Madden NFL 16 Title Update #1 Available Now, Roster Update Scheduled For Friday

[redsfan4life]

Quote: Originally Posted by Benz87

I was looking forward to starting my CFM for the year this weekend, but based on impression from other OSers it sounds like I should hold off until the second patch. It was nice they were able to move this one out the door so quickly, but it sounds like there are still plenty of CFM crippling issues that have been unresolved. It's not a big deal for me because I enjoy MUT, but I feel bad for those who are strictly CFM players. By the time CFM is stable enough to start, 2k16 will be out.

Just a suggestion, but use your own judgement here. What is 'franchise crippling' to some may not be to you. I am 100% ready to go with my CFM based on what I've seen.

[Dwaresacksqb]

Quote: Originally Posted by kehlis

They never told us when it was submitted just that it had been and I'm fairly certain they wouldn't have made that announcement until they were fairly confident it would be approved. Patch could have been submitted three weeks ago for all we know.

Okay yeah that's the only thing that makes sense. Because they told us it was complete on their end on 9.3.15. Not even a week ago. I'm still curious of the actual submission date because I thought the process was roughly 2 weeks in legnth.

[Allball76]

Quote: Originally Posted by howboutdat

Speed kills in madden i can take a wr with not that great of catching and burn people all day with them. Same for a cb, just user him get his stats, to get his xp, youll get him to a great place in two years time.

Naw i Agree with you with the top players in the league rookies should be adjusted down also ! There only a few guys 2- 4 that should come in fast every year!

[yankees028]

I would have to agree I just watched a 15min stream while I was at work. The user simmed 3 seasons and I saw nothing that wasn't addressed in the game. I'm all for someone making a statement with valid proof but you have posted none.

I saw 3 seasons of player progressions to regressions all which I was pleased. A Marcus Mariota then went up only 10pts in 3 years. I will take that every day

[The JareBear]

Quote: Originally Posted by Roncatto

From a logical stand point, it is miles quicker to change the stock roster speed of all the players than 30 draft classes. QBA accuracy is maybe 10 players per draft so that's easier

We will see.

I'm hesitant to get too excited. I'm worried the new ratings will be even wackier than the first. As long as guys are comparable between each other/matched with real life I will be ok. Just want balanced gameplay.

[callmetaternuts]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

The issue is that left tackles (and right tackles to a lesser extent, but it's mostly left tackles) are allowing a disproportionately high number of sacks relative to other starting offensive linemen. The total number of sacks allowed is actually pretty solid at a glance, but teams' left tackles are allowing too many sacks. For example, in one given sim, the Cowboys allowed 32 total sacks, but Tyron Smith allowed 12 of them. Washington Post credits Tyron Smith with six sacks allowed in 2014 and he's never allowed double-digit sacks in his career per that source. Another example: Browns LT Joe Thomas - probably the premier left tackle in the league - allowed 13 sacks in the same simulated season (with PBK of 96 following the season); he's never allowed more than six sacks in his career, per Washington Post. The extreme example: for the Rams, they allowed 60 sacks as a team in one sim I did, and Greg Robinson allowed 41 sacks by himself. No other player on the team allowed more than 9. Combine this with a component of Game Prep where an offensive tackle will automatically regress if he allows too many sacks in a game. For example, Greg Robinson will automatically lose four points in Pass Blocking permanently if he allows four sacks in a game. The amount of regression may be tied to Consistency; the Rams' right tackle, Rob Havenstein, also allowed four sacks in a single game once this sim, and he lost five points on Pass Blocking instead of four. It appears that three sacks allowed is the threshold for any ratings penalty, so an OL can allow 0, 1, or 2 sacks in a game and be fine. Going back to Greg Robinson allowing 41 sacks in a season - that's a little over 2.5 sacks a game. In a second sim I did, he allowed at least 3 sacks in 8 games, and in two games allowed more than 6 sacks individually. So he's getting hit with PBK ratings penalties at least eight times in the season. That's the reason we're seeing the tackles regress so much - they are allowing a ton of sacks individually, and the game is penalizing them for that. For frame of reference - Washington Post credits Vikings LT Matt Kalil, one of the worst current starting tackles in the NFL by consensus, with 13.75 (.75?) sacks allowed in 2014. Unfortunately sortable real-world individual OL stats are proving really hard for me to find. If I were to take a stab at what the long-term effects of this would be - CPU teams are going to be at the mercy of the sim engine with respect to developing young offensive tackles, and any who don't perform in the game sims are going to probably discarded quickly on account of the extreme PBK regression. The LTs who already have high ratings, though allowing too many sacks, will probably maintain their ratings more often than not because they mostly won't ever hit the single-game sacks allowed thresholds to incur ratings penalties.

Great point. The regression model seems to be working correctly. It's the sim stats that are pushing it this way. Giving up 30 sacks a year, then yea, they should regress. A QB throws 90 picks a year, we would expect regression, same holds true here.

[howboutdat]

Quote: Originally Posted by Allball76

Naw i Agree with you with the top players in the league rookies should be adjusted down also ! There only a few guys 2- 4 that should come in fast every year!

exactly, there are 2 guys in stock roster 95 or over. A guy from my league just simmed 3 seasons and said there are 30 players on teams at 95 or over speed and 6 sitting in FA....This wasnt touched

[lvann4x]

The rookie speed issue perplexes me. Are the rookies generated by an algorithm, or were they made one at a time by the devs? If they were made one at a time by the devs (which sounds tedious, but only slightly more tedious than a Madden gamer having to check his own Trade Block), then how did we get so many rookies with too much speed? I just wonder how this stuff gets by testing, and how the Ratings Czar gives his blessing to these rookie classes.
It just seems like alot of these things would be a walk in the park, formulaic, tried and true after 30 years.
Seems like these guys would have a firm grasp of the Bell curve, standard deviation, etc. And that they'd have one or two guys that could eyeball a fictional draft class and have a pretty good idea of if it was realistic and useable, just like a farmer can eyeball a crop for 5 seconds and know how close to harvest it is, a scout can watch 2-3 pitches from a pitcher and have a good idea of if he's worth scouting further, or a detective can look at a crime scene and see things that the everyday person would miss. Do all of these professions make mistakes? Yes. But the good ones learn from their own mistakes and come up with a process to prevent silly mistakes, and good organizations find a way to capture knowledge so that there's a continuity of wisdom that is kept in spite of staff turnover.
Football/sports video games are not a novel idea anymore. It's an established industry that's been around for the entire lifetimes of many of the staff.
I'm not pissed. I'm not a Madden-*****. I've been playing Madden since the very first version. I'm just continually surprised and some of the basic stuff that slips through the cracks on an annual basis.