can't say i blame ya. i stopped buying flex a long time ago.
Originally posted by cwrujosh
One of the suggestions that was not adopted, but should have been, was the "repeat plays get harder to run idea".
Basically, the defense learns, in-game, how to stop a play as it gets run ad infinitum. So if you run Strong I OT every play, it will work, but get progressively less successful.
This is just one of many common sense ideas that never get considered.
This has been considered and will likely be added at some point, but right now there aren't enough plays to justify it. In other words, when there are only about 15 or so plays that are every down plays, but some games could turn out 90 offensive plays, it is hard to penalize people for using the same ones.
Also I think people who reflect on the problems of seasons 1-5 will realize that most of the problems with the sim now are a result of bort adjusting it based on user complaints. Give me a current problem with the sim and I will tell you the problem it was supposed to solve.
Example: Seasons 1-2 the running game was so weak that people played all cover 2 man because the front 4 could singlehandedly shut it down. There was mass complaining so bort beefed it up. Now powerbacks are starting to truly develop and no one can stop them.
If you give me any current issue with the sim I can tell you the original complaint that was made that led to its current state.
One of the suggestions that was not adopted, but should have been, was the "repeat plays get harder to run idea".
Basically, the defense learns, in-game, how to stop a play as it gets run ad infinitum. So if you run Strong I OT every play, it will work, but get progressively less successful.
This is just one of many common sense ideas that never get considered.
This has been considered and will likely be added at some point, but right now there aren't enough plays to justify it. In other words, when there are only about 15 or so plays that are every down plays, but some games could turn out 90 offensive plays, it is hard to penalize people for using the same ones.
Also I think people who reflect on the problems of seasons 1-5 will realize that most of the problems with the sim now are a result of bort adjusting it based on user complaints. Give me a current problem with the sim and I will tell you the problem it was supposed to solve.
Example: Seasons 1-2 the running game was so weak that people played all cover 2 man because the front 4 could singlehandedly shut it down. There was mass complaining so bort beefed it up. Now powerbacks are starting to truly develop and no one can stop them.
If you give me any current issue with the sim I can tell you the original complaint that was made that led to its current state.
Last edited Mar 20, 2009 12:55:54
Originally posted by tpaterniti
Originally posted by cwrujosh
One of the suggestions that was not adopted, but should have been, was the "repeat plays get harder to run idea".
Basically, the defense learns, in-game, how to stop a play as it gets run ad infinitum. So if you run Strong I OT every play, it will work, but get progressively less successful.
This is just one of many common sense ideas that never get considered.
This has been considered and will likely be added at some point, but right now there aren't enough plays to justify it. In other words, when there are only about 15 or so plays that are every down plays, but some games could turn out 90 offensive plays, it is hard to penalize people for using the same ones.
Eh - I disagree with that. Don't penalize them for using it 10 times, but if they use it 20 times, it needs to be.
Originally posted by cwrujosh
One of the suggestions that was not adopted, but should have been, was the "repeat plays get harder to run idea".
Basically, the defense learns, in-game, how to stop a play as it gets run ad infinitum. So if you run Strong I OT every play, it will work, but get progressively less successful.
This is just one of many common sense ideas that never get considered.
This has been considered and will likely be added at some point, but right now there aren't enough plays to justify it. In other words, when there are only about 15 or so plays that are every down plays, but some games could turn out 90 offensive plays, it is hard to penalize people for using the same ones.
Eh - I disagree with that. Don't penalize them for using it 10 times, but if they use it 20 times, it needs to be.
McGrai37
offline
offline
Originally posted by thehazyone
Originally posted by tpaterniti
Originally posted by cwrujosh
One of the suggestions that was not adopted, but should have been, was the "repeat plays get harder to run idea".
Basically, the defense learns, in-game, how to stop a play as it gets run ad infinitum. So if you run Strong I OT every play, it will work, but get progressively less successful.
This is just one of many common sense ideas that never get considered.
This has been considered and will likely be added at some point, but right now there aren't enough plays to justify it. In other words, when there are only about 15 or so plays that are every down plays, but some games could turn out 90 offensive plays, it is hard to penalize people for using the same ones.
