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

[SolidSquid]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

A usage question (and only a usage question) - do people here focus their XP spending on SPD / ACC in CFM? Personally, I find this incredibly inefficient. Using the WR example, I'd rather upgrade his CTH / CIT / RRT / SPC / AWR ratings. The way EA has balanced the game, one can increase these ratings by more total points than if one just focuses on SPD / ACC, and by a significant margin. If I spend my XP on SPD / ACC instead, I'm not maximizing the value of that XP spent and not improving that player as much as I potentially could otherwise. If I want a more athletic player, more often than not I have to draft him, not build him.

Agreed and I don't do it either but I'm a single player who plays exclusively against the cpu. The problem arises in online leagues where it's not just speed and acceleration that are upgraded. Also it's not efficient but it's also very unrealistic. Getting 100 tackles with 2 of your LBs doesn't mean next season those guys should have increased zone coverage, likewise getting a lot of ints with you secondary doesn't mean they should become the hardest hitting secondary in the league and force a ton of fumbles. XP is extremely unbalanced.

[bad_philanthropy]

XP shouldn't even apply to physical attributes. I'd like to see it for football attributes only, and physical attributes progress or regress through a non-user controlled method.

[msdm27]

Too many pages went by to quote you, bucky60.... but to the point of giving ratings to coaches and then automating tasks.

I agree, that sounds pretty dope and like a sound solution, BUT...

A year from the implementation, we'd be discussing why coaches' ratings are static and how they should be dynamic... maybe we could send our tight end coach to a seminar to make him improve his teaching skills thus making my tight end better.

It goes back to my "endless loop" point.

Even if a system/method is found to make coaches ratings fluctuate...what's stopping users from just signing all the better coaches? You could say: a limited budget.
But that's not realistic either, there's a plethora of factors that go into why coaches/coordinators choose their teams but money is usually not the top reason (likely pretty much the same from all suitors).

I'm not trying to be anthagonistic... just trying to discuss a new way of doing things in Madden

As some others have stated, the most plausbible solution might be to limit XP usage to non-physical attributes.

[jfsolo]

Quote: Originally Posted by brandon27

The problem I see here though, this is the system we used to have in Madden. Then people complained it wasn't good enough for whatever reasons they thought. People complained they wanted control over it, rather than the CPU just being "random" about it. Personally, I don't have an issue with the system as it is. I play the game as if the XP doesn't exist in game. I call my plays as if I would as the coach. I throw to the open guy based on the read I made, not based on who needs a number of catches in a game, or drive or whatever to hit a goal. Then you take your XP, weekly, bi-weekly, whatever... for me it's every 4 weeks, and I apply it in the area's I want my players to improve as if I was serving the coach/GM role. So, if my WR's have poor hands... as a coach, I'd be putting them on the jugs machines daily to work on their catching, so... I'd dump my XP into them there. If they were poor route runners, and not able to get open, well, now as a coach, I'd be working on the release techniques, their route running etc.. So that's where my XP would go. Now, to me, that system works great. My guys get whatever they get by the way I play the game. I'm an offline player, so it's easy for me. I can understand though where it's an issue for online guys, because I'm sure there's guys in leagues that are just taking advantage of the system. However, with the trend shifting towards everything online, that's where the problem lies IMO. That's another rant for another day though. While the XP system works for me, because of how I choose to play within it, and use it. I completely understand why you'd want to base it on Fifa types, with potential, and age, etc, etc, etc. However... the big drawback there, if someone at EA decides that DeVante Parker, the rookie WR for Miami gets only a B potential, and will be maxed at an 80 OVR, then I've got, and many others have a big problem with that. Because, lets say I put up back to back to back 100 catch, 1200 yard, 12 TD seasons with the WR... he's clearly filling a superstar role on my team, yet the system is prohibiting him from his ratings advancing. To me, that's an issue. Bottom line is, nobody is every going to be happy with it.

