We all know that all madden cpu can kick your ass any given day. Mediocre qb can easily go 25/27 4 TD. I think most everyone agrees that user games need to be on all madden, so we can't change the sliders to all pro.   I think we should get at least 2 tries to beat cpu and a sim if you can't.  I don't think it make sense to punish the person that IS active.  Even the worst roster in the league is dangerous with madden at the helm.   We are going to have at least one cpu team in the playoffs for the love of god, maybe more. If we wanted to get destroyed by the cpu, we would play offline cfm.  We want to play vs users, that's why we are all here.  Maybe people would be less likely to go AP if they thought they might lose when they did so.   

Follow up questions:

I hate playing CPU. I like this idea in general, but wonder about the following:
• Would the possibility of CPU teams almost always losing be a problem for anyone who has one or two legit scheduling conflicts?

• Would this policy open up bigger arguments about when does someone deserve a Force-Win?

I really want SIM-A-TIE

Last edited by wrattboy (1453760744)

matthalpin wrote: 
We all know that all madden cpu can kick your ass any given day. Mediocre qb can easily go 25/27 4 TD. I think most everyone agrees that user games need to be on all madden, so we can't change the sliders to all pro.   I think we should get at least 2 tries to beat cpu and a sim if you can't.  I don't think it make sense to punish the person that IS active.  Even the worst roster in the league is dangerous with madden at the helm.   We are going to have at least one cpu team in the playoffs for the love of god, maybe more. If we wanted to get destroyed by the cpu, we would play offline cfm.  We want to play vs users, that's why we are all here.  Maybe people would be less likely to go AP if they thought they might lose when they did so.

Lots of good points made, thank you for contributing.

When it comes to CPU games, users won't win every time. I've played a handful of CPU games this season and I think I've split 50/50, and the ones I lost, I definitely could have won.

I do not believe anyone is going on AP to have a better chance of winning. At least they shouldn't. Going on AP is reserved for being away from your XBOX, not just when people don't feel like playing. Consistent inactive members will be replaced because they don't add any competitive element to the league.

That would be a bannable offense because it's essentially cheating the spirit of competition. Being a good GM does come into play when you have to go out of town or you're sick and can't play, and your CPU team has to play for you.

Having 2 tries vs the CPU may be an option, but simming after two failed tries is probably where I would draw the line. My only hesitation is the players who don't take responsibility for their own mistakes when they're dealt a loss, and believe they should never lose a game, ever.

I do agree CPU Seahawks are unreal, though, lol.

At the end of the day its still a game not real life. Everyone wants sim but the rules arent sim tbh. 1. Dont run score up on ppl. In the nfl they do it every sunday. Use different  Defense but you can play cover 3 in different formations. Look as much as sim we want things sim is just matter of opinion and if you have a lesser  team your not beating cpu. Give them 2 trys  to beat cpu then have them post twitch feed and have a commish look through it to see if they broke any rules. Then give Fw

James_07074 wrote: 
Look as much as sim we want things sim is just matter of opinion and if you have a lesser  team your not beating cpu. Give them 2 trys  to beat cpu then have them post twitch feed and have a commish look through it to see if they broke any rules. Then give Fw

Thank you for your feedback. We'll likely sim-a-win if their opponent misses their scheduled game, and will offer two chances to beat the CPU is their opponent is on autopilot for multiple games. We will write this up in the rules this offseason