Eh - I disagree with that. Don't penalize them for using it 10 times, but if they use it 20 times, it needs to be.
I also disagree. Both teams are using the same playbook. The team that's more willing to open it up should be rewarded.
Originally posted by tpaterniti
Originally posted by cwrujosh
One of the suggestions that was not adopted, but should have been, was the "repeat plays get harder to run idea".
Basically, the defense learns, in-game, how to stop a play as it gets run ad infinitum. So if you run Strong I OT every play, it will work, but get progressively less successful.
This is just one of many common sense ideas that never get considered.
This has been considered and will likely be added at some point, but right now there aren't enough plays to justify it. In other words, when there are only about 15 or so plays that are every down plays, but some games could turn out 90 offensive plays, it is hard to penalize people for using the same ones.
Eh - I disagree with that. Don't penalize them for using it 10 times, but if they use it 20 times, it needs to be.
I also disagree. Both teams are using the same playbook. The team that's more willing to open it up should be rewarded.
cwrujosh
offline
offline
Originally posted by tpaterniti
If you give me any current issue with the sim I can tell you the original complaint that was made that led to its current state.
And therein lies the original sin. Thanks TPat for being one of the few mods willing to admit that.
Bort is WAY too "reactionary". He would be far better served educating the GLB population as to the whys instead of just attempting a quick fix, because quick fixes lead to long term problems.
If you give me any current issue with the sim I can tell you the original complaint that was made that led to its current state.
And therein lies the original sin. Thanks TPat for being one of the few mods willing to admit that.
Bort is WAY too "reactionary". He would be far better served educating the GLB population as to the whys instead of just attempting a quick fix, because quick fixes lead to long term problems.
BigBody1914
offline
offline
sometimes you should try running your own league instead of caving in to stupidity. and if you did it based on people griping originally, then why stop now?
You're losing quality owners and pretty soon, players who enjoy this site.
You're losing quality owners and pretty soon, players who enjoy this site.
Last edited Mar 20, 2009 20:29:39
The Strategy Expert
offline
offline
Originally posted by cwrujosh
Originally posted by tpaterniti
If you give me any current issue with the sim I can tell you the original complaint that was made that led to its current state.
And therein lies the original sin. Thanks TPat for being one of the few mods willing to admit that.
Bort is WAY too "reactionary". He would be far better served educating the GLB population as to the whys instead of just attempting a quick fix, because quick fixes lead to long term problems.
Agreed. Bort shouldn't be listening to user complaints with the sim, because they are just speaking from an uninformed position without being able to see how the codes and formulas are designed and the way they are intertwined with other aspects of the game. It's not as simple as tweaking just 1 thing and then not expecting that change to crossover into the manipulation of many other variables that aren't even remotely close to being understood by the user-base. The only person who is in a position to fix the sim is Bort, because he is the only one that can see everything and determine how everything interrelates. That's not to say the user input isn't valid, but it needs to be assessed and evaluated with respect to the overall sim code and how all of the variables of the entire engine inter-relate with each other.
And that's not to say it's impossible for the users to help with problem, but it's more of a guessing game, and one would have to have a very shrewd interpretation of the game engine to hone in on proper suggestions to various elements, and if one guesses wrong and that area is addressed by Bort, then that's going to create a different imbalance that just creates a different perspective of problems for then a new group of complaints, followed up by further user suggestions that are going to continue the trend of low statistical odds of solving the problem while not wrecking other parts of the overall engine.
The analogy I will make is that of a car problem. But to tailor the analogy to GLB well let's assume a world in which only one type of car exists and the one guy who built it has invented every single part to the car and is the only person who knows how every single piece is assembled. Well if you hear a squeaking sound coming from the right side, and you think you have an idea what the problem is as a customer, you can't just expect the customer to say that the solution is to make the right widget more tightly snug into the widget housing assembly, cause by tweaking that one piece, you could be throwing off the alignment of a nearby part which is then directly or indirectly affecting another part, and then problems spread throughout multiple systems and the problem becomes indefinitely unsolvable through that such method of prognosis and treatment. It is impossible for the customer to then troubleshoot an unexpected effect of which they may not even be aware that it exists because they can't hear the sound for the other problems, and new problems are now evident by a completely different sensory experience such as visual. The only way to remedy the situation is for the builder of the car to perform all of the diagnostic tests himself and come up with the correct solution, because he is the only one that has the knowledge and the power to be equipped with making improvements to 100% of the car's systems to maximize overall efficiency of the final product.
