CPU Quarterback Play (Behavior Under Pressure, Interceptions) Thread

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by kdutch98

I'm not saying there isn't an issue, either. The sliders absolutely could be broken. Take the "Roughing the Passer" slider, for instance. Moving that up to just 51, results in an absurd number of RTP calls. The Interception slider is probably broken, if setting it to 0 still results in a lot of interceptions. My point is, that, in years past, there wasn't much fear in making throws into coverage against the CPU, because most of them were just batted down. Now, those throws are getting picked off at a higher percentage. It is incentivizing taking care of the football, making good decisions. I'm all for fixing/adjusting the INT slider. NOT for nerfing the defense.

I think the other issue is the CPU QB is making throws under duress

and throwing into coverage and having the ball picked off.

I tried to make suggestions, until a fix arrives, use Aggressive Catch for

your WR's and use Swat for your DB's under coaching options.

[kdutch98]

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

I think the other issue is the CPU QB is making throws under duress and throwing into coverage and having the ball picked off. I tried to make suggestions, until a fix arrives, use Aggressive Catch for your WR's and use Swat for your DB's under coaching options.

They are. But I have also noticed that the better QBs (such as Rodgers) are also throwing the ball away more often than the lower rated QBs are.

There is also some discussion that quarter length/accel clock might lead to the CPU QBs being more "aggressive" because they think they don't have enough time with shorter quarters.

Like I said, I play 12 minute quarters, 20 sec accel. clock, and I don't see near the issues that most have been seeing.

my defense has 20 picks in 14 games. High? probably, but two teams had over 20 last year, with Dallas having 26

[CujoMatty]

Quote: Originally Posted by kdutch98

But it really is, though. I mean, think about it. If you make a bad throw into coverage 10 times a game, you really shouldn't be surprised if you throw 5 picks.

Man,. I'll try this again.

This thread is supposed to have nothing to do with user thrown picks it was started to differentiate between user throwing picks and cpu throwing picks.

A lot of us, myself included, have accepted that user thrown picks have user skill or error. I don't want to argue that here nor should I argue that here.

This is the cpu throwing way too many picks. So if your comment is in regards to the cpu making 10 bad decisions a game that should be picked, thats outta my control and something that definitely needs tweaking.

I have zero control over that, other than the plethora of magic slider formulas that trust me, I've tried them all, doesn't fix.

[Armor and Sword]

Quote: Originally Posted by kdutch98

I said something similar in the other thread. I want to say it here, too. Hope no one takes it the wrong way. Just want to share what I am seeing, and what I think COULD maybe be part of it. First off, I play on All Madden, default sliders. 12 minute quarters, 20 second accel. clock. In 14 games with the Lions, I have thrown SIX interceptions with Jared Goff. SIX interceptions in 461 pass attempts. I was told that this was "an outlier, not the norm" But, what if it IS the norm. And the way Madden has been playing these last several years, is actually the "outlier" Here is what I mean. In years past, if a QB (user or CPU) made a dumb throw under pressure, or into coverage, more often than not, it was batted down. Maybe at a realistic rate, maybe not, that I don't know. Because we were so used to that happening, that became the norm. There was no fear of making those throws, because the chance of a horrible outcome was minimized. Now, the game is playing like actual football. Those mistakes, those dumb throws are being capitalized on more often. Maybe it is too often, maybe not. Maybe the "fix" for the issue is not to nerf the defense, but rather to consciously limit the number of "dumb" decisions. Take the sack. Throw the ball away. Live to fight another down. Only take those chances when ABSOLUTELY necessary. Sometimes (most of the time) taking a sack is better than making a throw with a high chance of an interception. In years past, there wasn't much fear of making those throws. Partly because those passes normally just got batted down. Partly because the pass defense wasn't that great. Zones didn't react the way they should. Now they do. Now there is fear of making those throws (as there should be) But maybe we're still playing with the mindset that there isn't (or shouldn't be) fear in attempting those throws. If a QB makes a good throw, and a DB jumps the route, and makes a great play, and gets a pick, people say "well, that's football" If a QB makes a dumb throw into coverage, right to a DB, and it gets picked off, some people say "that's broken, it needs to be fixed) No, that's Football. Again, I'm not trying to dismiss anyone's opinion on here. Just sharing what I have experienced, on the highest difficulty. I have prioritized making good decisions with the football. Prioritized not throwing into coverage. Reading the Defense. Have an idea on what SHOULD be open based on my coverage reads, and a check down in case that first option isn't there. This year's game has made me completely change the way I play the game. For the better.

I don’t disagree with you.

The main issue for me is the success rate of DB’s and LB’s.

In real football their hands for the most part (save for the truly elite) are stone.

The rate of success is overdone. And the interception slider always was able to combat that.

Not really this cycle.

Nothing drastic needs to be done except allow the slider to work more effectively and also there have been some ridiculous “Madden” picks that are superhuman. I can swallow those because they are not often.

I just hope they tune the success rate/dice roll.

Because it is overdone in that regard.


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[kdutch98]

Quote: Originally Posted by CujoMatty

Man,. I'll try this again. This thread is supposed to have nothing to do with user thrown picks it was started to differentiate between user throwing picks and cpu throwing picks. A lot of us, myself included, have accepted that user thrown picks have user skill or error. I don't want to argue that here nor should I argue that here. This is the cpu throwing way too many picks. So if your comment is in regards to the cpu making 10 bad decisions a game that should be picked, thats outta my control and something that definitely needs tweaking. I have zero control over that, other than the plethora of magic slider formulas that trust me, I've tried them all, doesn't fix.

Then the title of the thread is misleading.

CPU overpowered interceptions would imply that the CPU defenders are overpowered.

[Armor and Sword]

Quote: Originally Posted by kdutch98

But it really is, though. I mean, think about it. If you make a bad throw into coverage 10 times a game, you really shouldn't be surprised if you throw 5 picks.

Again the success rate is far higher than 50% more like 90% and that is my core issue.

Just tune it and all is good.


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[CujoMatty]

Quote: Originally Posted by kdutch98

Then the title of the thread is misleading. CPU overpowered interceptions would imply that the CPU defenders are overpowered.

Got ya. My bad.

Detroit Tigers was saying to make a new thread about the cpu throwing too many ints and I assumed that's what RM was doing. I reread ot and this is more a continuation of that other thread to get back on track.

Sorry yall I was off topic not you.

[kdutch98]

Quote: Originally Posted by Armor and Sword

Again the success rate is far higher than 50% more like 90% and that is my core issue. Just tune it and all is good. Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

I agree, the success rate is probably too high, and the slider doesn't seem to be responding.

I still think that in years past, the success rate was much too low though. Which "created a norm" that really shouldn't have been a "norm"