I'm not disputing nor advocating anything being put forward in this thread. I would caution, however, making any specific judgments or claims about what does what or the significance of these evaluation settings. Experience will convey, no doubt, a few inclinations, but relentless and countless comparisons side-by-side against the same data and player movements are the only way to reach anything resembling a reasonable conclusion. Experimenting only conveys speculation.
For instance. when examining setting comparisons like 50/20/20/10 versus a very close 45/30/15/10, I seriously doubt it would be anything less than extremely time consuming to find significant and demonstrable differences between these two. It would take, IMHO, tedious collection of a ton of data under various circumstances to actually prove their effects. These aren't Madden-like sliders, adjusting the use of slants or average yards per carry, they're filters, altering a myriad number of the ways a player is viewed and valued in an equally large number of circumstances, not just trades or scouting, for example, but the extremely complex world of roster management; how we view and interpret our own players and the nearly mystical fashion with which the AI uses them to manage
its organizations.
Play your way, experience it your way, perceive it your way, but fact-finding is quite a different path than simply sharing impressions.That's entirely different than presenting findings.