Originally posted by tpaterniti
If you give me any current issue with the sim I can tell you the original complaint that was made that led to its current state.
And therein lies the original sin. Thanks TPat for being one of the few mods willing to admit that.
Bort is WAY too "reactionary". He would be far better served educating the GLB population as to the whys instead of just attempting a quick fix, because quick fixes lead to long term problems.
Agreed. Bort shouldn't be listening to user complaints with the sim, because they are just speaking from an uninformed position without being able to see how the codes and formulas are designed and the way they are intertwined with other aspects of the game. It's not as simple as tweaking just 1 thing and then not expecting that change to crossover into the manipulation of many other variables that aren't even remotely close to being understood by the user-base. The only person who is in a position to fix the sim is Bort, because he is the only one that can see everything and determine how everything interrelates. That's not to say the user input isn't valid, but it needs to be assessed and evaluated with respect to the overall sim code and how all of the variables of the entire engine inter-relate with each other.
And that's not to say it's impossible for the users to help with problem, but it's more of a guessing game, and one would have to have a very shrewd interpretation of the game engine to hone in on proper suggestions to various elements, and if one guesses wrong and that area is addressed by Bort, then that's going to create a different imbalance that just creates a different perspective of problems for then a new group of complaints, followed up by further user suggestions that are going to continue the trend of low statistical odds of solving the problem while not wrecking other parts of the overall engine.
The analogy I will make is that of a car problem. But to tailor the analogy to GLB well let's assume a world in which only one type of car exists and the one guy who built it has invented every single part to the car and is the only person who knows how every single piece is assembled. Well if you hear a squeaking sound coming from the right side, and you think you have an idea what the problem is as a customer, you can't just expect the customer to say that the solution is to make the right widget more tightly snug into the widget housing assembly, cause by tweaking that one piece, you could be throwing off the alignment of a nearby part which is then directly or indirectly affecting another part, and then problems spread throughout multiple systems and the problem becomes indefinitely unsolvable through that such method of prognosis and treatment. It is impossible for the customer to then troubleshoot an unexpected effect of which they may not even be aware that it exists because they can't hear the sound for the other problems, and new problems are now evident by a completely different sensory experience such as visual. The only way to remedy the situation is for the builder of the car to perform all of the diagnostic tests himself and come up with the correct solution, because he is the only one that has the knowledge and the power to be equipped with making improvements to 100% of the car's systems to maximize overall efficiency of the final product.
Last edited Mar 20, 2009 20:48:46
Painmaker
offline
offline
Bort produced a number of functions within a complex system, but we've got 8 seasons (more if you count alpha testing) confirming that he doesn't fully understand all of the relationships within that complex system. A computerized simulation can easily grow in complexity beyond its creator's understanding -- in fact that's partly the point of any modeling simulation: it should produce results the creator would otherwise be unable to predict on his own. Otherwise what's the point of creating it?
There are some pretty sophisticated folks playing this game... imo a wise developer would avail himself of their insights. Of course the challenge is recognizing what input is valuable and what isn't... not a straightforward task at all.
There are some pretty sophisticated folks playing this game... imo a wise developer would avail himself of their insights. Of course the challenge is recognizing what input is valuable and what isn't... not a straightforward task at all.
datongw
offline
offline
Sorry to hear the LV is leaving, sad to see good teams fold in disgust of the game. I think a lot of people are getting there, more and more people's threshhold are been reached. I'm just surprised that it took this far into the season for the first USAPL team to do so. In SEAPL and APL, there have been several teams with great owners and agents packing it in.
