Improving upon the new Franchise features moving forward

[ehh]

The biggest thing that has to be prioritized is the CPU's logic when it comes to roster management. Spending a Top 10 pick on a franchise QB in consecutive years, blowing a huge chunk of their FA budget on a position where they already have a star, etc. There is zero self-awareness for the CPU.

I can't imagine this is that difficult to implement but then again NBA2K is still a disaster in this regard, hell it might be worse than Madden, so it must be one hell of a chore.

[stinkubus]

I'm certain a better job could be done. Whether or not they would ever invest the time and resources is another question. I gave up a long time ago on expecting a challenge from the CPU in most mass marketed games.

Even games that manage to pose a challenge do so because the mechanics lend themselves to giving the AI buffs or handicapping the human player. Let the CPU build its roster with no salary cap or player limit, but impose these constraints on the human, and you might have a game.

[briz1046]

Quote: Originally Posted by stinkubus

I'm certain a better job could be done. Whether or not they would ever invest the time and resources is another question. I gave up a long time ago on expecting a challenge from the CPU in most mass marketed games. Even games that manage to pose a challenge do so because the mechanics lend themselves to giving the AI buffs or handicapping the human player. Let the CPU build its roster with no salary cap or player limit, but impose these constraints on the human, and you might have a game.

I agree I think we are some way off any CPU ever offering a challenge in a sports game on an even playing field , could be wrong though ,technology has improved exponentially in my lifetime
Long ago I gave up looking for a challenge as such , preferring to act in a god-like manner and steering my franchise in what I consider plausible directions , as far as gameplay I play only in coach mode and without hot routing except to keep in blockers
Not for everyone I know , but I play for my amusement ,not to WIN per se

[stinkubus]

Quote: Originally Posted by briz1046

I agree I think we are some way off any CPU ever offering a challenge in a sports game on an even playing field , could be wrong though ,technology has improved exponentially in my lifetime Long ago I gave up looking for a challenge as such , preferring to act in a god-like manner and steering my franchise in what I consider plausible directions , as far as gameplay I play only in coach mode and without hot routing except to keep in blockers Not for everyone I know , but I play for my amusement ,not to WIN per se

I get where you are coming from. I really do. I impose house rules on video games all the time to make them more interesting or challenging.

House rules should serve to fix something that broken, but in this case it's doing the opposite. It isn't "excessive" hot routing that breaks the game. Hot routing is an attempt to fix something that's broken to begin with.

Let's stick with the Cover 3 example. Let's say you've decided that's the scheme you want to run in franchise. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with this. The problems don't start until we actually get on the field.

I can't think of a single stock offensive passing concept in Madden that a stock cover 3 can actually take way. More often than not the stock call is going to leave multiple routes wide open.

What you end up experiencing in game is swings between "robo qb" and "wtf did he just do" QB based on the results of dice rolls.

The thing is the AI isn't really "robo QB". The problem is your defense isn't sound.

To prevent the AI from being unstoppable they have to generate negative plays for you by doing incredibly stupid things like standing in the pocket and waiting for your DL to shed, or rolling out of a clean pocket right into a contain/spy, or heaving up a prayer to a blanketed receiver when someone else was wide open.

With my clock settings I typically face anywhere from 30-40 snaps against the AI on D. I'd guess 5-10 PER GAME generate those sort of absurd results.

When you do this none of the choices the player makes have any influence on the outcome whatsoever. You're just waiting for the AI to inevitably implode.

Until the design of the defensive concept is fixed there's literally nothing EA can do to overcome this, short of giving players super human abilities. The same goes for the customization options available to the human player. Do whatever you want to your sliders or the player ratings. They can't fix a broken play call.

This ties into franchise because if one of the "schemes" can't be made to work on the field without having the AI assist you by gifting you free turnovers and sacks then that's bad game design. There's no way to make it an immersive experience because what you do doesn't matter.

