Sliders/Theories, etc - approach it with evidence thread

[Matt10]

This thread should be used with those coming up with theories, and posting video evidence of said theory.

We need to stop coming up with theories and tests that aren't supported with evidence. It's like one new thing after the other with this section. We all claim that we want a sim approach, and that we are "experiencing" certain things, but 9/10 it's a placebo.

This is what I have done for the last 2 weeks, every single theory that has been posted - I've streamed and proven some are bunk and some are legit.

People think I'm the only one that has figured out the OS sliders on my own. I can give you a list of guys that contributed to the findings. High threshold, not my idea - I was against it - it sounded stupid, but I did it; and I will forever be in debt to Cowher for even suggesting it.

With that said, we are going to develop a case of slideritis (over analyzing sliders,etc) and it will be too damn hard to play this game for what it is.

So from now on - let's focus on showing VIDEO EVIDENCE of what our theories are. Let this be the thread for that; and go from there.

My first videos tonight will be regarding high threshold @ 95. People think there will be no separation from ratings, primarily speed, and I will show you there is nothing to worry about.

[mrwarre85]

Quote: Originally Posted by Matt10

This thread should be used with those coming up with theories, and posting video evidence of said theory. We need to stop coming up with theories and tests that aren't supported with evidence. It's like one new thing after the other with this section. We all claim that we want a sim approach, and that we are "experiencing" certain things, but 9/10 it's a placebo. This is what I have done for the last 2 weeks, every single theory that has been posted - I've streamed and proven some are bunk and some are legit. People think I'm the only one that has figured out the OS sliders on my own. I can give you a list of guys that contributed to the findings. High threshold, not my idea - I was against it - it sounded stupid, but I did it; and I will forever be in debt to Cowher for even suggesting it. With that said, we are going to develop a case of slideritis (over analyzing sliders,etc) and it will be too damn hard to play this game for what it is. So from now on - let's focus on showing VIDEO EVIDENCE of what our theories are. Let this be the thread for that; and go from there. My first videos tonight will be regarding high threshold @ 95. People think there will be no separation from ratings, primarily speed, and I will show you there is nothing to worry about.

I like this idea and agree 9/10 "findings" here are placebo. Keep up the good work.

I will say I'm eagerly awaiting your 95 speed threshold video... I'm very skeptical.

[JrueToTheGame]

Agreed about the placebo thing. I have a video that I am trying to get uploaded I will edit this post shortly. . .

[Oraeon1224]

Quote: Originally Posted by Matt10

My first videos tonight will be regarding high threshold @ 95. People think there will be no separation from ratings, primarily speed, and I will show you there is nothing to worry about.

I have already tested this in the past. I would also caution interpreting results from your video. It is 100% correct that at 95 you won't see a big difference in pass coverage (I can't tell a WR/CB difference at 0 or 100)depending on your focus. At high threshold ratings the SD from the mean value is narrowed. This causes minimal changes to WR and CB coverages for similarly rated teams since changing the SD from the mean for players who are already the same SD from the mean results in an equal shift. It does however have several unintended consequences on the game. Since it objectively increases LB speed and TE speed it may result in atypical results (i.e. a TE not being run down by a cornerback after a missed tackle by a LB).

While higher settings do not change the appearance of similarly rated players--a TE covered by a LB will appear unchanged. Discrepant coverages are not as advantageous (LB covering a WR) as at a lower setting. This also removes some of the differences seen between teams. A team with 70 SPD/ACC LB covering a team with 88 SPD/ACC TEs will not be blown away as in real life.

The other consequence of 0 or 100 threshold sets is that by severely altering SPD ratings of slower players you deconstruct the safety valves of the defense. On 100 fairly fast players who break blocks would usually be run down from behind by a safety or CB. You will see bad pursuit angles and run downs at 100. Similarly if you set to 0 you will see CB able to run down these players more easily. Much harder to assess is the impact on acceleration (at threshold of 100) on defensive linemen rushing the quarterback and LB closing on running backs which may impact the passing/sack statistics or result in more tackles for a loss.

Bottom line: Threshold does have minimal impact on pass coverage but does impact running and post catch results, and possibly on pass rush (never tested that myself).