I hope Bort improves this sim and fulfill the potential this game has. However, that's just wishful thinking. I think Bort himself has reached his full potential on this, and unless he brings in some help (not just volunteer testers), some real professional help for game design, coding and testing, this game will probably die in a few more seasons. Seriously, the sim has gotten worse the past few seasons, instead of improved sim, we have been getting "endorsements" and "colored dots". The endorsement and colored dots just makes me feel like some one doing a piss poor job trying to cover up their shitty work by creating some smoke screens.
I hope Bort improves this sim and fulfill the potential this game has. However, that's just wishful thinking. I think Bort himself has reached his full potential on this, and unless he brings in some help (not just volunteer testers), some real professional help for game design, coding and testing, this game will probably die in a few more seasons. Seriously, the sim has gotten worse the past few seasons, instead of improved sim, we have been getting "endorsements" and "colored dots". The endorsement and colored dots just makes me feel like some one doing a piss poor job trying to cover up their shitty work by creating some smoke screens.
BigBody1914
offline
offline
Originally posted by Painmaker
Bort produced a number of functions within a complex system, but we've got 8 seasons (more if you count alpha testing) confirming that he doesn't fully understand all of the relationships within that complex system. A computerized simulation can easily grow in complexity beyond its creator's understanding -- in fact that's partly the point of any modeling simulation: it should produce results the creator would otherwise be unable to predict on his own. Otherwise what's the point of creating it?
There are some pretty sophisticated folks playing this game... imo a wise developer would avail himself of their insights. Of course the challenge is recognizing what input is valuable and what isn't... not a straightforward task at all.
So the big question is:
Why the HELL are we paying for a system that the creator doesn't understand?!
Bort produced a number of functions within a complex system, but we've got 8 seasons (more if you count alpha testing) confirming that he doesn't fully understand all of the relationships within that complex system. A computerized simulation can easily grow in complexity beyond its creator's understanding -- in fact that's partly the point of any modeling simulation: it should produce results the creator would otherwise be unable to predict on his own. Otherwise what's the point of creating it?
There are some pretty sophisticated folks playing this game... imo a wise developer would avail himself of their insights. Of course the challenge is recognizing what input is valuable and what isn't... not a straightforward task at all.
So the big question is:
Why the HELL are we paying for a system that the creator doesn't understand?!
kr0n
offline
offline
Originally posted by BigBody1914
Originally posted by Painmaker
Bort produced a number of functions within a complex system, but we've got 8 seasons (more if you count alpha testing) confirming that he doesn't fully understand all of the relationships within that complex system. A computerized simulation can easily grow in complexity beyond its creator's understanding -- in fact that's partly the point of any modeling simulation: it should produce results the creator would otherwise be unable to predict on his own. Otherwise what's the point of creating it?
There are some pretty sophisticated folks playing this game... imo a wise developer would avail himself of their insights. Of course the challenge is recognizing what input is valuable and what isn't... not a straightforward task at all.
So the big question is:
Why the HELL are we paying for a system that the creator doesn't understand?!
i think you should ask yourself that question
Originally posted by Painmaker
Bort produced a number of functions within a complex system, but we've got 8 seasons (more if you count alpha testing) confirming that he doesn't fully understand all of the relationships within that complex system. A computerized simulation can easily grow in complexity beyond its creator's understanding -- in fact that's partly the point of any modeling simulation: it should produce results the creator would otherwise be unable to predict on his own. Otherwise what's the point of creating it?
There are some pretty sophisticated folks playing this game... imo a wise developer would avail himself of their insights. Of course the challenge is recognizing what input is valuable and what isn't... not a straightforward task at all.
So the big question is:
Why the HELL are we paying for a system that the creator doesn't understand?!
i think you should ask yourself that question
The Strategy Expert
offline
offline
Originally posted by kr0n
i think you should ask yourself that question
Indeed. Not to mention didn't this guy sign up his first player when we were in "beta"? My answer is that I choose to pay because this is the best football MMORPG on the net and nobody has shown me anything better. I haven't found any game on the internet that I prefer to waste countless hours of the day on. This is the place for me!
i think you should ask yourself that question
Indeed. Not to mention didn't this guy sign up his first player when we were in "beta"? My answer is that I choose to pay because this is the best football MMORPG on the net and nobody has shown me anything better. I haven't found any game on the internet that I prefer to waste countless hours of the day on. This is the place for me!
