Fixing Progression via Coaching Prestige

**okstate123** · 07-16-2011, 03:11 PM

Re: Fixing Progression via Coaching Prestige

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w

ontVertAlignCellWithSp/> <w

ontBreakConstrainedForcedTables/> <w

ontVertAlignInTxbx/> <w:Word11KerningPairs/> <w:CachedColBalance/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--> HC Prestige:

Base:
9 A+
8 A
21 B+
16 B
10 C+
9 C
16 D+
31 D

After Year 1:
3 A+
2 A
8 B+
1 B
6 C+
13 C
25 D+
62 D

After Year 2:
6 A+
1 A
6 B+
6 B
6 C+
11 C
18 D+
66 D

After Year 3:
12 A+
3 A
11 B+
5 B
4 C+
14 C
13 D+
58 D

After Year 4:
20 A+
9 A
5 B+
5 B
4 C+
7 C
19 D+
51 D

Now obviously it’s getting to the point where there are way too many elite coaches, but I still think this is a lot better than what you’ll get without adjusting prestiges. Hopefully, by the time we start reaching this point in our dynasty, EA will come out with a patch to fix coach progression, especially for coordinators.

**okstate123** · 07-16-2011, 03:11 PM

Re: Fixing Progression via Coaching Prestige

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:TrackMoves/> <w:TrackFormatting/> <w:PunctuationKerning/> <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/> <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid> <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent> <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText> <w

oNotPromoteQF/> <w:LidThemeOther>EN-US</w:LidThemeOther> <w:LidThemeAsian>X-NONE</w:LidThemeAsian> <w:LidThemeComplexScript>X-NONE</w:LidThemeComplexScript> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> <w

ontGrowAutofit/> <w:SplitPgBreakAndParaMark/> <w

ontVertAlignCellWithSp/> <w

ontBreakConstrainedForcedTables/> <w

ontVertAlignInTxbx/> <w:Word11KerningPairs/> <w:CachedColBalance/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> <m:mathPr> <m:mathFont m:val="Cambria Math"/> <m:brkBin m:val="before"/> <m:brkBinSub m:val="--"/> <m:smallFrac m:val="off"/> <m:dispDef/> <m:lMargin m:val="0"/> <m:rMargin m:val="0"/> <m:defJc m:val="centerGroup"/> <m:wrapIndent m:val="1440"/> <m:intLim m:val="subSup"/> <m:naryLim m:val="undOvr"/> </m:mathPr></w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--> Team Overall:

Base:
2 A+
8 A
8 A-
31 B+
14 B
19 B-
6 C+
12 C
7 C-
9 D+
3 D
1 D-

After Year 1:
2 A+
13 A
8 A-
22 B+
17 B
20 B-
6 C+
13 C
11 C-
7 D+
1 D

After Year 2:
2 A+
9 A
7 A-
24 B+
6 C+
19 C
9 C-
6 D+
2 D

After Year 3:
1 A+
5 A
10 A-
15 B+
6 B
27 B-
13 C+
19 C
16 C-
7 D+
1 D

After Year 4:
3 A+
13 A
5 A-
11 B+
12 B
24 B-
10 C+
18 C
6 C-
12 D+
6 D

So even though coaching prestige is beginning to get out of control, it’s very nice in my opinion to see that team overalls are staying fairly similar to the base roster.

**NEOPARADIGM** · 07-16-2011, 03:12 PM

Re: Fixing Progression via Coaching Prestige

Good stuff dude. Thanks.

**khaliib** · 07-16-2011, 04:11 PM

Re: Fixing Progression via Coaching Prestige

Originally posted by okstate123

So, one of the biggest problems out of the box this year is obvious: coaching prestige progression. Coaches progress very easily and it can lead to an incredible amount of A+ coaches. On its own, it wouldn’t be a big issue, but since it is tied to player progression, the talent inflation from the default roster becomes problem.

In hopes to solve this issue, I’ve rerated every coach’s prestige. I subtracted 25 from all head coach’s prestige, and 50 from all coordinator’s prestige (the best HC started at 74, best coordinator started at 49).

I was just testing out the same thing.

I'm probably going to go lower as I re-rated Alabama's #10 QB to 83 OVR w/70 AWR and 80 Accuracy.

HC Saban was 88 OVR, while OC was 75.

After simming one year, #10 was a 94 OVR w/95 AWR and 96 Accuracy.
Too big of a jump!!!

In reality, player's physical attributes change very little.
It's their AWR/understanding that increases.

I'm going to re-rate coach's so that they have only a slight effect on player progression.
It will be much easier to adjust a couple of guys vs 100's every year.

**tinman** · 07-16-2011, 05:01 PM

Re: Fixing Progression via Coaching Prestige

Curious of the effect this is having on the top 25 each year and who is winning national championships. Under the base set, Navy, Temple, and Boise seem to be stock piling BCS championships while usual top teams are falling out of the top 25. What are you finding?

