Home
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-28-2018, 01:21 PM   #1041
MVP
 
MvPeterson2828's Arena
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Prescott Valley, Arizona.
Re: Matt10's Madden 19 Sliders

Testing latest sliders with small tweaks on AP. CPU pass block 15 and user Wr catch 48. Streaming now

https://youtu.be/gCAUc3OgCKw


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports
MvPeterson2828 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove
Old 08-28-2018, 01:23 PM   #1042
Rookie
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Oct 2008
Re: Matt10's Madden 19 Sliders

Matt, any chance you can comment on what the reaction and coverage sliders do? And what moving them up and down does? You have reaction over 50 so are you trying to make defenders play better or worse? You have coverage under 50, so is coverage supposed to be slightly worse?
kooch66 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2018, 01:52 PM   #1043
Hall Of Fame
 
Matt10's Arena
 
OVR: 23
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Overland Park, KS
Posts: 15,095
Re: Matt10's Madden 19 Sliders

Quote:
Originally Posted by kooch66
Matt, any chance you can comment on what the reaction and coverage sliders do? And what moving them up and down does? You have reaction over 50 so are you trying to make defenders play better or worse? You have coverage under 50, so is coverage supposed to be slightly worse?
Sure, I can explain a bit. These are just from testing of course, and can probably be proven wrong, but relevant to the formula of what I made, I think it is valid.

The first coverage item to consider is threshold. With zero threshold, the values need to be tighter, as in lower. The reason for this is because it's a tighter window to the next collision detection if you will. So where a linebacker locks on to a TE at 50 threshold, he still has enough room/threshold to cover the receiver behind him. At zero threshold, he's locked on for good, and the coverage slider is used to go even lower to make sure of that, so there is no further warping into the player or mirroring routes - after all, there is no buffer at zero threshold.

This is why a low pass coverage, which can essentially be a more man coverage approach, works well with lower thresholds. The specifics here is that the penalty values were needed to compensate for animations that would appear going this low if the values were left on default penalties - in particular, the Kick/Catch Interference, which serves as the Read/React assistant on zero threshold. If this value is turned off, the DBs stop dead, and take an extra second before moving into the next animation.

So, with the 10 threshold, this set is now geared to have a set coverage. This allows the separation to stay, but the emphasis on man coverage at 40 coverage makes it a bit tighter. It's just enough that the receiver stays ahead and the DB does not look psychic.

With the reaction value, post-patch it's not as effective. What I found at a lower reaction value, relative to the penalty values, it was more of an aggression play, which is controlled by the Roughing the Kicker value being turned Off. Basically, it was not perfect, because it did not produce the deflection animations as often, but it did produce an aggressive reaction to the ball carrier - which, when paired with an adequate TAK value, would result in poor pursuit angles. This is honestly where I started to get a bit tired as this value was essential, but it was also affecting the run and overall logic (defenders running forward to the ball in the air and not doing anything for example).

Where pre-patch 50 was playing like an 80, it's now like 80 plays like a 50. Regarding threshold, it's about trying to make up the difference for 10 and helping players in the zone to react. The issue is that post-patch the deflections are hit or miss. I decided to crank it up to try to create the pre-patch effect + insurance to recommend ball hawk on. Ball Hawk "on", as my good friend Josh brought up last year to me, allows more deflections for both user and CPU. Last year we needed it badly, and previous year to that, so it's a bit sad that when we had it great at default - it was "quickly" taken away from us.

I hope that made sense. Sorry for the novel. Penalties + Gameplay Sliders are a powerful combo, but power requires balance - which is something that I grew tired of having to do, or research when receiving feedback.
__________________
Youtube - subscribe!
Matt10 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2018, 02:24 PM   #1044
Rookie
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Oct 2008
Re: Matt10's Madden 19 Sliders

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt10
Sure, I can explain a bit. These are just from testing of course, and can probably be proven wrong, but relevant to the formula of what I made, I think it is valid.

The first coverage item to consider is threshold. With zero threshold, the values need to be tighter, as in lower. The reason for this is because it's a tighter window to the next collision detection if you will. So where a linebacker locks on to a TE at 50 threshold, he still has enough room/threshold to cover the receiver behind him. At zero threshold, he's locked on for good, and the coverage slider is used to go even lower to make sure of that, so there is no further warping into the player or mirroring routes - after all, there is no buffer at zero threshold.

This is why a low pass coverage, which can essentially be a more man coverage approach, works well with lower thresholds. The specifics here is that the penalty values were needed to compensate for animations that would appear going this low if the values were left on default penalties - in particular, the Kick/Catch Interference, which serves as the Read/React assistant on zero threshold. If this value is turned off, the DBs stop dead, and take an extra second before moving into the next animation.

So, with the 10 threshold, this set is now geared to have a set coverage. This allows the separation to stay, but the emphasis on man coverage at 40 coverage makes it a bit tighter. It's just enough that the receiver stays ahead and the DB does not look psychic.

