Funkycorm's Madden 22 XP Sliders

[Funkycorm]

Hello everyone. My name is Funkycorm. I am more active on the MLB forums as the crazy guy with the crazy roster theories. In case you needed a point of reference or for what you are in store for here. Every year I create my own custom set of XP sliders and use that in my franchises. I decided to share my findings with everyone this year.


This is for Madden 22 next gen. I have to assume it would work on the current gen systems but I won't guarantee that. So, let's get into it. But first some explanation and droning on about me and the process I use as it is a different approach from others.


A bit about me first since I am new to the madden slider subforum. I am a perfectionist. I like things a certain way. I strive to make the best experience in the game for myself. I am a cardiologist so I bring my meticulous nature to XP sliders as well as any sliders I create for myself. I look at how the short term impacts the long term. And that is exactly what XP sliders do. XP sliders don't impact the game in one week like gameplay slider adjustments do. You have to look at how the XP sliders impact the health of a franchise long term. I do not focus on stats as that is not what XP sliders are about. They are about growth and regression.


I take a week by week and a year-by-year approach both. What this means, is that I don't run a multiyear sim at once without stopping and just see where the numbers lie down the road, I sim week to week and look at what an individual player/position gains in a week based on various factors. We don't just want to see where league is in x number of years. There is nothing wrong with the approach of simming x number of years and seeing where you are at, but it doesn't give you an idea on how you got there. I go for a more detailed approach.


We want to see where the league is at after year 1, 2, 3, etc. The league may balance out in 7-10 years but what happens in those first 6 years is important as well. Especially since more players probably tend to play 3-5 seasons in a given cycle. (Just my estimate. Don’t hold me to this number.)


For those that know me, know how I play sports games. I can't stand current rosters. I want to sim years into the future and play in a half real half fictional universe I put my personal stamp on or play historical rosters, in the case of MLB at least. That is why I started doing this. I started noticing certain trends in how players progressed and regressed in this game and found that XP sliders were great influencers on this. In the last few games, I would take a series of bronze, silver, and gold drills and look and see how much XP was earned week to week. This would give me a good correlation of how many points a player would get in a given year as well as an average amount for games played and games simulated. Awards and pro bowl appearances play a role here but that is only for a small percentage of the league so those are one offs and not taken into account.


This year, it was a bit harder to narrow these down because there are more factors involved than previously. But like any game, there is a pattern. Progressive fatigue plays a big factor in this and we have to take into account all situations here. The fact that you can now focus train up to 6 players is a big monkey wrench as well. With full pads training, starter, high dev trait, coach bonuses, and focus training, a player can earn near 1,000 XP a week and multiple that by 6 and you have some serious roster ratings inflation.


Rules of the thread:

1. Be courteous and respectful.
2. Do not quote the first 2 posts to keep the thread less cluttered.
3. Please do not share your XP sliders in this thread. It causes confusion and clutters up the thread.
4. Be constructive. These are pretty much final unless something changes with progression and regression and/or I want to update something. Therefore, I am not looking for direct feedback or changes to be made at this time.
5. Remember, my approach to XP sliders is different. I will gladly hold constructive discussion on these.


The sliders will be in the next post as I go into more details there.

Thanks for checking these out!

[Funkycorm]

Madden 22 Next Gen XP Sliders:

QB 84

These need to be lowered as scenarios for QB are common. Lowering this helped to even out the high base ratings more.

HB 88

Another one that needs lowered because of the high inflation on the base roster. It will start to balance over 10+ years but until then you need to keep weekly progression in check.

FB 108

The fullback position is less common in today’s game but this number where it is at let’s a few elite guys emerge through the years.

WR 102

Progression here has always been hard to lock down in the past. This year, sticking close to the default was the solution here.

TE 105

Here we need a bit of a boost to let some of the elite guys emerge in future seasons.

G 102
T 102
C 102

Traditionally, you have needed a huge boost to the OL positions in previous games. Not this year. This is a position grouping where not much change is needed.

