Cpu vs cpu sliders
 

who’s rosters is best to fix interception problem and who’s sliders r beat for it?

Re: Cpu vs cpu sliders
 

DEFAULT ROSTERS

I did some research & this seems to be the way to go as far as CPU vs CPU. First of all on the gameplay settings I have EQ - ON, Multi Hot Routes - ON, & Coach Mode - On. Game time is 9 min per quarter.

Sliders are 35 for Human & 40 for CPU. Injuries - 20, Fumbles - 23, INT - 0

I am testing right now but it seems as though the QBs are making better throws & the defensive players aren't making a lot of INTs. I will confirm this after more games but this seems to be the magic we have all been wanting for 15 years now.

Re: Cpu vs cpu sliders
 

How's it looking? Do you make any adjustments to the playbooks?

Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

Re: Cpu vs cpu sliders
 

Sorry for delay. I have been away for a while. I am back to testing. So far the sliders are still the same. As far as the playbook is concerned, I usually change both teams to West Coast & it plays pretty well.

Keep in mind, I am still testing. Just been away for a while. (Change of work schedule.)

Re: Cpu vs cpu sliders
 

Any updates on this?

Re: Cpu vs cpu sliders
 

Just started testing again. Sorry for delay. I will have results of my findings by the end of next week.

Re: Cpu vs cpu sliders
 

No luck! One would have to fix the ratings of almost every player to get CPU vs CPU to play even close to "good". This game just wasn't tuned well enough to play against itself. Sucks but it is what it is.

Peace!

Re: Cpu vs cpu sliders
 

I've had some success with this recently and I would like to share (and have more folks test if they would be so kind, as game length leads to small sample size).


I'll preface that this is a league of entirely fictional players (simmed until all original players retired) and that I did have to use Finn's editor to reduce the Catch stat of all defensive players by 50%. 8 minute quarters do a good job of replicating the number of plays run in the modern game.



CPU blocking 8
Passing 24
Running 32
Catching 40
Coverage 0
Pursuit 0
Tackling 0
Kicking 20
Fatigue 8
Injury 20
Fumble 24
Interception 0



Some of the performances produced:
QB1 (ovr 77) 17-28 (61%), 205 yds, 2 td, 0 int, 7.3 ypa, 1 sack

QB2 (ovr 84) 25-44 (57%), 345 yds, 2 td, 1 int, 7.8 ypa, 1 sack
QB3 (ovr 78) 13-32 (41%), 157 yds, 1 td, 2 int, 4.9 ypa, 3 sacks
QB4 (ovr 82) 19-32 (59%), 255 yds, 1 td, 1 int, 8.0 ypa, 1 sack


Some theory:
Interception slider seems to impact interception rate negligibly.


Passing being too high seems to increase INT rate. I think too much precision leads to more throws directly into the DB coverage lanes. At 0, though, I was seeing completion rates hover in the low 40s. I'm not exactly sure where the sweet spot is.


YPA may be inflated. In the modern game, 7+ YPA is the realm of the top QBs alone, not the average ones. More sample size is needed. If it's a problem, my first attempt to fix it would be to modestly increase Pursuit to see if it would cut back on YAC.


Tangentially, running may need to be increased to 40. I saw some 95+ ovr backs held to <3.5 ypc. Then again I also saw an 80 ovr go for 9.5. Many variables and small sample size. I hesitate to increase blocking because it may reduce pressure/sacks too much.


Also the AI will nearly always attempt low percentage passes at end of half/game, no matter how dire their position, and this leads to elevated INT and decreased completion % overall.


I hope you guys will try these out and add to our data.