[Ueauvan]

these aren't new features in the main:

custom draft classes - don't care, make generated ones better
new menus aren't a feature, it's presentation
captains - was in prior maddens - so were chemistry (hc09) and morale (madden 08 pc)
archetypes - don't change, just delete. whilst i may play a version of 3-4 i can only have the definitions as provided of what type can play where? i should be able to play what type of player i want in a position regardless of base or any other formation. for example my starting lbers i develop to get to certain mcv/zcv levels, most points are through the air, sacks are a bonus so break up passes on base formation plays. i cant do that with archetypes.

[SilverBullet19]

I like the scheme fit, it’s a step in the right direction. Add coordinators and some mystery when signing free agents would be good.

Quote: Originally Posted by TheGr8Drake28

Do you guys choose to play as Coach or Owner when playing an offline franchise?

I enjoy owner mode, having total control.

Quote: Originally Posted by briz1046

Coach always and coach mode in gameplay, not one bit interested in team finances , only reason I'd see to be an owner is if you would be looking to relocate

There’s plenty other reasons to be owner. It can make signing players tougher because you have to control not just the cap but how much signing bonus you can afford. It’s also nice to have a handle on who your staff is in terms of trainers and scouts (and coaches but that has little effect if you don’t sim games). To me it’s also fun to control upgrades to the stadium, media relations and other stuff that impact the overall popularity of your team.

Honestly, playing it on coach or owner really changes the overall franchise experience. I just wish it went a bit deeper. The first owner mode had more “little things.” You used to be able to spend money on advertising and it directly impacted overall attendance at each game. There were also “fan appreciation days” where you could do a giveaway and it boosted attendance (always did that on my Thanksgiving Day game for the Cowboys). They got rid of that when the NFL essentially mandated that all games were sellouts . You could sell stadium naming right too, which I miss.



Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[JoshC1977]

Quote: Originally Posted by adembroski

Schemes that aren't a smorgasbord of outdated concepts. Tampa 2 hasn't been anybody's base for 5 years at least. 46 hasn't been anybody's base since the Buddy Ryan Cardinals. Run and shoot?! Seriously? Where is the Defense De Jour, Seattle Press 3? Some player archetypes are missing. Where's the press corner (Sherman, Peterson), run-stopping linebackers should be split between pursuit (Telvin Smith) and pluggers (Shazier.)

I'm actually glad that they have "retro" schemes/playbooks in the game; this is critical for those of us that want to use classic rosters. They frankly need to add more of them IMO (I would love a playbook with a more classic west coast - think 80s 49ers).

As for the stuff you would like added, I agree with you 100%...


I think it would be cool for defense if you could select your base front (43, 34, 46, 335, 425, etc.), then your scheme (zone blitz, cover 2, man, zone press, etc.), and playbook. By pairing the front/scheme together, it is limiting the options with this new system since the preferred positional archetypes are seemingly tied to the overall scheme selected.

[StayPlation82]

i think draft classes should stay the way they are as default. personally i don't want to spend 20 plus hours creating it for it to be randomized. but with all things video games, giving people options is always the key.

menus come and go. i'd like news to be at the forefront.

captains are a cool addition. i think it's cool as an aesthetic. like the OP, player morale, team morale and team chemistry would be nice additions. but then you'd need to build out the roles system again and i don't think that's improving the feature but creating a new one.

archetypes are a good one. highly debated and whatnot. i think there should be more of them per position if we're talking moving forward. more importantly i think a lot of convo moves towards fitting a scheme and not letting the user create their own. i think the hard rules are good for the CPU though. Seattle's C3 isn't the same as a one from the 90s. maybe i'd like all my DLs to be speed pass rushers. i can do it now but the game tells me i'm not in the box like i should be.

a few people hit on it. it's all tied to AI, CPU roster management and CPU play calling is paramount. teams don't have an identity. when you create a playbook and it has all of these stars next to plays. Seattle's defensive playbook should be 70-80% C3 plays! the base is there for play calling, it just needs to be expanded upon, tweaked and used for the CPU. as far as roster management, i think some hard rules need to be in place. and most of it revolves around the QB. having an 86 QB signed in free agency when an 85 is already on the roster?? while 4 teams in the league have 68-72 rated qbs or no QB going into the draft? just make a rule for QBs to start. then everything else.