Beercloud wrote:
That's something we can be testing now that we've seen the trends.
For the most part this is what Im seeing also.
But on the other hand, I've seen a GM that has his QB playing well in a very competitive league with some top flight GM's. The QB's rating is 113.83 with 18 TD's, 3 Int's , 67.6 pct and 8.68 yds per attempt thru 8 games. It really didn't come about until this version. The QB has pretty good ratings but not great. So this GM has either stumbled on something or figured something out. Which I think is the latter.
If anyone wants to experiment stuff, hit me up via pm if you play me and I can set my defense to whatever you want to test against. Best way to see stuff if you know what your going up against before hand.
Who's the player ? I watched a lot of games and evaluated schemes applied in many of the leagues I am in as well as various forum posts .
I seen a few guys playing as you describe , but I chalk that up to mostly correct defensives adjustment not made yet .
Good calls have good results , but too many are pending the weaknesses of this code to get consistent good numbers. Alot of those complaints were left off this release . Until, those are looked at I don't expect to be surprised much by any more testing . I feel like i know what plays work and don't work .....for the most part
That being said I am trying different things in every league as I have such a broad level of talent/experience . I kinda like trying to throw my opponent off....right now I am testing the level of that. As I feel the parabolizing of ratings has made the play overuse penalty much more effective .
Qbs still are getting sacked based off that time clock and long passes are still nerfed. It's tough for offenses in general when a good fast defense is playing . It's been that way. Here in mfn one I am getting 2 passes a game with out changing anything since last season . When long passes were opened back up a bit.
4.5 and The parabolizing of ratings has had a positive impact in a lot of areas but it has highlighted the weakness in the fatigue code. It really needs to be based off body mass index. Something like having only speed and strength fail linear like ours and have skill ratings drop much slower but fall off quickly when the guy is really tired . That would be more realistic .
I here owners playing fatigue levels below the recommended to avoid poor play , Penalties and injuries . I guess having depth would matter a bit too much . Big guys get you a nice push, but it doesn't out way some of the possible negatives .
I have my qbs at 99 fatigue in a lot of leagues. They get pulled too often for the physical demands put on them. This is why the rotation worked so well. But real bug was masked by the qb sub penalty . ..fatigue is highlighted for qbs because we have a better code.
Just think any pro real life qb could drop back 100 times under 4.5 and not get tired at all. They just snap and throw. Physiologically it's not that hard to do if your arm is professionally trained ..like a baseball pitcher. When they fall off...they fall off hard , but alot of then can throw it hard 100 times.
If qbs were running for 75 yard tds all game maybe they need to be pulled , but really our qbs dont move at all. And under no circumstance does an elite guy get pulled late in the 4th cause they completed several passes and drove his team to possible game winning drive only cause the setting is 99. I seen it in the 3rd quarter as well. Why are they tired at all ?
With how sensitive qb accuracy calculations are right now I am thinking a tired qb is having a prominent effect in these clutch situations later in the game when they are not subbed like mine.