**okstate123** · 07-16-2011, 09:15 PM

Re: Fixing Progression via Coaching Prestige

Originally posted by tinman

Curious of the effect this is having on the top 25 each year and who is winning national championships. Under the base set, Navy, Temple, and Boise seem to be stock piling BCS championships while usual top teams are falling out of the top 25. What are you finding?

Unfortunately my saves are at the preseason of each year, so I can't see the final top 25 rankings at the end of each season. I'll give you the notes I can find from viewing each coach to hopefully answer your question.

Year 1:
Oklahoma won the NC.
Boise went 12-1 and won a BCS game.
Temple went 11-3 and won a bowl game.
Navy went 5-7.

Year 2:
Georgia won the NC.
Boise went 10-3 and won a bowl game.
Temple fell back to earth and went 4-8.
Navy went 9-4 and won a bowl game.

Year 3:
Wisconsin won the NC.
Boise went 11-2 and won a bowl game.
Temple went 3-9.
Navy went 8-5 and won a bowl game.

Year 4:
Oklahoma won another NC.
Boise went 11-2 and won a bowl game.
Temple went 4-8 and their HC got fired and became an OC at Tulane.
Navy went 4-8.

Year 5:
Wisconsin won another NC.
Boise went 9-4 and won yet another bowl game.
Temple with their new HC went 4-8.
Navy went 5-7.

Sorry I couldn't be more detailed, but I think these results are pretty realistic (surprising that 2 teams won multiple NCs though). If there are any other teams you want me to follow through the seasons let me know.

**northface28** · 07-16-2011, 09:45 PM

Re: Fixing Progression via Coaching Prestige

This is encouraging, while not quite perfect, I can live with these numbers.

**okstate123** · 07-16-2011, 10:29 PM

Re: Fixing Progression via Coaching Prestige

Here are the breakdowns of elite players by positions.

The first number is how many 90+ overall players there were at that position at that year. The second number is how many 95+ OVR players there were.

QB
Base- 23 4
Year 1- 29 6
Year 2- 31 8
Year 3-17 6
Year 4 23 6

RB
32 3
43 12
41 12
26 2
29 4

FB
0 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
6 1

WR
28 4
18 4
20 2
7 1
21 2

TE
3 0
6 1
3 0
4 0
13 2

LT
12 2
9 3
9 0
6 1
2 0

LG
4 0
10 1
16 3
7 1
9 1

C
8 1
16 3
14 2
9 2
15 2

RG
4 0
10 1
18 3
9 2
10 1

RT
5 0
3 0
9 1
6 2
3 0

LE
6 0
8 1
6 1
4 1
6 1

RE
6 0
7 2
7 0
3 0
3 0

DT
10 0
14 3
18 3
12 1
17 2

LOLB
2 0
3 1
5 0
4 0
9 1

MLB
17 3
18 6
6 2
5 0
5 0

ROLB
9 1
10 0
4 1
4 0
3 0

CB
9 0
20 1
16 1
7 0
19 1

FS
7 0
15 2
10 1
4 0
7 1

SS
6 0
10 2
8 1
2 0
6 0

K
4 0
12 2
9 1
18 3
14 8

P
1 0
7 1
19 1
18 6
15 6

**okstate123** · 07-16-2011, 10:37 PM

Re: Fixing Progression via Coaching Prestige

Originally posted by khaliib

I was just testing out the same thing.

I'm probably going to go lower as I re-rated Alabama's #10 QB to 83 OVR w/70 AWR and 80 Accuracy.

HC Saban was 88 OVR, while OC was 75.

After simming one year, #10 was a 94 OVR w/95 AWR and 96 Accuracy.
Too big of a jump!!!

In reality, player's physical attributes change very little.
It's their AWR/understanding that increases.

I'm going to re-rate coach's so that they have only a slight effect on player progression.
It will be much easier to adjust a couple of guys vs 100's every year.

Unfortunately, I think this is a problem that rerating coaches beforehand won't fix. It doesn't really matter how low you put Saban, his team is going to have a great year which will jack up his prestige to an A+ within a year or two.

This is one of the biggest issues in my opinion. In this game, every OC at, say, Oklahoma, is going to be an A+ after just a couple of years because of how good the team already is. This will lead to that A+ coordinator going to another team, and some other lower prestige coordinator taking his spot and becoming an A+.

It's a cycle that is unrealistic and will undoubtedly lead to a bunch of A+ coaches.

Though, with these adjustments, you can get a very realistic 4 years (in terms of player progression) into your dynasty. Surely by that time EA will have a fix.

**voodoo_magic** · 07-16-2011, 11:14 PM

Re: Fixing Progression via Coaching Prestige

Originally posted by okstate123

Unfortunately, I think this is a problem that rerating coaches beforehand won't fix. It doesn't really matter how low you put Saban, his team is going to have a great year which will jack up his prestige to an A+ within a year or two.

This is one of the biggest issues in my opinion. In this game, every OC at, say, Oklahoma, is going to be an A+ after just a couple of years because of how good the team already is. This will lead to that A+ coordinator going to another team, and some other lower prestige coordinator taking his spot and becoming an A+.

It's a cycle that is unrealistic and will undoubtedly lead to a bunch of A+ coaches.