I basically agree 1000% with everything you've said here. I totally understand people not liking the current system, but it's strange to me that people sabotage their own experience by adopting a meta playstyle.

[jfsolo]

Quote: Originally Posted by CM Hooe

A usage question (and only a usage question) - do people here focus their XP spending on SPD / ACC in CFM? Personally, I find this incredibly inefficient. Using the WR example, I'd rather upgrade his CTH / CIT / RRT / SPC / AWR ratings. The way EA has balanced the game, one can increase these ratings by more total points than if one just focuses on SPD / ACC, and by a significant margin. If I spend my XP on SPD / ACC instead, I'm not maximizing the value of that XP spent and not improving that player as much as I potentially could otherwise. If I want a more athletic player, more often than not I have to draft him, not build him.

I play the way you play. Maybe in User v User games speed is still the only thing that matters, but for me in my CFM, Play Recognition, Awareness and skill development are much more important.

[bucky60]

Quote: Originally Posted by msdm27

A year from the implementation, we'd be discussing why coaches' ratings are static and how they should be dynamic... maybe we could send our tight end coach to a seminar to make him improve his teaching skills thus making my tight end better. It goes back to my "endless loop" point.

I see this as a good thing. More depth and not an endless loop. The endless loop I see is EA/Tib is on their second or third interpretation of scouting and XP/Goals. Instead of adding depth, they're redoing existing features.

Quote: Originally Posted by msdm27

Even if a system/method is found to make coaches ratings fluctuate...what's stopping users from just signing all the better coaches? You could say: a limited budget. But that's not realistic either, there's a plethora of factors that go into why coaches/coordinators choose their teams but money is usually not the top reason (likely pretty much the same from all suitors).

I would say a better, more in depth financial model. Some games, like that PS4 baseball game, has things other than salary built into FA signings. The same depth could be done for coaches. And a progression system could be created for coaches as well. Other sports games have done it.

And I haven't taken you as being antagonistic. I see what we are having as a respectful dialogue. I respect your opinions. I might not agree with all of them. I guess that's what forums are for.

[msdm27]

Quote: Originally Posted by bucky60

I see this as a good thing. More depth and not an endless loop. The endless loop I see is EA/Tib is on their second or third interpretation of scouting and XP/Goals. Instead of adding depth, they're redoing existing features. I would say a better, more in depth financial model. Some games, like that PS4 baseball game, has things other than salary built into FA signings. The same depth could be done for coaches. And a progression system could be created for coaches as well. Other sports games have done it. And I haven't taken you as being antagonistic. I see what we are having as a respectful dialogue. I respect your opinions. I might not agree with all of them. I guess that's what forums are for.

I generally agree with all your suggestions in the last few pages, as I'm actually more interested in CFM for the management/game prep/progression aspect rather than the games. That's where the thrill is imo (building your team)

I just don't think it's realistic for us to hope EA would deviate so much from what they've invested so much in (make things easier, not deeper)... that's why I'm trying to come up with solutions bound by realism (inability to improve SPD/ACC) but that still fall within the realm of XP earned via gameplay.

Some of the in-depth suggestions we're discussing seem more realistic for text-based games. Even the undisclosed baseball game that implements some of the things we discuss, utilizes a simplistic... here's your scout --- press X to train Z ---- See results.

BTW... the financial system in said baseball game is actually very flawed... one bad season and the Yankeezzz all of the sudden have no budget at all, for example. And I think we've seen how Madden's implementation of finances work out

In addition to ratings for coaches or players, a real randomization algorythm (untied from ratings --- basically accounting for work ethic, I guess) would have to be in place to determine if and how much players progress or coaches have effect on players. And we, as players would have to be ok with such randomized events.

I know I'd be, but I doubt the majority would

[maafla1]

My big thing is substitutions - either automatic or manual. It takes too long to make substitutions, especially on offense when the play clock is ticking down. I have never been convinced that the substitution sliders work the way they should.