I feel like trading for draft picks is cheating

[Cre8]

I have posted a video about this. I agree that it is too easy to get picks from the CPU...

House Rules are a good option, but you shouldn't have to make rules to keep yourself from succeeding against a CPU.... Broken AI is a big issue, and I would prefer HARDER trades rather than easy ones.

[NorrinRadd12]

Quote: Originally Posted by Roncatto

On this note, Just seeing if this is both fair and would happen. I have seen teams "Franchise Tag" a player IRL only to trade them later (obviously not wishing to pay stupid to keep nor letting them go for free). I came to the end of Falcons Season. I had Grimes, Lofton and Abe all up for FA. I Re-signed Lofton, let Abe go, but because Grimes wanted a silly contract IMHO, I tagged him and then traded to the Bills (who had no recognised decent CB) for their 2nd round pick (they were up for selling 1st round but I knew that was silly). Did i play fair on the bills?

Did you use the "trade block" or just offer Grimes via "trade players"? Even if you used "trade players", that's not a totally unfair deal, you just probably wouldn't have gotten as much if you used "trade block".

[Cre8]

Quote: Originally Posted by Roncatto

Did i play fair on the bills?

I would say that is fair... Depending on his MCV an ZCV ratings as well as age, SPD and ACC, a 2nd Rd Pick could be very fair. I would almost say a 2nd and future 3rd for a franchised player would be acceptable as well... at least under the terms you seem to suggest with the Bills being in need of a CB.

[StayPlation82]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cre8

I have posted a video about this. I agree that it is too easy to get picks from the CPU... House Rules are a good option, but you shouldn't have to make rules to keep yourself from succeeding against a CPU.... Broken AI is a big issue, and I would prefer HARDER trades rather than easy ones.

yeah i'd rather harder trades with a trade override option in the settings for the guys that want who they want.

[macbranson]

@ Roncatto, That deal sounds fine. If he's a good CB and they really needed him, you could have gotten a first round pick. After all, if he were a RFA, the team that wants him would have to give up draft picks just to sign him.

I think a lot of people are too strict about trading. Teams will give up what seem like incredibly valuable draft picks to get players that they think they really need or would really fit well with their team. Look at what Oakland gave up for Carson Palmer and he wasn't even playing football anymore and he was on a steep decline when he retired. I don't think it's the type of picks that we acquire, but the sheer frequency of trading that goes on in franchise mode that make the game unrealistic. A lot of people trade like 3 or 4 players per season and that's where it gets unrealistic. There just aren't that many trades in the NFL.

[Guru03]

I manipulate the CPU to get great draft picks and I succeed in the future largely because of this. Do what it takes to win.

[funnyfiggy]

Quote: Originally Posted by macbranson

@ Roncatto, That deal sounds fine. If he's a good CB and they really needed him, you could have gotten a first round pick. After all, if he were a RFA, the team that wants him would have to give up draft picks just to sign him. I think a lot of people are too strict about trading. Teams will give up what seem like incredibly valuable draft picks to get players that they think they really need or would really fit well with their team. Look at what Oakland gave up for Carson Palmer and he wasn't even playing football anymore and he was on a steep decline when he retired. I don't think it's the type of picks that we acquire, but the sheer frequency of trading that goes on in franchise mode that make the game unrealistic. A lot of people trade like 3 or 4 players per season and that's where it gets unrealistic. There just aren't that many trades in the NFL.

I agree that some people are too strict, but do not cite Oakland as a reputable source. Carson Palmer was part of one of the worst trades ever for a team, and Cincinnati made out like bandits. Oakland has no picks in round 1-4 and had no playoff spot. Are you seriously telling me that the GM constantly makes good decisions?

[hawksruleva]

The CPU really doesn't value their future draft picks. In one draft, I had the #1 overall pick. I traded down 7 times (within the first round) and got 7 additional future picks for the next season, along with a 3rd or 4th in the current year's draft.

It's sad, because I'd like to use trading down for future picks as a strategy (the Patriots seem to excel at that). But it's so easy to do with the CPU that it's no challenge at all.