Madden NFL 16 CFM Impressions - Confidence, Goals, Hub & More (MyMaddenPad)

[pantherfan_forever17]

Quote: Originally Posted by jpdavis82

The onscreen notifications, what do you mean shut off goals exactly? It's part of the progression system. It was designed to simulate the real nfl based on stats and metrics. Real nfl players have goals every week, it's just the way it was implemented that was the problem. Same thing goes for confidence and regression.

He was asking if you could shut off goals entirely, perhaps in a options menu. Meaning no goals, no confidence increase/decrease, no xp, etc. See on here we try to make everything as sim as possible and we may feel that features like that break the slidders we use to make the cpu competitive. Skeptical because with madden 15, if confidence was past 50 the cpu became too easy as their confidence most likely was below 50. Not to mention xp and leveling players to 99 to easy. and who wants to change slidders every game? Gotta admit its a fair point?

Thanks for sharing the info. None of us are trying to be rude intentionally. Just passionate about football is all.

[N51_rob]

Quote: Originally Posted by jpdavis82

Like I said the way it was implemented was poorly done in M15, when you say this year that is M16 to me, I'm not thinking about last year as much. The whole concept being based on real nfl stats and metrics comes directly from Josh who designed the system. The idea was to create something that simulated progression and regression of players based on real nfl stats and metrics.

But JP real progression and regression aren't tied to stats and metrics. It's player development, position coaching, film work, age, injury etc.

Just because a WR fails to catch 120 passes in a season doesn't mean his is going to regress. Lots of guys have average to below average 1st or 2nd seasons and still have breakout years in their 3rd or 4th season.

If that is what Josh Looman said about progression/regression I'm utterly stunned and speechless.

[jpdavis82]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

Yeah, the current XP-based progression system quite obviously wasn't designed with realism in mind. It's a great user feedback loop which preys on human psychology - user achieve victories and earn rewards, user applies rewards to make his characters stronger, user repeats against tougher opponents. Tons of video games do this, and I'm personally fine with Madden operating this way. From a video game standpoint, I'm actually really curious about the goal chaining mechanic, I think that could be a lot of fun depending on how well that is executed. It's not realistic, though. That doesn't bother me as much as it does other people, but I'm just one person.

I was referring to the goals and confidence being based on real nfl stats and metrics, I'm not a fan of the xp system, players stats should increase based on performance on Gameday and in practice but it's hard to simulate that because not every practice performer is a Gameday performer.

[jpdavis82]

Quote: Originally Posted by N51_rob

But JP real progression and regression aren't tied to stats and metrics. It's player development, position coaching, film work, age, injury etc. Just because a WR fails to catch 120 passes in a season doesn't mean his is going to regress. Lots of guys have average to below average 1st or 2nd seasons and still have breakout years in their 3rd or 4th season. If that is what Josh Looman said about progression/regression I'm utterly stunned and speechless.

No that's not what I was saying, I'm saying like for example if Eddie Lacy is struggling like he did at first last year he may have been struggling in his confidence due to the injury, now honestly injuries should probably affect confidence a lot, especially concussions. Anyway say on a normal week his goal every week is 100 yards, if he doesn't hit that it probably won't affect him or a guy like Lynch much but if a rookie HB comes in and struggled to get 50 yds every week that would affect his confidence and that's kind of the idea behind the system. Look at Manziel last year, he came in confident and arrogant but struggled and even off the field he was humbled and he's going to have to regain confidence this season and the trust of his coach and teammates. That's the idea behind the system, it's just that it was so broken in M15. Players with high OVR and consistency rating shouldn't be dropping in confidence and regressing as much in M16.

[khaliib]

The issue with current regression and why a player looses more than they gain is due to the small window which player ratings are able to fluctuate on the 0-99 scale.

With most player ratings being generated above 70's, there's more room for regression (ie - more pts) to occur than there is for progression (ie + 1,2 or 3pts) before hitting the ceiling of the 0-99 scale.
There's more room given for a regression than there is for an progression.

Another issue is that actual visible differences of any regression/progression can/will only be seen during gameplay by the gamer based on changes of 10 pts or greater.

This runs for every rating the game uses to generate animations.
It's by "tier's of 10", so those couple of point changes to a particular rating produces nothing tangible that a gamer will see when playing.
So the purpose of the regression/progression system is not accomplishing it's intended purpose.

You can only see a slight difference going from ex. 60 to 70, 70 to 80 etc...
Not anything in between (ie 85 to 88).
A rating that's at 85 then receives a progression boost of +3 pts, only means that 2+ pts or more are needed to reach the tier of 90 and be able to see that slight difference/change when playing.

So an older player having his speed regress from 80's to 60's actually is in line with accomplishing the intended goal of a player regression by making the player slower (based on how the game is programmed to animate, not in real life).
(this speed difference also depends on any boost that Sliders may apply to that rating)

All of this to say that EA "MUST" increase their use of the 0-99 scale for any type of regression/progression to function properly.
The window that is currently used is simply too small and forces regression to be so drastic, while progression to be so minute.

