Warrior General Games

Originally posted by GuieetarBen
Keep tweaking it, overall a well though out suggestion!

+1

What parts do you suggest need tweaking?
I think I've covered most of what needs to be in the formulas and explained why some things should not.

Any more suggestions before I advance to test phase?

I haven't read past the first page, but I hope it didn't take long for someone to point how that obviously the amount of plays factor in heavily.. and gutted teams.. One team might decide to pass 90% against gutted teams, and another might run 90%. That affects stats big time even playing on equal footing.

And of course then there's the fan boys who can't let anything happen in the natural flow of the game, they have to go out of their way to get all the achievements.. like the guys who use a PR/KR only against gutted teams for easy trophies, etc.. or the guy that has his punter playing 50 plays a game.. You know, basically the people that should just be banned from the site since they have no code or respect for the game.

So anything that has a formula that doesn't require a minimum amount of plays and doesn't include a division based on amount of plays, and have sophisticated negatives to go with the positives is going to fail. And even then you know that offensive players aren't going to do anything without a good offensive line.. Doesn't matter how good the RB is if he has no blocking, etc.

And then you get the further ass-hattery of people intentionally running 100% of the time to avoid King Douche Bag the forum glory hound from getting his sacks needed to make the pro-bowl.

There are always too many holes in these plans because people can't ever just do the right thing.

IMO The best answer is to probably create two temporary teams, have the runners-up of the conference championships take ownership of the team for two-three days during the offseason, and have them pick the championship team by offering special contracts (hell, throw in a 50k bonus or something like the real pro-bowl) that sign up a player to the pro-bowl team. Throw in the stipulation that all 16 teams must be represented, set the roster so it has to fill out a certain way, then just d-league sim it.

The part where you have to accept that contract to get into the pro-bowl also sets up the possibility that a conference can vote in its own players. If someone wasn't voted in, they don't accept or get an offer. If someone is inactive, they don't play either.

You can choose starters by formula or vote or whatever and then have the coach pick the rest.. If he picks all his guys, then he's a douche just like the managers of baseball that do the same thing, and everyone hates him.. win-win.

Originally posted by justafish2002
Originally posted by swoosh22

Only problem I have with this is, both of my defenses are REALLY good. But I am going to assuming we get a lot less plays per game than other defenses in the league. So they have more chances to get stats than my guys do... since this is formula is based 100% on stats. Maybe divide it by plays per game?

In the NFL, it goes to the people with the best stats, not necessarily the best performer. Michael Turner had a few exciting plays last year and did great while he was in, but Tomlinson got the Pro Bowl nod.

A perfect example of why your system is inherently flawed and these systems always will be. You have to use common sense, and that always goes back to people either voting or choosing the team. Other it isn't a true pro-bowl and no one will care.

"I don't want to play for your defense, it's too good, I'll never make the pro-bowl!!1!eleven"!

And there are numerous critiques with the OP grocery list.. punting average - TBs? a Tb costs you 20 yards and you're subtracting 1 point per? Pointless. What about net average?

And sacks allowed?

These ideas are going to have to fix the missing stats that Bort obviously isn't going to add because he has never fixed or changed or added a stat option since I've played this game (season 1.) Despite NUMEROUS requests.

I'm not trying to pee in your cornflakes, but this formulaic idea is not grounded in reality right now, so I hate to see you churning them wheels so hard.

+1.

1 vote for you!

Originally posted by secondeye
I haven't read past the first page, but I hope it didn't take long for someone to point how that obviously the amount of plays factor in heavily.. and gutted teams.. One team might decide to pass 90% against gutted teams, and another might run 90%. That affects stats big time even playing on equal footing...

I appreciate your comments and I'll respond to the problems you see.

The problem with the minimum amount of plays is that for KR/PR you can't base it on that due to playtime at other positions. So I tried to remove the element that gives an advantage to people with few or many returns.

Punters- I think I'll redo the formula to something like (Punt AVG)*((Inside20-Touchbacks)/(Punts-15))+(LongPunt).
That way it's punt avg times a good punt percentage with a min of 15 punts (any less and you'll get a negative total.) (BTW, PuntAVG is net right now).

Most formulas can survive without the stats Bort hasn't added yet, but they are severely weakened.

Updated first page with completely new Punter formula and updated the CB formula.

Originally posted by justafish2002
Updated first page with completely new Punter formula and updated the CB formula.

I'd suggest rewriting it a little bit right now it's + long return which would be like if your punt return is 10 yardsx2 you'd get 20 and then if you had 1 return TD that'd be 6 but if your long return was 90 yards that'd out weigh everything else

Originally posted by seayjoel
Originally posted by justafish2002

Updated first page with completely new Punter formula and updated the CB formula.

I'd suggest rewriting it a little bit right now it's + long return which would be like if your punt return is 10 yardsx2 you'd get 20 and then if you had 1 return TD that'd be 6 but if your long return was 90 yards that'd out weigh everything else

What do you think now?

When I looked back on it, it was a HUGE weakness and now I feel it has been fixed. I'm also working on making a min amount of returns. Should be up within 2 mins.

Added min number of returns.

+1

I've fixed all parts that are fixable, so if they are no more critiques, I'll advance to test phase.

We have a script!
Originally posted by pabst


Not perfect, but it's close enough for me.
http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/35527

Changes needed to script added to front page.