2Koalition NFL 2K Roster Thread

[puja21]

Quote:

I look at it this way: if an NFL player isn't able to perform consistently on 95% of the plays he's involved in, then he wouldn't be playing football

it's a measure of how often he plays up to his maximum ability

no offense, nor is this directed at you, but i never understand the justification that "I make xx the absolute minimum for a given attribute because if it was any lower than this he would not be in the NFL"

This makes no sense IMO:
Why do ppl arbitrarily decide that the 100 pt rating scale in 2K applies to the entire population of earth? Why is 50 or 60 or any number selected as "the minimum for what makes an acceptable NFL player in within this videogame.

The 100 pt attribute range is a measure of an NFL player's ability... shouldn't it naturally only apply within the pool of existing NFL players? So a 10 rating doesn't necessarily mean a player is in the bottom 10% of all football players in the world in that attribute (although it might in some cases)

The only way to know with any certainty (without seeing the actual code of how what an attribute causes) is to test how the rating translates to the field. IMO, in the case of consistency, many players at 5-10 for that attribute have pro bowl seasons in simmed franchises and can easily find success in hum-controlled games too

The only thing thatan attribute's value represents is aesthetic in terms of the "100 pt scale" we see on the screen... we don't know how it is formulaically applied to the actual gameplay. It has been shown that in the case of SPD, AGL and a few others that this scale is nowhere near linear. Written another way, the difference between two points may be the same visually but not within the code; e.g. 50-60 in SPD may be a more or less signif gap in reality than the difference between 80-90. This is why testing the gameplay is more significant than making the ratings "look right" for many ppl
^And it's the same reason the roster-makers don't simply copy Madden ratings... the range of 2K ratings and how they make the players perform in the game translates to the field completely differently from the way Madden ratings do and often times 2K attributes translate to the field differently from what logic would say.

Just my 2 cents

[oakraider]

2koalition no love for the Raiders, that's wrong. Slightly better than the Lions, come on man!

[2Koalition]

Quote: Originally Posted by oakraider

2koalition no love for the Raiders, that's wrong. Slightly better than the Lions, come on man!

no offense the Raiders stink. but they are a fun team to use in the Franchise to rebuild. plus if you mess with the depth chart, you can squeeze out a few more points. javon walker is rated 75 but he isnt starting but if you make him start they go up a bit. lol not that much but all good

[oakraider]

Your right about rebuilding them in franchise mode, I can make all the decisions on free agents and draft picks, that's one of the best things about this game it never gets old.

[dan77733]

Raiders are horrible and while Seymour did good in his debut, im still trying to figure out why Al Davis would trade their 2011 first round draft pick to NE (of all teams) for a 31 year old DE who will be a UFA in 2010 unless he gets franchised or re-signed. And if OAK franchises him, it will cost them more than the $16m plus that the Panthers are paying Peppers. Either way, thats nuts and so is Al Davis.

[oakraider]

The Raiders needed D line help so they went and got help, if they didn't get help people would have given them a bad time and Seymour had a good game and you could see the difference in the other players. Can't count on a pick in 2011 to amount to anything. When the season is over we will see what happens with Seymour, not need to worry about that right now.

[dophin26]

Quote: Originally Posted by dan77733

Raiders are horrible and while Seymour did good in his debut, im still trying to figure out why Al Davis would trade their 2011 first round draft pick to NE (of all teams) for a 31 year old DE who will be a UFA in 2010 unless he gets franchised or re-signed. And if OAK franchises him, it will cost them more than the $16m plus that the Panthers are paying Peppers. Either way, thats nuts and so is Al Davis.

That's just Al Davis for you. He has always gone after the extremely seasoned vets. I think Seymour made a difference in last week's game too. I'm not sure about giving up a #1, but they did need the help immediately.

[2Koalition]

Attributes rely on SKILL BASE rather than OVERALL NUMBER

another reason why this game still topples Madden. i just finished the Detroit Lions in my game: 69 offense, 67 defense, 72 overall however... according to NFL.com's Depth Chart of the Lions they have some below-average players in the lineup so i did not follow that. Eric King over Phillip Buchanon? no way. Noticed Orien Harris was on their also, even though he was recently cut so i dont think those Depth Charts are correct but i use them to an extent cause it is... NFL.com...

now you notice the bold, 'Attributes rely on Skill Base' this amazes me i am happy to see it. i was in practice mode throwing the ball around with the Lions offense using Stafford... i bench the 79 rated Stafford for the 76 rated Culpepper and the offense goes up a notch to 70.

Stafford
OVR: 79
ARM: 92
ACC: 83
READ: 57
COM: 35
CON: 56
STR: 46
SPD: 71
AGL: 89
BRTK: 40

Culpepper
OVR: 76
ARM: 94
ADCC: 74
READ: 62
COM: 44
CON: 30
STR: 70
SPD: 84
AGL: 72
BRTK: 82


i think cause Culpepper is much more a threat with running the ball, opposed to Stafford who isnt as strong or tough when it comes to breaking tackles and scrambling. i think its pretty realistic. what do you think?