Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Interceptions??? CPU vs CPU

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Sports] >> Maximum-Football 2.0 >> Maximum-Football Support >> Interceptions??? CPU vs CPU Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Interceptions??? CPU vs CPU - 12/6/2007 10:11:01 PM   
dreamvar

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 9/27/2007
Status: offline
Running the latest version 2.1.8
Chose the college level of player skills.

In 26 games played out manually CPU vs CPU there have been two interceptions.

I have been trying to smooth out statistical results by massaging player values in the database and playbook.
I've been able to make rushing yardage realistic to real football.
Same for sacks.
Fumbles happen at a good frequency.
Pass completion percent and average yards gained are on target.

The only thing I haven't been able to make a dent in is interceptions.

I read some older threads and found that initially people complained it was too high, then after David modified for that people complained it was too low.

For both collegiate and NFL levels of play: Interceptions should happen about every 32-34 pass attempts. That comes out to an average of 2 per game.

I'm sure there are people who run video game styled offenses to gun the ball down field repeatedly and thus manage to get a few picks in per game. They were probably the ones saying there were too many earlier on.

I, myself, am interested in realism.

David: Is it possible to put an INT setting in the config file? A setting that tweaks INT rates. I think it would be the best way to please people with different usage styles.
Post #: 1
RE: Interceptions??? CPU vs CPU - 12/7/2007 8:59:29 AM   
mudrick

 

Posts: 162
Joined: 4/4/2005
Status: offline
I definitely agree that Ints are too low.  But they really were too high before.  I was an observer, not a complainer.  But I think ratings should handle that.  Or......when the ball is thrown to the defenders with no WR around. 

So we went from too many to too few.  Best case scenario would have been....from too many to half of those be knock downs.  But I guess that is easier said than done.  Or is there a certain rating for DB's that bring up this probablility?

(in reply to dreamvar)
Post #: 2
RE: Interceptions??? CPU vs CPU - 12/8/2007 9:54:34 PM   
micvik

 

Posts: 139
Joined: 10/23/2007
Status: offline
It definately is a problem. what I do is after training camp I increase DB catching by 10.

I am finding Interceptions are much more realistic this way

(in reply to mudrick)
Post #: 3
RE: Interceptions??? CPU vs CPU - 12/8/2007 10:44:22 PM   
dragon2

 

Posts: 24
Joined: 2/23/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dreamvar

Running the latest version 2.1.8
Chose the college level of player skills.

In 26 games played out manually CPU vs CPU there have been two interceptions.

I have been trying to smooth out statistical results by massaging player values in the database and playbook.
I've been able to make rushing yardage realistic to real football.
Same for sacks.
Fumbles happen at a good frequency.
Pass completion percent and average yards gained are on target.





I for one would be interested in what you changed on your player values and what you are using in your playbooks to make your statistical results
more realistic.

(in reply to dreamvar)
Post #: 4
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Sports] >> Maximum-Football 2.0 >> Maximum-Football Support >> Interceptions??? CPU vs CPU Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.641