Though, with these adjustments, you can get a very realistic 4 years (in terms of player progression) into your dynasty. Surely by that time EA will have a fix.

Thanks for doing this.

Your analysis of the cycle of coaches and how things can quickly spiral out of control is good, and put in a easy to understand example.

Using your settings as a start I decided to go just a bit lower but I wouldn't have decided to do that without the results of your test.

**voodoo_magic** · 07-17-2011, 09:16 PM

Re: Fixing Progression via Coaching Prestige

Using okstate's info here I decided to try a test with a more extreme reduction.

I edited all Head Coaches prestige so that the highest was 61 (C rating) and lowest 15. I didn't do an exact edit, like 40 from all coaches so some of the D teams are bunched up at the bottom. I did try to maintain some order with regards to ranking of coaches though.
I also edited all co ordinators highest 34 lowest 1.

Don't know what happened in yr 4 with only 102 of 90+rated players but then it went back up in yr 5+6.
Year 6 there is a jump in A+ coaches but not bad overall in every other grade.
Looks like things at this point are going to start getting crazy like with the base set of coach prestige.

I'm quite happy with the results up to this point. The amount of 90+rated players is really close to the base roster and it feels like getting a 95+ rated player is special.

Team ratings
Start of year 5, A+ 5 teams A,A- 9 teams
Start of year 6, A+ 5 teams A,A- 10 teams

Code:

Rating						
	base	yr2	yr3	yr4	yr5	yr6
99	1	5	2	0	1	2
98	1	0	3	2	1	5
97	3	7	3	4	4	5
96	5	8	7	2	6	13
95	8	15	12	9	6	17
94	15	23	23	8	12	24
93	12	22	32	9	12	31
92	40	29	45	14	28	38
91	46	52	40	21	37	48
90	59	63	64	33	55	63
90+	190	224	231	102	162	246
total						
						
HC Prestige	A+	A	B+	B	C+	C
start 2nd year	1	1	2	0	4	7
start 3rd year	3	1	0	2	2	7
start 4th year	7	0	3	3	1	17
start 5th year	8	4	7	2	5	11
start 6th year	16	5	7	5	6	15
						
						
						
Co ordinators	A+	A	B+	B	C+	C
start 2nd year	1	0	0	0	0	7
start 3rd year	4	0	1	2	1	6
start 4th year	2	2	2	2	5	8
start 5th year	7	2	8	4	5	20
start 6th year	13	3	4	5	13	22

Here's another thread where EvanRG did a test of base prestige, shows the staggering numbers of 99 rated players and basicly double the amount of 90 rated players.

http://www.operationsports.com/forum...n-ongoing.html

**Chedapalooza** · 07-18-2011, 02:08 AM

Re: Fixing Progression via Coaching Prestige

Originally posted by okstate123

So, one of the biggest problems out of the box this year is obvious: coaching prestige progression. Coaches progress very easily and it can lead to an incredible amount of A+ coaches. On its own, it wouldn’t be a big issue, but since it is tied to player progression, the talent inflation from the default roster becomes problem.

In hopes to solve this issue, I’ve rerated every coach’s prestige. I subtracted 25 from all head coach’s prestige, and 50 from all coordinator’s prestige (the best HC started at 74, best coordinator started at 49).

So far I’ve simmed 4 years (first year of all generated players) and recorded both HC prestige, and team overalls to compare to the base roster to see if there is a significant increase.

I’ve saved each season as a separate dynasty, so if a lot of people want to see more data, I can look at each season retroactively to collect it.

Seemsl like a good idea with the stats to back it up. Where do u make this edit? In dynasty or edit coaches in main menu? I'm assuming we have to go thru 1 by 1? Do you think it woul be beneficial to take more off? Like 30 and 55 from hc and coord respectively ?

Thanks!

**Rendezvous** · 07-18-2011, 06:59 AM

Re: Fixing Progression via Coaching Prestige

What if you edited down all the ratings, and turned off coaching contracts so that coaches didn't progress? Then there would stay the same about of A+ coaches and the recruits wouldn't progress as much.

**okstate123** · 07-18-2011, 09:48 AM

Re: Fixing Progression via Coaching Prestige

Originally posted by Chedapalooza

Seemsl like a good idea with the stats to back it up. Where do u make this edit? In dynasty or edit coaches in main menu? I'm assuming we have to go thru 1 by 1? Do you think it woul be beneficial to take more off? Like 30 and 55 from hc and coord respectively ?

Thanks!

Make the edits out of dynasty under edit coaches. Took me about 2 hours total (off an on) to edit them all, but it seems worth it to get a better dynasty.

Taking more off might produce better results, as the guy above me showed. But I think no matter how much you take off, by year 6, you'll end up with talent inflation.

I might try to start every coach at 0 to see how that affects dynasty.

Another thing I'm going to do is find out which positions are seeing the most inflation (QB, is one I've noticed) and just decrease the attributes of incoming recruits at that position.

Fixing Progression via Coaching Prestige

Recommended Videos

Fixing Progression via Coaching Prestige

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment