 |
Quote: |
 |
|
|
 |
Originally Posted by roadman |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Josh, I tried your new changes last night and the game felt more organic to me.
Now, here is a few disclaimers before I proceed:
I've been using online instead of offline, I didn't know if there was a difference, and over the past few months, I've been using current rosters vs preseason rosters because I wanted Ty Montgomery as a RB.
Other than that, here is what I noticed after a one game sample size.
Ratings matter, period.
The Packers sacked Bradford 8 times and people may think, 8 times? The Vikings OL is terrible and I was seeing the DL disengage is some of the battles on the line. I didn't see that much of that before.
Bradford stood motionless a few times in the pocket for awhile. Using the AM settings, Bradford would have sat in the pocket for awhile 50% of the game. I did see him try to get away from the rush a few times. He didn't stand like a robot each time he was sacked.
Bradford threw for close to 350 yds, but had 3 picks and a 66% completion percentage. I did see about 4 or 5 inaccurate passes from Bradford. I saw him throw one into the stands in the redzone with a perfectly timed blitz. I noticed LB's batting down balls, a few of those batted balls became int's.
Rodgers (me) hit 68% of his passes with no int's. The no int's is significant because I would average 24 int's per season with Rodgers with the prior settings and that is very unusual for Rodgers.
The running game was a mess, but the Vikings were in behind mode for the second half. I'm ok with the running game w/avg's of 3ypc for the Packers and the Vikings avg 2.6 yds per carry because the Vikes are not a strong running team and the Vikes are good against the run on defense.
I'm like you, I need to find the time to delete the cloud franchise and start all over again in offline franchise, but I am strongly encouraged by last nights results, albeit a small sample size.
Nice work.
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Thanks Roadman. Your outcome looks consistent with my observations so far....and thanks for adding the caveats, I actually like having that info so I know how it is applying with different variables (roster or online).
I played back-to-back games last night myself (a rarity for me) in a Buffalo CFM with the other set. Played LA and SF, both close wins, but both games were quite different in a lot of areas.
The game versus LA...they pounded it a lot early...with modest success and Goff played the "safety valve game" with Kendricks. My run game was more effective with just over 100 yards (to my left side behind Glenn/Icognito...the right side of my line is a disaster). Second half, I started shutting down Gurley better after bringing up my safeties on occasion and LA had to attack in the air more....and poor Goff....he was just all over the place, started throwing picks on poorly thrown balls and it snowballed on him (he threw 5 INTs total and was ~53% passing). They still had a chance to win, but with 30 seconds left and down 1, Goff threw a horrible pass that Gilmore picked-off for a Pick 6.
The SF game was different. My solid run game versus LA evaporated, the SF front 7 killed me all day...McCoy averaging less than 2 yards per carry. But, I could throw on their secondary at times (but Taylor was still only around 55% comp) and I unleashed the 64 overall Tyreek Hill for the first time using him on simple patterns...and he was huge (along with Watkins, who has been my rock all year). SF started Gabbert as Kaep was hurt. After picking off 5 Goff passes the week earlier, Blaine threw no picks and completed about 65% of his passes (with better variety in targets than Goff). Hyde was modestly effective as well (around 60 yards rushing). Still, having the superior team, I pulled off the 10 point win....they hung in there pretty nicely.
The main trend I have seen with these tweaks is that there has been no definitive trend. Every game has played out differently...all close, but my Bills team is in that middle ground where they should be in competitive games most of the time. My schedule stiffens up now...it will be interesting to see how I fare versus better teams with good O-lines and offensive weapons.
So just a breakdown of the good/question marks after three games:
The Good
- Variety in QB performance (both user and CPU). Noticing that better-rated CPU QBs do a better job getting ball to primary receivers.
- Very solid coverage both for M2M and Zone
- Ratings coming through
- Solid variety in types of penalties being called (even saw the ever elusive unnecessary roughness call) and the number of calls looks OK (7-8 total per game)
- Stats really on-point with some variation.
- QBs doing a better job moving in the pocket and/or getting rid of the ball to avoid sacks. Far fewer number of those plays where they hold the ball forever.
The Question Marks
- Both run games seem a bit stifled; but I need sample size either from my own games or others. In the old setup, the issue was the tackle power/animation really overpowered the backs. Now, the tackle animations are far more varied but the ball carriers are getting swarmed still. This is quite possibly due to heatseeker being on. If I test out changes, I will start with turning it off and pray it doesn't screw up anything else or make the run game TOO effective.
- Subbing is a bit meh...even with XP sliders at default. This might just have to be the area to sacrifice.
- Lineplay isn't always pretty, which irks me, but more or less, it reflects ratings. The good news is that I am not seeing any suction/warp blocks and the majority of the time, I can get a guy or two free.
I'm actually enjoying my games with this setup, I never know what to expect and I am being challenged solidly. We can probably refine a few things to enhance, but I don't expect to change too much.