Actually... yes! I want them to stop artificially nurfing stats at the start. Power ups and chemistry are fine. But give each player their actual stats on the core card in the beginning (they already do their "real" appraisal in franchise - use those numbers).
They can still do legends and special edition cards througout the year... i.e. TOTW, flashbacks, rising stars, holiday promos, etc. But their core card should be their core card!
If they gave players their actual ratings, there would be 99 overall, 98 overall, and 97 overall cards at the beginning of the game. Those players would be too expensive for NMS players and would completely ruin the skill gap. I get where you're coming from, but that would basically kill all the hype around new players coming out.
Not necessarily. They can leave a little at the top for Legends and others. How many people should honestly have a 99 rating each year (maybe 1 or 2)?? They would just need to tweak the scale overall. The way they do it now... giving guys who should objectively be in the low-to-mid-90's a low-to-mid-80 rating at the start... has nothing to do with competition. It is so they can release 5+ cards for popular players to stimulate purchases.
The whole reason why they have the gamemode the way it is is that so there's almost a journey through the year of building up your team. When you start in August, your team might be an 80 overall. Then an 85 overall in November, a 90 overall in February, a 95 Overall in May, and a 99 overall in the following August. Nobody wants 90+ cards running around the field when majority of cards that are out are below 85
I agree they would have to reimagine how they approach it to make it work the way I described. But they could make it work. And it would be much more realistic. The majority of NFL players are average or slightly above. Very few players are 90+ if compared to their peers on a 100 point scale. In fact, on a 100 point scale, the only players who should be above the low 90's are legends and current all-pro caliber players. They could introduce the former throughout the year (putting out the lesser legends first and best later). And the universe of high-80s and low-90's would still further expand throughout the year as TOTW's, Flashbacks, promo's came out. Instead of getting 8 Khalil Mack's... you would actually get some seriously intriguing lesser knowns who progress substantially based on performance throughout the year. It would be different... no doubt. But it could be done. And your team would still improve as the year went along.
It is the way it is now, so folks have to constantly re-acquire the same popular cards to keep their roster relevent (that leads to more purchases). They also know that a relative few players entice people to buy the most packs. That is understandable as EA is a business. But let's not pretend that isn't the case or that the current model is the only one that would work for consumers.
So you want them to entirely revamp their rating system? That's easier said than done. I'd rather pay for 8 Randy Moss cards than be stuck with 1 90 rated card the entire year. I just think that would kill all the hype
I don’t think so at all. It’d be annoying af if they had cards like that at the beginning of the year for head to head. Plus, I don’t think they’re even that far off. Yes, he’s fast… for a TE. But since most DBs have like 82-84 speed if they’re fast right now, he’s not 5 speed faster than almost all DBs. Plus you mix that in with his break tackle and other ball carrier stats and it just wouldn’t even be fun to play against someone with that card. They could just toss the ball to him every play, which he’s a great player but everything is relative. The whole point of MUT is to be something fluid that you progress through the season. Having a card that’s better than everything you could acquire throughout the entire season too? That ruins the whole point if Ultimate Team. If you want to play him with his actual stats that Madden gives, then you should play him in seasons mode because then every other player is also on a relative scale.
Ultimate team isn’t even intended to be 100% reflective of how players actually are. It’s about progression of you and your team. You gotta earn that stuff. It’s already bad enough when you load up a head to head on day 2 of release and you play against the one guy who’s got money to blow and a madden obsession and either buys madden coins from a retailer or spends an even more absurd amount of money on openings the huge packs that cost 6k cash then shows up with 6 90+ players and has x-factor slots and abilities loaded out on all of them.
And before you say, “Kittle runs a 4.44 40, wtf u talking about relative speed? Dude is just fast” then I implore you to watch more football. Because he’s also huge and when he’s running routes, unless it’s a streak he never can really get to that speed. Tyreek Hill runs a 4.33 but when you look at them both on the field, Hill is absolutely a lot faster than their 40 times indicate. That’s part of the reason why some of those rookie elite cards are so weirdly balanced since they base their stats solely off combine performance.
Actually... yes! I want them to stop artificially nurfing stats at the start. Power ups and chemistry are fine. But give each player their actual stats on the core card in the beginning (they already do their "real" appraisal in franchise - use those numbers).
