Coverage A.I Next Gen

[Vanilla_Gorilla]

The issue at hand with coverage is a fundamental one that is just barely bandaided by sliders.

I believe the problem at hand is too many moving parts conflicting with each other. In any given pass play, there’s roughly 6 parts to the DB-WR interaction with 1 or 2 of those being variable depending on the play.

1) The Press
2) The Transition
3) The Coverage
4) The Route
5) The Ball in Air
6) The Catch

The issue with Madden, is there is at least one moving part to every step of that process. This is leading to conflicts in the animations and the player’s movements. It’s too convoluted and desperately needs to be streamlined.

Take for example Press and Transition. They are two separate functions to a press coverage play; however, it just needs to be one because in it’s current state, if the press is beat, the animation for transition doesn’t occur correctly leading to the CB being behind by 5-6 yards.

Streamlining the coverage animations and taking out a lot of unnecessary parts can go a long way into making coverage play a lot smoother and making it easier for player ratings to matter more.

[Ram209]

Agree 1000%!!

Quote: Originally Posted by ForUntoOblivionSoar∞

Yes, the main reason it's not a game killer is because sliders can offset it to an extent. In fact, with my current sliders I think it's quite reasonable. TAKING shots was very much missing in previous Maddens. It's just a matter of the success percentage. I've raised User coverage and reaction, and lowered CPU pass blocking, QB and WR, and I think I'm getting a lot closer to realism. But other than that deep ball issue, it's not as bad as some say. The fact is, there are holes in NFL zones, and really the only reasons teams are routinely picked apart is the NFL pass rush is fierce and QBs make mistakes. But if you drop pass blocking sliders (and have good pass rushers), you can mitigate the holes in the zones. So in summary, with the right slider adjustments the game is not THAT far from ideal.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Operation Sports mobile app

[khaliib]

***pertains to Next-Gen***

I sent this info to Clint.

What is happening is that when the Dynamic Fatigue is applied to defenders during plays, the weighted impact regresses the coverage ratings/player movement to simulate being tired.

*the hiccup/delay/blown coverages etc... is most likely due to when the Dynamic Fatigue Regression “calculates” during the play.

**In testing, outside of “0” (basically turning off Dynamic Fatigue impact), no other setting of the Fatigue Slider minimize the issues.

Coverage ratings for defenders are already lower than than WR/TE Route ratings, so when the DFR is applied after the snap, the ugly Fatigue design is revealed.

One working method I’ve found that helps offset/minimize the DFR impact on LB/DB’s while still remaining active against DL is edit the “Recovery” rating for positions.

***Gameplay nugget***
”Toughness” = Stamina Recovery rating that determines how fast a player stamina is regained between plays
(also doubles with Injury duration/recovery)

- even top defenders are rated in the upper 70’s/80’s causing their ratings to decrease, while the WR/TE their covering have a higher Toughness ratings, thus less Fatigue impacting them.

- setting above “90” allows players to perform closer to their positional ratings throughout each play with little ratings manipulation.

***constant calling MCV applies greater Fatigue impact on defenders due to chasing, esp if it’s not a 3 & out (nice little find I didn’t know) vs ZCV calls


Another really big help is to do “99” for both MCV & ZCV ratings for DB/LB Coverage players.
- 99 ZCV still has a visible reaction delay applied
- 93+ MCV still allows slight separation by WR/TE with very high route ratings
**whatever LB’s MCV generated at leave at that

To still achieve Player Differentiation with above, edit...
Man CB/SS= below 75 AWR
Zone LB/CB/SS/FS = 90+ AWR

Run Stop LB, Hybrid SS/FS = 95+ Hit/Play Rec/Blk Shed w/out the above ZCV/MCV/AWR edits

Until Clint gets back to us, this is a viable solution for now with a little editing elbow grease.

For Franchise viability 30min of editing some players in each Draft Class is all it took

[khaliib]

So Raiders just proved blown coverages do happen. lol

Maybe Madden is becoming more authentic and we’re just not use to it.

Entire coverage defense getting AWR dropped to “25” along with tackling to “0”.

[booker21]

This is only happening on Madden 21 Next Gen or PS4/Xbox one also having this issue?

[Ram209]

Like I've been saying all along in this thread.... AS A RAIDER FAN!!!!!! Maybe the Programming at maddenwas done while watching a Raider game?!?!??!!

Quote: Originally Posted by khaliib

So Raiders just proved blown coverages do happen. lol Maybe Madden is becoming more authentic and we’re just not use to it. Entire coverage defense getting AWR dropped to “25” along with tackling to “0”.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Operation Sports mobile app

[ForUntoOblivionSoar∞]

Quote: Originally Posted by khaliib

So Raiders just proved blown coverages do happen. lol Maybe Madden is becoming more authentic and we’re just not use to it. Entire coverage defense getting AWR dropped to “25” along with tackling to “0”.

While this is hilarious, these aren’t really blown coverages so much as corners suddenly having to take an explosive diarrhea in the middle of the field so they start jogging so they can pinch their cheeks together.

[OJsakila]

Quote: Originally Posted by khaliib

***pertains to Next-Gen*** I sent this info to Clint. What is happening is that when the Dynamic Fatigue is applied to defenders during plays, the weighted impact regresses the coverage ratings/player movement to simulate being tired. *the hiccup/delay/blown coverages etc... is most likely due to when the Dynamic Fatigue Regression “calculates” during the play. **In testing, outside of “0” (basically turning off Dynamic Fatigue impact), no other setting of the Fatigue Slider minimize the issues. Coverage ratings for defenders are already lower than than WR/TE Route ratings, so when the DFR is applied after the snap, the ugly Fatigue design is revealed. One working method I’ve found that helps offset/minimize the DFR impact on LB/DB’s while still remaining active against DL is edit the “Recovery” rating for positions. ***Gameplay nugget*** ”Toughness” = Stamina Recovery rating that determines how fast a player stamina is regained between plays (also doubles with Injury duration/recovery) - even top defenders are rated in the upper 70’s/80’s causing their ratings to decrease, while the WR/TE their covering have a higher Toughness ratings, thus less Fatigue impacting them. - setting above “90” allows players to perform closer to their positional ratings throughout each play with little ratings manipulation. ***constant calling MCV applies greater Fatigue impact on defenders due to chasing, esp if it’s not a 3 & out (nice little find I didn’t know) vs ZCV calls Another really big help is to do “99” for both MCV & ZCV ratings for DB/LB Coverage players. - 99 ZCV still has a visible reaction delay applied - 93+ MCV still allows slight separation by WR/TE with very high route ratings **whatever LB’s MCV generated at leave at that To still achieve Player Differentiation with above, edit... Man CB/SS= below 75 AWR Zone LB/CB/SS/FS = 90+ AWR Run Stop LB, Hybrid SS/FS = 95+ Hit/Play Rec/Blk Shed w/out the above ZCV/MCV/AWR edits Until Clint gets back to us, this is a viable solution for now with a little editing elbow grease. For Franchise viability 30min of editing some players in each Draft Class is all it took

This is interesting... However, when I adjust the man and zone coverage ratings on the players upward to 99 it tremendously effects their overall rating... What I DID do was adjust ONLY the "recovery/toughness" value of all dbs and lbs... This dolidnt seem to effect the over all ratings yet still allowed the defense to stay ontop of their assignments..
Now, I AM using Matt10's sliders, as well, and I'm not seeing huge issues anymore... Maybe I'm missing something but the adjusting of toughness values on dbs and lbs in combination with Matt10's sliders seem to be working out well for me...
Enjoying this discussion, of course. +1