Vegas_Bronco
offline
offline
Originally posted by tpaterniti
Originally posted by cwrujosh
One of the suggestions that was not adopted, but should have been, was the "repeat plays get harder to run idea".
Basically, the defense learns, in-game, how to stop a play as it gets run ad infinitum. So if you run Strong I OT every play, it will work, but get progressively less successful.
This is just one of many common sense ideas that never get considered.
This has been considered and will likely be added at some point, but right now there aren't enough plays to justify it. In other words, when there are only about 15 or so plays that are every down plays, but some games could turn out 90 offensive plays, it is hard to penalize people for using the same ones.
Also I think people who reflect on the problems of seasons 1-5 will realize that most of the problems with the sim now are a result of bort adjusting it based on user complaints. Give me a current problem with the sim and I will tell you the problem it was supposed to solve.
Example: Seasons 1-2 the running game was so weak that people played all cover 2 man because the front 4 could singlehandedly shut it down. There was mass complaining so bort beefed it up. Now powerbacks are starting to truly develop and no one can stop them.
If you give me any current issue with the sim I can tell you the original complaint that was made that led to its current state.
Tpaterniti - Great post - a class act move offering that information! But, I must agree with some of the posters here in saying that fixing one area doesn't necessarily cure the complaint. I think you have a very different gamer level here...it's like mixing the Level 10's with the level 52's and expecting everyone to just 'sort things out'. What is good for a level 10 or level 52 sim isn't necessarily a 'cure all' for the entire game. Thus my suggestion that there be a separate server for leagues AAA and up. AAA should prepare you for Pro Ball.
I honestly think that the game is only 1-3 UNchanges from being what it is intended to be. Instead of controlling the game moreso based on complaints....it would be wise to assess what those changes will consequently influence in the game also. I have no gripes about certain aspects of the game other than it is becoming a one trick monkey show....especially at the pro level. I really enjoyed season 7 because you knew that a team had 5-6 trademark plays that were their bread and butter...BUT COULD ALSO add in 3-4 others on any given sim and kick your ass. It made the game very challenging to prepare for and on any given sim you could win/lose using PURE STRATEGY or on 1-2 play difference. It led to some very good games and was a blast to participate in. (Case in point: The Season 7 Champs - Washington Bullets - had a 11-5 record going into the playoffs and didn't win a single playoff game by more than 7 points. It that isn't fun stuff, I don't know what is).
Enter season 8, I can pretty much assure that my ass or the Bullets will be blown out by any powerback in the league if I don't have one to counter with. Look at the scores from last season (very respectable) and yet this season we see scores like 55-7 or 45-7 - hell, I know the game better than 85% of the owners out there and there is NO EXCUSE for losing that bad other than the one-trick monkey show that has been encouraged by the game changes. We all knew during season 7 that if you can't stop the run....you lose. In S8, you can't stop the run period.
Because of the most recent changes (I assume encouraged from the 'test-server')...I can see changes on a game by game basis where the game is becoming overly controlled leaving teams with no other options than to run 52 times a game. It's as if they are trying to FIX TOO MUCH. At this point, my true question is- has BORT handed over the controls to the sims to the testers? ....The everyday changes to the game seem to speak loudly in the affirmative.
Some changes that resulted in poor results:
Why was the wheel pass and screen pass and long HB pass taken away? The elimination of these two plays has resulted in most teams disqualifying them from the playbooks (especially the screen pass) - these were two very powerful offensive pass plays that allowed most offenses to disguise their passing game and rushing game.
Why is the passing game been cornered also? If a team comes out and passes against my team and I don't have the proper AI setup to handle that pressure....then I should rightfully suffer/lose. If a team has 5 WR's that are all 53+ leveled....then it is the nature of the game that I better stop their pass or suffer the consequences. Furthermore, quarterbacks Ratings are down a good 20 pts on average from last season - NOT 1 ANNOUNCEMENT ADDRESSED THIS CHANGE.... needs to be explained in my opinion! If my WR doesn't have 15 in sure hands....why can't he still make a catch if his catching build is at 65?.....See where the changes have an over-controlling influence?
