RFF's M22 XP Sliders

[Aestis]

Mattanite, impressive estimation considering you're landing close to where I am with far less data!

Here's a sneak peak of the 95% finalized USER v USER 32-man XP sliders I'm going to post. CPU will be ostensibly easier to balance because fewer guesses on what CPU will do... as the sims ARE what the CPU does, ha.

Key Settings:
Star Dev: 400 (default)
Superstar Dev: 100 (max)
XFactor Dev: 75 (max)

OL: manually award +1 Star-->SS dev upgrade each season
OL: manually award +1 SS-->XF dev upgrade each season




RE: the OL awards, the actual logic doesn't matter (we intentionally do NOT base it on stats/performance), but the one thing I'd recommend is whatever your logic, don't give these dev awards to lower OVR guys. Even 22 yo 70 OVR guys can actually lose the dev you give them after 1 season due to regression. This is part of the reason for keeping Star at default when I initially ran many sims with it at the minimum 300. Doing this really hampers the efficacy of the manual dev awards.

Here was the logic I used as a benchmark, these guys all did a pretty good job of retaining their dev and thus generating the progression benefit we were targeting:

Star-->SS: <= 24 yrs old, 74+ OVR for OT or 75+ OVR for G/C
SS-->XF: <= 25 yrs old, 75+ OVR for OT or 76+ OVR for G/C


Been soooo busy so I apologize for the continued slowness. I will be posting extensive distribution charts to provide evidence of what 10-year progression actually looks like with the above sliders.

The BI tool I use allows me to quickly look at not just the distribution but also WHO are the guys at the top. One thing we have to be careful of is not to select a distribution that looks good until I drill down and filter to the 85+ guys and realize that 10 yrs later there's basically no drafted/generated players hitting that mark, it's only IRL guys hanging around.

[Mattanite]

The 10yr sims looked good with those predicted sliders but then going to 5yr checks changes the ovr profile a bit due to gen players hitting a peak in 10yr vs existing young players hitting a peak in 5yr.

I love your dev cap distribution there and would likely do the same IF we were playing abilities off.

We're in final test league now with:
Qb 70
Hb/Fb 100
Wr 100
Te 110
OL 70
De/dt 100
Olb/mlb 100
Cb/s 110
K/p 100

Star dev 420 (plus expecting ~28 ol, fb, k, p)
Superstar dev 80
X-factor 56

Had to pull it down from 448, 96, 64 due to 5yr checks.

This gives us a spread of players slightly above base rosters... However we're using injury slider 50 for more variability. And the sims only check full pad starters, users will be less risky half pads late on or do splits/backups.

No dev protections, QB 20+ ints ineligible for any dev upgrades and if a playoff QB automatically lose a dev (we have some newer coaches so can't outright do it). Rookie qbs immune to 20 int rule (Peyton Manning). Breakouts on. Team ability cap of 7 players checked in resign week (doesn't count pending free agents - oldest players over 7 down grades) and can go over 7 via free agency, draft and breakouts
Hopefully more veterans hit free agency that way.

Conclusion, I like your xp slider and dev cap setup. Big difference I guess is abilities on or off and injury sliders.

Sent from my H3113 using Tapatalk

[Mattanite]

Looking at your front7 xp sliders, 80 looks good considering your maxed dev caps. I found outside of QB, front7 defenders collected a lot of superstar and xfactor devs. 5yr checks also show high HB ability players that doesn't show in the 10yr data I found.

Sent from my H3113 using Tapatalk

[Spudbox65]

Quote: Originally Posted by Aestis

Mattanite, impressive estimation considering you're landing close to where I am with far less data! Here's a sneak peak of the 95% finalized USER v USER 32-man XP sliders I'm going to post. CPU will be ostensibly easier to balance because fewer guesses on what CPU will do... as the sims ARE what the CPU does, ha. Key Settings: Star Dev: 400 (default) Superstar Dev: 100 (max) XFactor Dev: 75 (max) OL: manually award +1 Star-->SS dev upgrade each season OL: manually award +1 SS-->XF dev upgrade each season RE: the OL awards, the actual logic doesn't matter (we intentionally do NOT base it on stats/performance), but the one thing I'd recommend is whatever your logic, don't give these dev awards to lower OVR guys. Even 22 yo 70 OVR guys can actually lose the dev you give them after 1 season due to regression. This is part of the reason for keeping Star at default when I initially ran many sims with it at the minimum 300. Doing this really hampers the efficacy of the manual dev awards. Here was the logic I used as a benchmark, these guys all did a pretty good job of retaining their dev and thus generating the progression benefit we were targeting: Star-->SS: <= 24 yrs old, 74+ OVR for OT or 75+ OVR for G/C SS-->XF: <= 25 yrs old, 75+ OVR for OT or 76+ OVR for G/C Been soooo busy so I apologize for the continued slowness. I will be posting extensive distribution charts to provide evidence of what 10-year progression actually looks like with the above sliders. The BI tool I use allows me to quickly look at not just the distribution but also WHO are the guys at the top. One thing we have to be careful of is not to select a distribution that looks good until I drill down and filter to the 85+ guys and realize that 10 yrs later there's basically no drafted/generated players hitting that mark, it's only IRL guys hanging around.

Will you be posting a User vs. CPU XP slider set, or just the user vs. User?? Thanks!

[Aestis]

Quote: Originally Posted by Spudbox65

Will you be posting a User vs. CPU XP slider set, or just the user vs. User?? Thanks!

Only USER v USER.

The reason being is, truthfully, there is no real data-driven USER v CPU set. What works for me is going to be different than what works for someone else. How do you even balance? If you're the #1 rushing team, does that mean rushing is too easy? What if you're just having a great season?

So it ultimately comes down to you balancing against what feels realistic, or balancing against how good you feel you should be doing.

USER v USER sets takes (most of) the feeling out of it, since how well I'm doing doesn't matter much as I'm just 1 of 32 players.

[Mattanite]

Getting max XP whilst injured during training will be a bug affecting all of our simulations. We will have to check XP sliders if it is fixed but if not fixed it's a horrid bug.

https://twitter.com/Mattanite/status...43185508872193

[Mattanite]

The Summary:

Any injured player is counting as a backup AND that the training was supposedly backup focussed during Weekly Strategy/training even if it was starter focussed.

In the video I show a Vikings rookie HB out for the whole year on IR still getting 960xp per week on base sliders (also due to a similar focus train injury bug) and star dev players out for the year receiving 750xp per week despite being injured (including on IR).

If you didn't put injuries on during your sim then it wont show up in your sliders. If you did then XP sliders might be slightly too high for when/if the bug is fixed.

[Aestis]

Quote: Originally Posted by Mattanite

The Summary: Any injured player is counting as a backup AND that the training was supposedly backup focussed during Weekly Strategy/training even if it was starter focussed. In the video I show a Vikings rookie HB out for the whole year on IR still getting 960xp per week on base sliders (also due to a similar focus train injury bug) and star dev players out for the year receiving 750xp per week despite being injured (including on IR). If you didn't put injuries on during your sim then it wont show up in your sliders. If you did then XP sliders might be slightly too high for when/if the bug is fixed.

I definitely ran injuries on for the simulations, does this bug not show up for cpu led teams? Wouldn't this bug be baked in?