They can still do legends and special edition cards througout the year... i.e. TOTW, flashbacks, rising stars, holiday promos, etc. But their core card should be their core card!
Edited by GSUMetz21
If they gave players their actual ratings, there would be 99 overall, 98 overall, and 97 overall cards at the beginning of the game. Those players would be too expensive for NMS players and would completely ruin the skill gap. I get where you're coming from, but that would basically kill all the hype around new players coming out.
Not necessarily. They can leave a little at the top for Legends and others. How many people should honestly have a 99 rating each year (maybe 1 or 2)?? They would just need to tweak the scale overall. The way they do it now... giving guys who should objectively be in the low-to-mid-90's a low-to-mid-80 rating at the start... has nothing to do with competition. It is so they can release 5+ cards for popular players to stimulate purchases.
Edited by GSUMetz21
The whole reason why they have the gamemode the way it is is that so there's almost a journey through the year of building up your team. When you start in August, your team might be an 80 overall. Then an 85 overall in November, a 90 overall in February, a 95 Overall in May, and a 99 overall in the following August. Nobody wants 90+ cards running around the field when majority of cards that are out are below 85
I agree they would have to reimagine how they approach it to make it work the way I described. But they could make it work. And it would be much more realistic. The majority of NFL players are average or slightly above. Very few players are 90+ if compared to their peers on a 100 point scale. In fact, on a 100 point scale, the only players who should be above the low 90's are legends and current all-pro caliber players. They could introduce the former throughout the year (putting out the lesser legends first and best later). And the universe of high-80s and low-90's would still further expand throughout the year as TOTW's, Flashbacks, promo's came out. Instead of getting 8 Khalil Mack's... you would actually get some seriously intriguing lesser knowns who progress substantially based on performance throughout the year. It would be different... no doubt. But it could be done. And your team would still improve as the year went along.
It is the way it is now, so folks have to constantly re-acquire the same popular cards to keep their roster relevent (that leads to more purchases). They also know that a relative few players entice people to buy the most packs. That is understandable as EA is a business. But let's not pretend that isn't the case or that the current model is the only one that would work for consumers.
Edited by GSUMetz21
So you want them to entirely revamp their rating system? That's easier said than done. I'd rather pay for 8 Randy Moss cards than be stuck with 1 90 rated card the entire year. I just think that would kill all the hype
Tyreek Hill with 99 speed and all RR thresholds day 1? Unobtainable unless you throw $2000 at EA
Which would ensure anyone rarely encounters him.
but at that point you're just locking out the playerbase from all of their favorite cards???
I don’t think so at all. It’d be annoying af if they had cards like that at the beginning of the year for head to head. Plus, I don’t think they’re even that far off. Yes, he’s fast… for a TE. But since most DBs have like 82-84 speed if they’re fast right now, he’s not 5 speed faster than almost all DBs. Plus you mix that in with his break tackle and other ball carrier stats and it just wouldn’t even be fun to play against someone with that card. They could just toss the ball to him every play, which he’s a great player but everything is relative. The whole point of MUT is to be something fluid that you progress through the season. Having a card that’s better than everything you could acquire throughout the entire season too? That ruins the whole point if Ultimate Team. If you want to play him with his actual stats that Madden gives, then you should play him in seasons mode because then every other player is also on a relative scale.
Ultimate team isn’t even intended to be 100% reflective of how players actually are. It’s about progression of you and your team. You gotta earn that stuff. It’s already bad enough when you load up a head to head on day 2 of release and you play against the one guy who’s got money to blow and a madden obsession and either buys madden coins from a retailer or spends an even more absurd amount of money on openings the huge packs that cost 6k cash then shows up with 6 90+ players and has x-factor slots and abilities loaded out on all of them.
And before you say, “Kittle runs a 4.44 40, wtf u talking about relative speed? Dude is just fast” then I implore you to watch more football. Because he’s also huge and when he’s running routes, unless it’s a streak he never can really get to that speed. Tyreek Hill runs a 4.33 but when you look at them both on the field, Hill is absolutely a lot faster than their 40 times indicate. That’s part of the reason why some of those rookie elite cards are so weirdly balanced since they base their stats solely off combine performance.