Could you explain why these 2 areas were changed to the degree that you can no longer influence a game through their strategic use?
My ultimate suggestion: If anything...lets go back to season 7. Give us back the ridiculous stats, passing yards and rushing yards, give ICE COLD his 2,700+ receiving yards per season and Jones-Drew his 3,500 yards - ALL IN THE SAME SEASON! It was fun, unpredictable and a great game where strategy could transcend build. You could lose a game by 1-3 plays and there was a lot of fun and unpredictable occurrences. Scores were tight and it was an any given sunday kind of league which seems much more 'realistic' than what we have now.
Originally posted by cwrujosh
One of the suggestions that was not adopted, but should have been, was the "repeat plays get harder to run idea".
Basically, the defense learns, in-game, how to stop a play as it gets run ad infinitum. So if you run Strong I OT every play, it will work, but get progressively less successful.
This is just one of many common sense ideas that never get considered.
This has been considered and will likely be added at some point, but right now there aren't enough plays to justify it. In other words, when there are only about 15 or so plays that are every down plays, but some games could turn out 90 offensive plays, it is hard to penalize people for using the same ones.
Also I think people who reflect on the problems of seasons 1-5 will realize that most of the problems with the sim now are a result of bort adjusting it based on user complaints. Give me a current problem with the sim and I will tell you the problem it was supposed to solve.
Example: Seasons 1-2 the running game was so weak that people played all cover 2 man because the front 4 could singlehandedly shut it down. There was mass complaining so bort beefed it up. Now powerbacks are starting to truly develop and no one can stop them.
If you give me any current issue with the sim I can tell you the original complaint that was made that led to its current state.
Tpaterniti - Great post - a class act move offering that information! But, I must agree with some of the posters here in saying that fixing one area doesn't necessarily cure the complaint. I think you have a very different gamer level here...it's like mixing the Level 10's with the level 52's and expecting everyone to just 'sort things out'. What is good for a level 10 or level 52 sim isn't necessarily a 'cure all' for the entire game. Thus my suggestion that there be a separate server for leagues AAA and up. AAA should prepare you for Pro Ball.
I honestly think that the game is only 1-3 UNchanges from being what it is intended to be. Instead of controlling the game moreso based on complaints....it would be wise to assess what those changes will consequently influence in the game also. I have no gripes about certain aspects of the game other than it is becoming a one trick monkey show....especially at the pro level. I really enjoyed season 7 because you knew that a team had 5-6 trademark plays that were their bread and butter...BUT COULD ALSO add in 3-4 others on any given sim and kick your ass. It made the game very challenging to prepare for and on any given sim you could win/lose using PURE STRATEGY or on 1-2 play difference. It led to some very good games and was a blast to participate in. (Case in point: The Season 7 Champs - Washington Bullets - had a 11-5 record going into the playoffs and didn't win a single playoff game by more than 7 points. It that isn't fun stuff, I don't know what is).
Enter season 8, I can pretty much assure that my ass or the Bullets will be blown out by any powerback in the league if I don't have one to counter with. Look at the scores from last season (very respectable) and yet this season we see scores like 55-7 or 45-7 - hell, I know the game better than 85% of the owners out there and there is NO EXCUSE for losing that bad other than the one-trick monkey show that has been encouraged by the game changes. We all knew during season 7 that if you can't stop the run....you lose. In S8, you can't stop the run period.
Because of the most recent changes (I assume encouraged from the 'test-server')...I can see changes on a game by game basis where the game is becoming overly controlled leaving teams with no other options than to run 52 times a game. It's as if they are trying to FIX TOO MUCH. At this point, my true question is- has BORT handed over the controls to the sims to the testers? ....The everyday changes to the game seem to speak loudly in the affirmative.
Some changes that resulted in poor results:
Why was the wheel pass and screen pass and long HB pass taken away? The elimination of these two plays has resulted in most teams disqualifying them from the playbooks (especially the screen pass) - these were two very powerful offensive pass plays that allowed most offenses to disguise their passing game and rushing game.