DE 96
DT 96

The DL positions need brought back just slightly. With the slight bump in OL, the DL needs just a slight decrease as they traditionally have higher ratings across the board. They are also the recipients of XP bonuses.

OLB 96

This was a tough one. Pass rushers tend to start off higher than the other archetypes. There is also a discrepancy between ROLB and LOLB. Lowering this a bit from default helps balance things out.


MLB 95

Similar premise to the OLB. Just needed a slight tweak below default to feel right.

CB 105
FS 105
SS 105

I am going to group these all together. With these at default, elite guys emerge less. We need a slight boost here to keep up with the WR ratings to keep WR/DB interactions good long term.


K 105
P 105

No real comment here.



A few things to note:

1. Even with a lot of factors at play, once again a good share of our XP sliders are close to default. Despite issues, the Madden team continues to tweak progression and regression for the better.

2. If you are using custom draft classes, I cannot recommend these. I use only default classes as custom ones are typically way too inflated. Plus, I don't want to continue a real universe as I mentioned above.

3. I also feel that the default rosters are just a bit inflated so these are designed to lower that inflation just slightly and do so over the life of your franchise.

4. Also, when I mention XP scenario bonuses, those only apply to user-controlled teams, but I wanted to make sure it was acknowledged.


Other Recommended settings:

This is also where I differ in my approach. There are other setting recommendations that go hand in hand with XP sliders. These are my additional settings and what I used to test these XP sliders. They are not required but preferred for better results.

Star: 320
Superstar: 70
X Factors: 50


So, these settings are important when it comes to sliders. The way the game is, it is too easy to have an entire group of starters all have star development. When this happens, it imbalances the league.


What these lower numbers do is help control progression. With these settings, teams can still have 3-4 superstars/x factors as well as an average of 10 star dev players. After year 1 you will see a lot of dev trait regression. It's okay. Just roll with it. Trust me. It improves the health of your franchise long term and makes it more dynamic and keeps that ratings inflation in check.


Progressive Fatigue:

Preferred on. I developed my own way of managing it but I did tests with it on, off, and my system I developed.



Feel free to ask questions about the sliders but I will say that since these are likely final, I am not looking to make changes to them. I am confident in my approach and that these are my best XP sliders yet with my first ones being back in Madden 18.

[Lil Worm]

Again....you’re the man!!! Thanks for the work Funky!!


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[Funkycorm]

Quote: Originally Posted by Lil Worm

Again....you’re the man!!! Thanks for the work Funky!! Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

Thanks! I appreciate it. Glad to contribute to the community.

[Steely McBeam]

Depending on what you are looking for I think your O-line sliders will be too high. Lack of stars makes it difficult for top end talent to jump out. Not really addressable with tools at hand.

My philosophy is to decide based on my game play sliders (All-pro) what OVR I want the worst starters to be at go from there. If there is an absolute dearth of top end talent I up the XP then nerf something in game play sliders to compensate. As my "Human Pass Block" is at zero (CPU is 50) I really can't have a Franchise with heaps of good line men.

The O-line has lowest OVR of all the positions for the worst starters. Starting roster is in the OVR 68-70 range.

The problem with the Madden XP system is basically all players drafted have limitless potential. I don't have a practical lineman example (lineman I have drafted were starters/stars) but below are two cases for normal players.
Case 1. CB XP Slider 110 Rookie went from OVR 72 to 77. Entire career was the starting SLCB. His archetype did not match the scheme. This probably included some progression where their highest OVR did not change.

Case 2. WR XP Slider 80 Rookie went from 67 to 74. Entire career was 5th on the depth chart and barely took a snap. Archetype did fit the scheme.

The above is typical. Getting slightly more than one OVR per year is "normal" without some extreme slider work. O-line progression doesn't look that different.

If you add 5 to the OVR of every person drafted this means all O-line drafted with an OVR of 65 or above will eventually be a "bad" NFL starter. This introduced a lot of talent and the default will climb steadily.

