Will Sykyes Talks Gameplay, All-Madden vs All-Pro, and NOT Getting Juked (T4Verts)

[SyncereBlackout]

Quote: Originally Posted by deu22ces

Listening to the part about the play styles, I really got the impression he did not want to answer your question about which style and difficulty provides the best ratings-driven game play. I don't want to 'read' into that too much, but it was something i noticed. You asked a few different ways and he wouldn't address it specifically. After hearing that, I am not confident that All-Pro "Sim" truly plays to ratings as what is claimed by EA.

What's equally as interesting is I walked into this year thinking I would go All-Pro instead of all madden. Now maybe I should go all madden? It's almost like they changed what each mode means without telling me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[deu22ces]

Quote: Originally Posted by SyncereBlackout

What's equally as interesting is I walked into this year thinking I would go All-Pro instead of all madden. Now maybe I should go all madden? It's almost like they changed what each mode means without telling me. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yea, he 'answered' the questions, but he never really answered the question. I was left more confused than educated. When T4Verts asked him, rather specifically IMO, which style/level of play is ratings based, he did not give a straight answer.

And I'm starting to sense, not accusing yet, but sense that there is this passive aggressive mind set within the Madden team that 'competitive' style is some how for 'superior' players now. Again, just my 'radar' picking up subtleties, doesn't mean I'm "right".

Another thing I've noticed, is that no one, and I mean no one (that I've heard so far) has a firm grasp on what it is that ratings actually do to this game. There is no one with a satisfactory level of authority and this is THE part of the game that drives game play. Not even the "ratings guy" knows what he's globally dealing with.

[deu22ces]

Quote: Originally Posted by msdm27

It felt like the response was purposely vague on that one. But I reckon AWR is used for Offense only and PRC is Defense only, so in essense they are the same rating. And this makes a lot of sense, in my mind at least. It would be interesting to see, though, if AWR carries more weight than PRC towards the OVR formula for defensive players because that would be weird.

Actually, AWR does indeed count in the OVR formula for defensive players. That was the very reason I brought the question up. AWR is equal in % to PRC for OVR calculation for every defensive player and yet every single base roster player has identical AWR/PRC ratings.

And we've been expressly told that they are different ratings that affect different scenarios/animations for defensive players.

[khaliib]

Quote: Originally Posted by deu22ces

Your PRC question(s) brought another point I've wondered. Maybe if you ever talk the ratings guy or if someone in our community knows the answer: If PRC and AWR are different ratings with different impacts, as stated by Clint, ratings guy, and now in this interview, why does every single defender in the EA rosters have the same PRC and AWR rating? They're 'different', but the 'same'; doesn't make sense to me. This would seem to really throw off game play mechanics. It also gives a double bonus or double negative (PRC & AWR are same % of OVR) to a player that has a 90+ AWR/PRC or 60- AWR/PRC. *and in CFM, rookies come in with variances in PRC/AWR but not base rosters.

I've seen the generated levels for rookies (think posted a couple years ago) that are generated based off "Tiers" (ie Elite, Good, Standard, bad) and the Min/Mid/Max thresholds.

Base rosters have "Always" been done in a way (rated) to help market more towards the Play Now side vs being in-line with the CFM thresholds.

Who knows why their the same in base rosters.
May be how their spreadsheet was/is set from years ago for ease of use.

Years ago made it known that AWR has a double function.
1) Multiplier upon certain ratings (then Clint later verified)
2) Contextual Awareness

This double use may be what's causing so many issues because both are needed for the game as a whole, but both may not need to be as high.

Example:
Safeties use AWR to determine how much of the programmed play zone they can play (ie Multiplier)

But at the same time, it helps determine the Contextual component of head tracking the ball and/or players near him. (ie Contextual)
- this is where you see players covering players while looking back at the QB the entire way until the ball is thrown and their head follows the ball path)

One use impacts a Gameplay component, while the other impacts more of an ascetics component.

PRC is daisy-chained off the Contextual functiinality of AWR where if they can't see it, they shouldn't react to it (ie Run/Pass or basically ball near to crossing LOS)
- when too high, players with their backs to the play will magically turn to the football location without seeing it.

As PRC is a reaction rating to the ball on runs, ZCV does the exact same thing for the Pass (not about covering a zone area as many believe) controlling reaction to ball out of QB's hand.

As a CFM player, I always edit my roster to be in-line with the generated thresholds within CFM.

[SyncereBlackout]

Quote: Originally Posted by khaliib

I've seen the generated levels for rookies (think posted a couple years ago) that are generated based off "Tiers" (ie Elite, Good, Standard, bad) and the Min/Mid/Max thresholds. Base rosters have "Always" been done in a way (rated) to help market more towards the Play Now side vs being in-line with the CFM thresholds. Who knows why their the same in base rosters. May be how their spreadsheet was/is set from years ago for ease of use. Years ago made it known that AWR has a double function. 1) Multiplier upon certain ratings (then Clint later verified) 2) Contextual Awareness This double use may be what's causing so many issues because both are needed for the game as a whole, but both may not need to be as high. Example: Safeties use AWR to determine how much of the programmed play zone they can play (ie Multiplier) But at the same time, it helps determine the Contextual component of head tracking the ball and/or players near him. (ie Contextual) - this is where you see players covering players while looking back at the QB the entire way until the ball is thrown and their head follows the ball path) One use impacts a Gameplay component, while the other impacts more of an ascetics component. PRC is daisy-chained off the Contextual functiinality of AWR where if they can't see it, they shouldn't react to it (ie Run/Pass or basically ball near to crossing LOS) - when too high, players with their backs to the play will magically turn to the football location without seeing it. As PRC is a reaction rating to the ball on runs, ZCV does the exact same thing for the Pass (not about covering a zone area as many believe) controlling reaction to ball out of QB's hand. As a CFM player, I always edit my roster to be in-line with the generated thresholds within CFM.

And for persons interested I. Using this CFM-centric roster. Is it something you share for community downloads? If so, about when would someone look for it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[deu22ces]

@khaliib, appreciate your response. I have follow up questions but I don't want to possibly tie up T4Verts thread on a single topic. I'll just simply say thank you, and catch up with you in another thread.