With the reaction value, post-patch it's not as effective. What I found at a lower reaction value, relative to the penalty values, it was more of an aggression play, which is controlled by the Roughing the Kicker value being turned Off. Basically, it was not perfect, because it did not produce the deflection animations as often, but it did produce an aggressive reaction to the ball carrier - which, when paired with an adequate TAK value, would result in poor pursuit angles. This is honestly where I started to get a bit tired as this value was essential, but it was also affecting the run and overall logic (defenders running forward to the ball in the air and not doing anything for example).

Where pre-patch 50 was playing like an 80, it's now like 80 plays like a 50. Regarding threshold, it's about trying to make up the difference for 10 and helping players in the zone to react. The issue is that post-patch the deflections are hit or miss. I decided to crank it up to try to create the pre-patch effect + insurance to recommend ball hawk on. Ball Hawk "on", as my good friend Josh brought up last year to me, allows more deflections for both user and CPU. Last year we needed it badly, and previous year to that, so it's a bit sad that when we had it great at default - it was "quickly" taken away from us.

I hope that made sense. Sorry for the novel. Penalties + Gameplay Sliders are a powerful combo, but power requires balance - which is something that I grew tired of having to do, or research when receiving feedback.

Thanks for the explanation, I definitely have a better understanding of how you feel the sliders work in relation to the rest of the set, particularly with threshold and penalty values.

That all being said, with everything else at default, do you feel like either of these sliders are "reversed" or does moving both up make defenders better, as in faster reaction times and better coverage. There are some who feel they are reversed, YouTube videos about it, etc. I can see reaction time being reversed since increasing the time would equal slower reaction, hence a "reversed" slider. But I don't see how the coverage one could be reversed. Thoughts?
kooch66 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2018, 04:49 PM   #1045
Rookie
 
OVR: 4
Join Date: Jun 2010
Re: Matt10's Madden 19 Sliders

Can I just check these are to be inputted both in Main Menu and CFM?


Thanks
Roncatto is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove
Old 08-28-2018, 05:07 PM   #1046
MVP
 
SilverBullet19's Arena
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Oct 2015
Re: Matt10's Madden 19 Sliders

About to try the latest version on All-Madden, hope it goes well!
__________________
Check out my dynasty:
http://forums.operationsports.com/fo...oma-state.html

Major Boise State fan
SilverBullet19 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2018, 06:13 PM   #1047
MVP
 
SilverBullet19's Arena
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Oct 2015
Re: Matt10's Madden 19 Sliders

Cowboys (85 ovr) vs Bucs (80 ovr). All-Madden. Sliders followed exactly.

Final: Cowboys, 35-0

Thoughts: Holy crap, this game played well. I felt no All-Madden cheesing, for the FIRST time on AM! For the first time, I won a game on AM! There was no trickeration, no BS. It played true, I felt like not only did I earn the win, but the CPU did not try to cheat me out of it. That is VERY hard to pull off on AM.

Team Stats

Cowboys
Total offense: 389 (122 rush, 267 passing)
3rd downs: 8/10
turnovers: 0
Penalties: 1 (illegal forward pass...oopsies)

Bucs
Total offense: 186 (40 rush, 146 pass)
3rd downs: 3/9
Turnovers: 2 (1 int, 1 fum)
Penalties: 0


Passing Stats
Dak Prescott (USER): 25/32, 267 yards, 3 TD's, 0 int's 0 sacks
Jameis Winston (CPU): 16/25, 184 yards, 0 TD's, 1 int, 6 sacks

This played well. Perhaps the CPU pass blocking was a bit too low, as I snagged 6 sacks, however 3 of them were coverage sacks. Winston EASILY had time, but no one was open, and instead of throwing it away, he scrambled until sacked. This was a testament to fixing the wide open receivers right off the line. I caused a few incompletions with a good pass rush too.

As a user, it was good. Lot's of check downs, coverage was tight.

Rushing Stats
Ezekiel Elliott (USER): 23 carries, 107 yards (4.6 average), 2 TD's
Ronald Jones II (CPU): 12 carries, 41 yards (3.4 average), 0 TD's

Again, spot on. They really held me tight, but fatigue played a role in breaking 100 yards and the 4 ypc average. It was NOT like before, where the 4th quarter was 50+ yard runs the whole time. It was more of they stuffed me most of the game, but then I had a few for around 10 yards in the 4th to bring the average up. It felt very right, Elliott can wear down a defense.

CPU ran ok, had some good breaks but fell behind and had to give up the run.

Overall, VERY happy with how it played. I've never had an AM game where I wasn't tempted to rage quit at least 4-5 times, and I never felt that in this one lol.
__________________
Check out my dynasty:
http://forums.operationsports.com/fo...oma-state.html

Major Boise State fan
SilverBullet19 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2018, 07:17 PM   #1048
Rookie
 
noahcal11's Arena
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Jun 2015
Re: Matt10's Madden 19 Sliders

Quick question Matt: I feel like zone coverage is a bit too loose for my taste as there are too many open recievers in ZCV. What slider(s) would I change to make that a bit tighter?
noahcal11 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 02:35 PM.

Top -