Why is the passing game been cornered also? If a team comes out and passes against my team and I don't have the proper AI setup to handle that pressure....then I should rightfully suffer/lose. If a team has 5 WR's that are all 53+ leveled....then it is the nature of the game that I better stop their pass or suffer the consequences. Furthermore, quarterbacks Ratings are down a good 20 pts on average from last season - NOT 1 ANNOUNCEMENT ADDRESSED THIS CHANGE.... needs to be explained in my opinion! If my WR doesn't have 15 in sure hands....why can't he still make a catch if his catching build is at 65?.....See where the changes have an over-controlling influence?
Could you explain why these 2 areas were changed to the degree that you can no longer influence a game through their strategic use?
My ultimate suggestion: If anything...lets go back to season 7. Give us back the ridiculous stats, passing yards and rushing yards, give ICE COLD his 2,700+ receiving yards per season and Jones-Drew his 3,500 yards - ALL IN THE SAME SEASON! It was fun, unpredictable and a great game where strategy could transcend build. You could lose a game by 1-3 plays and there was a lot of fun and unpredictable occurrences. Scores were tight and it was an any given sunday kind of league which seems much more 'realistic' than what we have now.
The Strategy Expert
offline
offline
Originally posted by Vegas_Bronco
My ultimate suggestion: If anything...lets go back to season 7. Give us back the ridiculous stats, passing yards and rushing yards, give ICE COLD his 2,700+ receiving yards per season and Jones-Drew his 3,500 yards - ALL IN THE SAME SEASON! It was fun, unpredictable and a great game where strategy could transcend build. You could lose a game by 1-3 plays and there was a lot of fun and unpredictable occurrences. Scores were tight and it was an any given sunday kind of league which seems much more 'realistic' than what we have now.
+1 exactly what I have been saying. If we can't have a real football sim, then let's have fun with this and let everybody do well at every position, so yeah lots of rec'g yards, but maybe lots of picks, and yeah lots of rushing yards, but maybe lots of fumbles.
We don't even have a working clock and timeout system, so that's proof we are too far from real football, so it would be better to have it be funball while those other issues are ironed out in the background.
These changes would also make gameplanning more fun and more relevant. If you want to pass a lot you have to consider the higher thread of sacks and hurries and INTS and trade that off with big passing gains. If you want to run a lot more then you have to consider TFLs and fumbles that may happen as a trade off to yards. And then you have to consider what your opponent is more apt to do, and then it becomes a lot more strategy intensive and interesting, but not in a complex sort of a way with your AI so much as determining which of those pairings of trade offs suit you better from game to game.
My ultimate suggestion: If anything...lets go back to season 7. Give us back the ridiculous stats, passing yards and rushing yards, give ICE COLD his 2,700+ receiving yards per season and Jones-Drew his 3,500 yards - ALL IN THE SAME SEASON! It was fun, unpredictable and a great game where strategy could transcend build. You could lose a game by 1-3 plays and there was a lot of fun and unpredictable occurrences. Scores were tight and it was an any given sunday kind of league which seems much more 'realistic' than what we have now.
+1 exactly what I have been saying. If we can't have a real football sim, then let's have fun with this and let everybody do well at every position, so yeah lots of rec'g yards, but maybe lots of picks, and yeah lots of rushing yards, but maybe lots of fumbles.
We don't even have a working clock and timeout system, so that's proof we are too far from real football, so it would be better to have it be funball while those other issues are ironed out in the background.
These changes would also make gameplanning more fun and more relevant. If you want to pass a lot you have to consider the higher thread of sacks and hurries and INTS and trade that off with big passing gains. If you want to run a lot more then you have to consider TFLs and fumbles that may happen as a trade off to yards. And then you have to consider what your opponent is more apt to do, and then it becomes a lot more strategy intensive and interesting, but not in a complex sort of a way with your AI so much as determining which of those pairings of trade offs suit you better from game to game.
Last edited Mar 21, 2009 11:40:24
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
