GJD23 & WTBB's Madden 25 All-Madden Sliders

[GMAB8]

Quote: Originally Posted by Fuhrerhuh

I'll turn it down to 10, and as for the run game. They average 24 runs a game, pretty low.. what do I increase?

Beware, 10 acc clock will yield a delay of game on CPU every once in a while. I don't mind it.

Try CPU run block at 50 and CPU fumble at 50.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

[GJD23]

I'll reply to you guys in a second but I'm going to try and find out what the NFL tallies in their play counts, so we can get a more realistic picture. Because I'm getting 120-140 plays a game (league average) but I'm including things like punts, field goal attempts, and kick returns when I list my plays in a game. If the NFL constitutes a pass, rush and sack as plays then my play count would lower by about 20 (bringing my plays per game to roughly 110) and that wouldn't be league average....

It's an easy fix obviously, just raise accel clock, but I need to look into it.

Also I'm glad WTBB is back on board! lol

[GJD23]

Alright so different websites are counting plays differently (reasons unknown, lol) but NFL.com has listed Passing, Rushing, and sacks in their play count.

I think raising accel clock to 15 would fix this. It would also give us higher tackle numbers and a greater disparity in tackle distribution. I'm going to play a game in Play Now later on with accel clock at 15 and see how many plays come out of it.

[GMAB8]

Quote: Originally Posted by GJD23

Alright so different websites are counting plays differently (reasons unknown, lol) but NFL.com has listed Passing, Rushing, and sacks in their play count. I think raising accel clock to 15 would fix this. It would also give us higher tackle numbers and a greater disparity in tackle distribution. I'm going to play a game in Play Now later on with accel clock at 15 and see how many plays come out of it.

I already feel I get too many plays at 10acc clock. I count passes rushes and sacks and easily get 120-140. Never less than that which would mean my average is easily into that range.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

[GJD23]

Quote: Originally Posted by G0DZGiFT

I was the Seahawks Seattle Seahawks at Washington Redskins Jan 1, 1ST 2ND 3RD 4TH SCORE Seattle Seahawks () 3 9 7 6 25 Washington Redskins () 7 7 0 9 23 Team Stats Comparison SEA WAS Total Offense 395 378 Rushing Yards 145 197 Passing Yards 250 181 First Downs 19 17 Punt Return Yards 39 15 Kick Return Yards 128 0 Total Yards 562 393 Turnovers 1 2 3rd Down Converstion 6-15 6-13 4th Down Conversion 0-0 0-1 2-Point Conversion 0-0 0-1 Red Zone Touchdowns/Field Goals 0/4 2/0 Penalties 2-10 0-0 Posession Time 30:17 29:43 Seattle Seahawks PASSING C/A YDS TD INT R. Wilson 16/36 257 0 1 RUSHING ATT YDS AVG TD M. Lynch 23 71 3.0 0 R. Wilson 5 52 10.4 1 R. Turbin 2 17 8.5 0 M. Robinson 1 5 5.0 0 RECEIVING REC YDS AVG TD P. Harvin 8 137 17.1 0 D. Baldwin 5 68 13.6 0 Z. Miller 1 18 18.0 0 S. Rice 1 12 12.0 0 M. Lynch 1 22 22.0 0 G. Tate 0 0 0.0 0 J. Kerse 0 0 0.0 0 Washington Redskins PASSING C/A YDS TD INT R. Griffin III 20/30 210 0 1 RUSHING ATT YDS AVG TD A. Morris 16 143 8.9 2 R. Griffin III 4 34 8.5 1 R. Helu Jr. 3 11 3.6 0 D. Young 1 9 9.0 0 RECEIVING REC YDS AVG TD S. Moss 4 52 13.0 0 F. Davis 3 22 7.3 0 P. Garcon 3 34 11.3 0 D. Young 3 17 5.6 0 A, Morris 2 5 2.5 0 R. Helu Jr. 2 22 11.0 0 L. Hankerson 2 45 22.5 0 J. Morgan 1 13 13.0 0

Looks absolutely fantastic. No words. Haha.

Quote: Originally Posted by GMAB8

I already feel I get too many plays at 10acc clock. I count passes rushes and sacks and easily get 120-140. Never less than that which would mean my average is easily into that range. Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

Hmm. I guess it can be personal preference. I like to play realistic clock management so maybe that's why I need to increase accel clock. Like if there's 20 seconds left in the half and we're backed up I'm not going to get off 4 plays cos Gameflow says so. I'll simply kneel it out. Same in the 4th if I have a lead.

I'm more interested in the tackle numbers though. Our distribution is spot on, but I've always wanted to raise the total number of tackles to get to league average and I'm positive this will do it. Just never tried it cos I incorrectly counted plays, lol.

[wordtobigbird]

Quote: Originally Posted by GMAB8

And it seems nobody really knows what the pass coverage slider does? Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

Lol 100 definitely isn't "100 rated coverage" or anything. I still lean toward the old theory that it may sway coverage toward man and zone. 100 you see really tight man coverage, so tight it leans into psychic at times. But I haven't played with lower coverage much at all. So I will try 50 next time I play. Anyone else playing now or whenever should try lowering it and see how coverage changes. The high scores come from the passing game coming too easy, sometimes for both sides. Makes it easy to complete 3rd downs and keep your drives going. 3rd and 5+ aren't much of a challenge as they should be. Especially with the way defenders currently play zone. So we should try 50 and 0 with the current set and see what happens.

[ich2233]

Since somebody decided to get me Banned I can't post a link yet, but go to SportingCharts.com

Awesome Stat site with pretty much every stat you could think of if anyone wants to check it out. I've been shooting for the League Average with every stat but I didn't think about the fact that some stats have major differences between League Best and League Minimum. Ya'll are talking about Plays per game for ex. well Denver has the most at like 71.something while the Jets have to worst at 58.something. If they played each other there would probably be wayyyyy more plays than league avg. don't ya'll think? Obviously tons of variables but I would imagine a shootout for the Broncos while the Jets go 3 and out and just stay on D. Idk tho, I suck at math lol.

[wordtobigbird]

Quote: Originally Posted by wordtobigbird

Lol 100 definitely isn't "100 rated coverage" or anything. I still lean toward the old theory that it may sway coverage toward man and zone. 100 you see really tight man coverage, so tight it leans into psychic at times. But I haven't played with lower coverage much at all. So I will try 50 next time I play. Anyone else playing now or whenever should try lowering it and see how coverage changes. The high scores come from the passing game coming too easy, sometimes for both sides. Makes it easy to complete 3rd downs and keep your drives going. 3rd and 5+ aren't much of a challenge as they should be. Especially with the way defenders currently play zone. So we should try 50 and 0 with the current set and see what happens.

*PCV down to 50 for both.

Playing as Seahawks hosting Rams in heavy rain. Leading 7-3 at half.

Clemens 12/16 144 (user error leading to yards) 1INT (over thrown pass to Sherman standing in zone) long35

Stacy 10-39. Richardson 1-6.

Wilson 11/16 105 long26

Lynch 10-33 1TD (goaline carries.) Long11

Theyved forced two fumbles after catches that ive luckily recovered.

Sent from my HTC VLE_U using Tapatalk