monafam Posted November 8, 2015 Share Posted November 8, 2015 I am having a little trouble with the Set Training part of the game. I love William123's (apologies if that name as off) guides, but I am not seeing a correlation on what I am putting in and what is coming out of the player. I understand there are a lot of things to consider about the player (age, current/potential ratings, work ethic, etc. etc. you name it) and his coordinator (how does he develop players), because this is a really deep game. My issue is that I have been doing some testing and going extreme on one end or the other. For example, I had a FR QB with a great coach for developing QBs and a strong worth ethic/intellect and potential player. I put 1 point to football skills and 99 to strength/conditioning and looked at the results. I didn't see a correlation in his ratings. It wasn't like he turned into the Hulk (his strength didn't change, but lots of other ratings went up). Then I would do 99 for football skills and 1 for strength, or let the coaches decide, etc. Certainly varied results. I guess I wasn't sure what to expect. I don't mind the fog of war aspect to any game, but I wasn't seeing the correlation between what I was doing vs what my assistants were doing as making a difference. When there is a target weight and they are close to it, does the training staff "know" this and try to keep them in a within a few lbs? (I don't think I've had an overweight player yet.. Thanks and keep up the great work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william1993 Posted December 12, 2015 Share Posted December 12, 2015 I'm not sure what your question is. It takes time for a player to develop, and like you said, there are a lot of variables, so putting 99 in one spot is no guarantee that that year they will totally develop all available attributes of that characteristic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amazedbygrace86 Posted December 13, 2015 Share Posted December 13, 2015 I kind of get where monafam is coming from. William1993, I've appreciated your insights on training (and other things related to the game), but I still kind of wonder if all of my tinkering really makes much of a difference. Anyway, one question I've had about training players is why when you select "Suggest All" the computer seems to emphasize "Adaptability" so much for players who don't need it. For instance, I'm coaching the lowly Ohio Bobcats, and I have a senior CB who is 3.0 out of 4.0 rating. Why does the computer set his adaptability at "35"? Why would I change his position when he's a senior and he's my best corner? Is there more to adaptability that I should know about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william1993 Posted December 14, 2015 Share Posted December 14, 2015 you wouldn't change his position in this case, but in a lot of cases you have a lot of players at one position and you need some in another. That's what the adaptability would be for. All players have an adaptability rating for that purpose So, for example, if you had a bunch of ILB and you needed some OLB also if some of the ILBs had good adaptability you can play them out of position For player attributes, each player is capped out in the game to a certain number for each attribute. So if you look at the player editor it can show you. Some WR, for example, might have a maximum hands of 75 and max route running of 66. So that means throughout 4 years of development that's the highest those two attributes will ever be able to go for that particular player. There is variety because each player is different, with work ethic and intelligence and whatnot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ConStar Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 I have to agree with the OP. I played this game a ton back when it first came out and just recently got back into it with the update. I've played with so many different combinations of coaches, development ratings, training settings, etc., that I've lost count. I've not seen any method work on a statistically significant, repeatable (which is key) basis. I would hesitate to say the feature is irrelevant but it doesn't mirror what would happen in real life. As the OP alludes to, if you take a guy (particularly a lineman) and devote 99% of his time to weight training, chances are you're going to get a bodybuilder in real life. He might flunk English 101 and have the football skills of a brass statue but you *will* notice changes to his physique. I've never seen that here. I see more correlation to the development ratings of the assistant coach(es) than I do the Set Training feature. After hundreds of seasons of sims, these days I just do "suggest all" and skip the step in the interest of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william1993 Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 that phenomenon is due to what I said earlier: the game maxes each individual player's potential, so no, even if you put 99 weight training you won't get a body builder. What you might get, however, is a player who has reached his maximum strength, so, then, in the following year, you don't have to spend any strength points on him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monafam Posted December 17, 2015 Author Share Posted December 17, 2015 I understand what you are saying william1993, but I think what I am experiencing is the same as ConStar. I’m not expecting my player to max out on the various attributes in year 1, but I would like to see a correlation on the percentages I use with what tends to improve. I simmed this several times (same player, same year, same scenario) and while I think the results can/should vary each time, if I’m going “all-in” with strength training, I should see some correlation. Whether my weight goes up 10+ or 7+, I am thinking I should see the #s skewed in favor of specific attributes. I have found that I am just not seeing this. So, if I dedicate a smart OL in a redshirt season solely to the weight room, it doesn’t feel like I am seeing any difference if I did that or if the OC splits out the training more evenly. It can be a time consuming process, and if I feel like my intervention does not seem to have an impact, I could see me going the “suggest all” route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amazedbygrace86 Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 If this is all true, it takes away a bit from the overall game experience. I'd rather not waste my time tinkering with something that might not make that big of the difference. I'd love to hear what insight Arlie has about this area of the game. Is this something that can be tweaked in a future update? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olympia Posted January 20, 2016 Share Posted January 20, 2016 along that line is there a MAX amount that should be put to any one attribute before there no more improvement? example at "35" maybe I get as much improvement as I can with minimal additional for any effort after that (or maybe the number is 50). Or it causes other skills to diminish due to giving them no attention - and that in turn hurts what you are trying to improve I know for one thing, I try to recruit smarter players so I don't have to keep them in study hall too much in their training time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.