receiver will make a cut and the DB will pause/stop before reacting. This leads to tremendous separation and an easy completion. It happens to both the CPU and HUM. It doesn't happen on every play and I've seen it happen more then once on the same play to 2 different defenders (occasionally happens to a LB in coverage). Can the fatigue slider or substitution sliders help with this?

Thanks for the feedback!

The WR/DB separation issue is the one I noticed with the split-speed setup. Now, it was WAY worse with a lower injury slider. At 50 CFM injury it was almost ridiculously good; and you're back to running into the deluge of injuries. It's a real dicey balance. The question isn't just how often you see it, but the player ratings involved (such as MCV, AGI, etc.).

The run game stuff....honestly, it's too hard to diagnose it without full game vids. Many players rush more than 4 FAR too often than is realistic. I'd say 2/3 of my play calls are base 4 man rushes (right in-line with NFL average of 65% of plays being 4-man pressure calls). Some people try to control too many guys. Some people hit stick everything. Heck, most people have very overstated expectations of what run game numbers should look like. Point is....the CPU run game is always a point of contention every year....I do see a difference though between good and bad run games....that is a good starting point and I refuse to adjust things where a mediocre line gets a push just for the sake of "challenge".

Hoping I can get a little play time in this weekend between other activities

[mpd3892]

JoshC,

I'm with you on your run game observations and tend to avoid plays that bring more than 4 with the purpose of seeing how the run game plays out. Furthermore I tend to control a S so as to not influence the play at the LOS.

Generally I see some great run blocking and there are holes, but then a defender will shoot through or come from the outside unblocked, even though there was a blocker available. The run game may need an EA update, but for me is not the most glaring issue with this setup.

I think the DB reaction is more of an issue at this time. I know your time is tight, but did you play around with CFM injury settings between 40 and 50? If so, there is no need for me, or anyone else, to look at this.

My time with the game can be limited, but if there is an area you'd like some eyes on, please do let me know.

[JoshC1977]

Quote: Originally Posted by mpd3892

I think the DB reaction is more of an issue at this time. I know your time is tight, but did you play around with CFM injury settings between 40 and 50? If so, there is no need for me, or anyone else, to look at this. My time with the game can be limited, but if there is an area you'd like some eyes on, please do let me know.

I did not have time to look at those injury settings between 40-50....so yes, that would be the next most logical avenue to explore.


However, let me ask you this....did you look at player ratings and the matchups when you saw the separation? Were they happening with high MCV and high AGI guys or just the weaker guys? Were their heads focused on the QB and reading the throw or on the WR? Are DBs flat-out stopping on cuts or are the cuts just a little delayed (just not rounded enough on the turn)? These are the little details that can tell us if we need to explore settings or if it is more of a ratings-based effect.