Whether their programming was intended to work this way or not, this is the major cause of the problems with regression/progression.

They can con't to try and tweak the weights applied to the formula used to determine how much is given/taken away, but I think the improvement really lies in expanding the range of the metrics used (more of the 0-99 scale) to accomplish the goal they're seeking.


On another note, I really like the player cards.

Do you know if these cards pop up side by side (or can be programmed to) during any trades to get a quick glance of players involved?

It was a pain to have to go out of the trade screen, to only have to scroll all the way over to get the stats/attributes of a defensive player involved in the trade, to have to go back into the trade, to accept or deny.

Would be nice to see the main attributes needed for the position the player plays, show on the card.

Maybe later, they can add a "Position Change" button that quickly give you a glance of those attributes if you should desire to accept the trade with the intentions of changing his position.

My thing will be "Gameplay", so i'll wait for that date to be announced.
Can't wait to see what else is revealed as the days/weeks wind down.

[jpdavis82]

Quote: Originally Posted by khaliib

The issue with current regression and why a player looses more than they gain is due to the small window which player ratings are able to fluctuate on the 0-99 scale. With most player ratings being generated above 70's, there's more room for regression (ie - more pts) to occur than there is for progression (ie + 1,2 or 3pts) before hitting the ceiling of the 0-99 scale. There's more room given for a regression than there is for an progression. Another issue is that actual visible differences of any regression/progression can/will only be seen during gameplay by the gamer based on changes of 10 pts or greater. This runs for every rating the game uses to generate animations. It's by "tier's of 10", so those couple of point changes to a particular rating produces nothing tangible that a gamer will see when playing. So the purpose of the regression/progression system is not accomplishing it's intended purpose. You can only see a slight difference going from ex. 60 to 70, 70 to 80 etc... Not anything in between (ie 85 to 88). A rating that's at 85 then receives a progression boost of +3 pts, only means that 2+ pts or more are needed to reach the tier of 90 and be able to see that slight difference/change when playing. So an older player having his speed regress from 80's to 60's actually is in line with accomplishing the intended goal of a player regression by making the player slower (based on how the game is programmed to animate, not in real life). (this speed difference also depends on any boost that Sliders may apply to that rating) All of this to say that EA "MUST" increase their use of the 0-99 scale for any type of regression/progression to function properly. The window that is currently used is simply too small and forces regression to be so drastic, while progression to be so minute. Whether their programming was intended to work this way or not, this is the major cause of the problems with regression/progression. They can con't to try and tweak the weights applied to the formula used to determine how much is given/taken away, but I think the improvement really lies in expanding the range of the metrics used (more of the 0-99 scale) to accomplish the goal they're seeking. On another note, I really like the player cards. Do you know if these cards pop up side by side (or can be programmed to) during any trades to get a quick glance of players involved? It was a pain to have to go out of the trade screen, to only have to scroll all the way over to get the stats/attributes of a defensive player involved in the trade, to have to go back into the trade, to accept or deny. Would be nice to see the main attributes needed for the position the player plays, show on the card. Maybe later, they can add a "Position Change" button that quickly give you a glance of those attributes if you should desire to accept the trade with the intentions of changing his position. My thing will be "Gameplay", so i'll wait for that date to be announced. Can't wait to see what else is revealed as the days/weeks wind down.

I did not attempt to make any trades in my time playing except for during the draft and that was to move down. Gameplay is what I'm looking forward to seeing too and seeing people's reactions. The player cards are great especially for the scouting and draft with combine results, which we can discuss more on Tuesday.

[kehlis]

Quote: Originally Posted by jpdavis82

Like I said the way it was implemented was poorly done in M15, when you say this year that is M16 to me, I'm not thinking about last year as much. The whole concept being based on real nfl stats and metrics comes directly from Josh who designed the system. The idea was to create something that simulated progression and regression of players based on real nfl stats and metrics.

I'm not talking about 15 and you knew that.

Quote: Originally Posted by jpdavis82

I can't make you trust me, that's your decision whether you do or not. I'm just telling the truth and people can believe it or not.

I'm honestly convinced you don't even read or comprehend some posts before commenting.

I haven't commented on anything that hasn't been already revealed. I've only commented on things that have already been revealed and thusly my opinion has no difference whether or not I have the game (or have played a snippet of it like you have).

And no, you can't make you trust me. I haven't believed anything you've said for about 5 years now.

[jpdavis82]

Quote: Originally Posted by kehlis

I'm not talking about 15 and you knew that. I'm honestly convinced you don't even read or comprehend some posts before commenting. I haven't commented on anything that hasn't been already revealed. I've only commented on things that have already been revealed and thusly my opinion has no difference whether or not I have the game (or have played a snippet of it like you have). And no, you can't make you trust me. I haven't believed anything you've said for about 5 years now.

You're not talking about 15 ok that's fine, but what do you know about 16 then?