10 year sims need a slider at about 50 to stop this inflation. Your elite top 8 players will be 80+ as opposed to 86+. Top 16 78 compared to 81 then a mass of players around 70.

For 10 year sims 100% O-line XP sees the bottom around OVR 76, 80% -> OVR 74, 60%, 55% or 50% each have the same bottom around OVR - 69->72 due to variance. I haven't looked closely at why these 3 settings yield the same result but I strongly suspect that after 10 draft classes you have had enough OVR 69 players drafted into the league that it won't be possible to drag this lower and still have talent getting to 80. The variance will also be due to high OVR higher players in the original roster retiring after long careers in some simulations but not others.

I am in 2026 with my play through and will update if I see anything different. Haven't had a chance to look at actually roster to see in practice if it works radically differently.

All the other numbers are broadly in-line with what I have been seeing and work not to badly.

[SkruDe]

Man, Funky, you and Armor&Sword have made me so giddy to play Madden again. A feeling that has been absent in my life for many, many years. So thank you. This forum has been a god send to reviving Madden for me.


Quick question, does the difficulty setting matter? I'm assuming All-Pro is your default?

[Funkycorm]

Quote: Originally Posted by SkruDe

Man, Funky, you and Armor&Sword have made me so giddy to play Madden again. A feeling that has been absent in my life for many, many years. So thank you. This forum has been a god send to reviving Madden for me. Quick question, does the difficulty setting matter? I'm assuming All-Pro is your default?

Glad to hear you have that feeling back! I just want to contribute to the great community we have here.

Difficulty does not matter. It does not impact XP sliders for training.

[Funkycorm]

Quote: Originally Posted by Steely McBeam

Depending on what you are looking for I think your O-line sliders will be too high. Lack of stars makes it difficult for top end talent to jump out. Not really addressable with tools at hand. My philosophy is to decide based on my game play sliders (All-pro) what OVR I want the worst starters to be at go from there. If there is an absolute dearth of top end talent I up the XP then nerf something in game play sliders to compensate. As my "Human Pass Block" is at zero (CPU is 50) I really can't have a Franchise with heaps of good line men. The O-line has lowest OVR of all the positions for the worst starters. Starting roster is in the OVR 68-70 range. The problem with the Madden XP system is basically all players drafted have limitless potential. I don't have a practical lineman example (lineman I have drafted were starters/stars) but below are two cases for normal players. Case 1. CB XP Slider 110 Rookie went from OVR 72 to 77. Entire career was the starting SLCB. His archetype did not match the scheme. This probably included some progression where their highest OVR did not change. Case 2. WR XP Slider 80 Rookie went from 67 to 74. Entire career was 5th on the depth chart and barely took a snap. Archetype did fit the scheme. The above is typical. Getting slightly more than one OVR per year is "normal" without some extreme slider work. O-line progression doesn't look that different. If you add 5 to the OVR of every person drafted this means all O-line drafted with an OVR of 65 or above will eventually be a "bad" NFL starter. This introduced a lot of talent and the default will climb steadily. 10 year sims need a slider at about 50 to stop this inflation. Your elite top 8 players will be 80+ as opposed to 86+. Top 16 78 compared to 81 then a mass of players around 70. For 10 year sims 100% O-line XP sees the bottom around OVR 76, 80% -> OVR 74, 60%, 55% or 50% each have the same bottom around OVR - 69->72 due to variance. I haven't looked closely at why these 3 settings yield the same result but I strongly suspect that after 10 draft classes you have had enough OVR 69 players drafted into the league that it won't be possible to drag this lower and still have talent getting to 80. The variance will also be due to high OVR higher players in the original roster retiring after long careers in some simulations but not others. I am in 2026 with my play through and will update if I see anything different. Haven't had a chance to look at actually roster to see in practice if it works radically differently. All the other numbers are broadly in-line with what I have been seeing and work not to badly.

I appreciate the feedback but I am confident where my numbers lie.