[Matt10]

Quote: Originally Posted by Oraeon1224

I have already tested this in the past. I would also caution interpreting results from your video. It is 100% correct that at 95 you won't see a big difference in pass coverage (I can't tell a WR/CB difference at 0 or 100)depending on your focus. At high threshold ratings the SD from the mean value is narrowed. This causes minimal changes to WR and CB coverages for similarly rated teams since changing the SD from the mean for players who are already the same SD from the mean results in an equal shift. It does however have several unintended consequences on the game. Since it objectively increases LB speed and TE speed it may result in atypical results (i.e. a TE not being run down by a cornerback after a missed tackle by a LB). While higher settings do not change the appearance of similarly rated players--a TE covered by a LB will appear unchanged. Discrepant coverages are not as advantageous (LB covering a WR) as at a lower setting. This also removes some of the differences seen between teams. A team with 70 SPD/ACC LB covering a team with 88 SPD/ACC TEs will not be blown away as in real life. The other consequence of 0 or 100 threshold sets is that by severely altering SPD ratings of slower players you deconstruct the safety valves of the defense. On 100 fairly fast players who break blocks would usually be run down from behind by a safety or CB. You will see bad pursuit angles and run downs at 100. Similarly if you set to 0 you will see CB able to run down these players more easily. Much harder to assess is the impact on acceleration (at threshold of 100) on defensive linemen rushing the quarterback and LB closing on running backs which may impact the passing/sack statistics or result in more tackles for a loss. Bottom line: Threshold does have minimal impact on pass coverage but does impact running and post catch results, and possibly on pass rush (never tested that myself).

I want to keep this as an evidence based thread, man. I respect your thoughts and considerable data - but we play the game with our eyes, using video; there is no other way to prove to the masses how something works without doing so.

Fwiw - threshold has a significant impact on pass coverage. It's going to be some digging, but I will show you the difference from a couple weeks ago when we switched from 40 thresh to 95.

Moving forward - please, everyone, include video (even picture if can't find video) when you make an initial assessment or response. This has potential to be a very good thread, and not just for this year's game - but whatever comes next.

[okcthunder2010]

i've tried Matts 95 threshold, and i've gone back and forth from 95 to 0-10, but must admit that the 95 feels better...ive had a couple people drop from my dynasty because of this but trust me it does work...and ive even had moments of 40-60 yard breakaway runs with it at 95

[The_Gaming_Disciple]

At this time I do not have an Elgato, Haaupauge, etc...;however,

I did some slider testing for myself.

I played as Penn State (me) vs. Alabama (cpu) at Beaver Stadium.

All sliders were at default except for Interceptions. Interception for AI was set to 100.

The game threshold speed was at 95. Game difficulty, Offense Varsity, Defense Heisman.

The game speed was set to very slow. Home field advantage was turned off.

All penalty settings were left at default.

I played the first quarter with CPU interceptions at 50.

I ran the exact same offensive play down the field for the entire first quarter. The play was Ace Normal Big, Curl Flats. I threw to the same exact WR (split end) on my left side.

What I noticed is that with CPU interceptions set at 50 my WR on the curl route consistently gained 10+ yards on every catch in man coverage with no pressure. The DB glitch was also apparent. The CPU defensive back would take two to three steps back, right before my wide receiver caught the ball.

In zone coverage, the defensive back would stay in their zone; however, I was still able to gain 10+ yards of offense.

In the second quarter I moved CPU interceptions all the way up to 100 while Human interceptions remained at 50. I ran the exact same play down the field, Ace Normal Big, Curl Flats, and threw to the exact same WR (split end) on my left side. The defensive backs, as well as linebackers in man coverage stuck to my players like glue. Every pass I threw was for an interception. I had time in the pocket consistently and noticed the DB's and LB's would move in front of my players while waiting for me to throw the ball. As soon as the ball was thrown it was intercepted.

In zone coverage, the DB's and LB's played their area and no interceptions were made when I threw to a receiver that was not covered. (WIDE OPEN)

I want to stress again. With CPU interceptions at 100. The CPU intercepted every pass. No drops.

What I have noticed, and concluded from this test is that the interception slider for the CPU controls how tightly the DB's and LB's cover their receiver. They remain with them step for step. I am not sure if this is only noticeable with a 95 threshold and very slow speed gameplay.

Please feel free to test, and give me your results. P.S. I am playing on the PS3.


Additionally,

With speed threshold at 95 and game speed set to very slow, the CPU QB, AJ McCaaron was 5/12 in the second quarter with 2:50 left in the half. He threw the ball away when pressure from the D Line came. He also overthrew and under-threw his receivers while not being pressured. He was sacked once and his longest completion was 12 yds.

Once again all sliders where left at default except for CPU interceptions at 100.

After the first half,

Christian Hackenberg was 8/15 - 53%, 105 yds, 0 TD and 6 Int. His longest completion was 16 yds and he was sacked 0 times.

AJ McCarron was 12/20 - 60%, 99 yds, 1 TD and 0 Int. His longest completion was for 23 yds and he was sacked 1 time.

[Matt10]

We are live on twitch right now - the game played will give some merit towards 95 thresh; but probably won't do much for pass coverage on the user side - seeing as how our defenders (most of them) are made up of CAP (created players) with very low AWR

http://www.twitch.tv/matt10l

Watch live video from matt10l's channel on www.twitch.tv