 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Football Beta Testing » Football Beta Test Discussion » Somethings needs to be fixed
Stuthecool626
Another thing that should be changed is how easy it is to run the football. As I speak I have my team in the FHFL with only two guys that are good run blockers running all over the opponent and honestly I dont think that is fair. In the NFL most teams do move the ball down the field but no defense besides the 2013 Chicago Bears is that bad at stopping the run. It is almost easy to be able to have a RB run for alot of yards because the running game is almost out of control in how easy is.
One more thing its just a question? When will you fix the draft error on the regular website so that there won't be old players(what I call old) coming into the league.
Somethings needs to be fixed
April 12, 2015 at 05:20PM View BBCode
The passing game on the regular website is Atrocious. I have studied other games and watch my own games and it is absolutely terrible. Unless you have an out of this world QB behind center, it is near impossible to have a functioning offense that can move the football. I've watching NFL network lately and I'm seeing QBs like Terry Bradshaw playing real football and I don't see a pass get picked off almost every time they throw 10 yards or 20 yards down the field. Sure it goes incomplete half the time, but in the NFL passes aren't always picked off every time they throw down the field. Please Chris, please make a change to the passing game or the int rate because I shouldn't have to fear running a normal offense or throwing the football.Another thing that should be changed is how easy it is to run the football. As I speak I have my team in the FHFL with only two guys that are good run blockers running all over the opponent and honestly I dont think that is fair. In the NFL most teams do move the ball down the field but no defense besides the 2013 Chicago Bears is that bad at stopping the run. It is almost easy to be able to have a RB run for alot of yards because the running game is almost out of control in how easy is.
One more thing its just a question? When will you fix the draft error on the regular website so that there won't be old players(what I call old) coming into the league.
dirtdevil
April 12, 2015 at 07:11PM View BBCode
I can't say I agree with any of that. except maybe the older draftees part.
Stuthecool626
http://football.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?lid=830&th=0&year=1979&type=reg&mode=pass&loc=all&weather=-1&lid=830 then look at these Ints numbers and tell me the passing isn't messed up in this game.
http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/quarterback-interception-rates/2014/ here are some more specific stats from the nfl last season
[Edited on 4-12-2015 by Stuthecool626]
April 12, 2015 at 07:33PM View BBCode
http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/player-passing-interceptions-thrown/2014/ Look at these numbershttp://football.simdynasty.com/stats.jsp?lid=830&th=0&year=1979&type=reg&mode=pass&loc=all&weather=-1&lid=830 then look at these Ints numbers and tell me the passing isn't messed up in this game.
http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/quarterback-interception-rates/2014/ here are some more specific stats from the nfl last season
[Edited on 4-12-2015 by Stuthecool626]
geosfreddy
April 12, 2015 at 07:40PM View BBCode
The only thing I can say is the major difference I find is between an A+ power QB vs. an A- power QB and less on my end is very much different. But the passing game overall on the short pass is working fine. I wish that power were not such a huge factor.
dirtdevil
[url=http://football.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=3003661]Justin[/url]: 89.5 (1st), 8INT
[url=http://football.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=2866123]Fritsch[/url]: 95.5 (3rd), 3INT
[url=http://football.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=2840437]Stemke[/url]: 95.0 (1st), 13INT
[url=http://football.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=2928464]Glascow[/url]: 101.5 (1st), 8INT
they're all completely different guys and the only one I would consider on the border of elite is Fritsch. so tell me what the problem is?
also, we are not the nfl, for a number of reasons, and i'm not convinced that we should be using their numbers as anything more than a guide.
April 12, 2015 at 08:22PM View BBCode
here are the QB that started for my teams during their last full season with their QB ratings, league rank and INT totals.[url=http://football.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=3003661]Justin[/url]: 89.5 (1st), 8INT
[url=http://football.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=2866123]Fritsch[/url]: 95.5 (3rd), 3INT
[url=http://football.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=2840437]Stemke[/url]: 95.0 (1st), 13INT
[url=http://football.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=2928464]Glascow[/url]: 101.5 (1st), 8INT
they're all completely different guys and the only one I would consider on the border of elite is Fritsch. so tell me what the problem is?
also, we are not the nfl, for a number of reasons, and i'm not convinced that we should be using their numbers as anything more than a guide.
Stuthecool626
April 12, 2015 at 08:26PM View BBCode
Well this is a simulation of real football, shouldn't it be as close to how real football would play out instead of just having a sim just to have something to play.
geosfreddy
But again I personally have little success with A- arms compared to those A+ power arms that 80 arm can't match that 100 arm. (I wish they were closer to balance more teams in the leagues).
Any one else has had the same Drastic results going from A+ arms to A- or B+?????
April 12, 2015 at 08:45PM View BBCode
I don't think we have any interception issue here. The key is in the FHFL at least stu we are hard working teams all 32 of us to start. We call plenty of pass defences leading to better runshing in many cases. I think with time you will find a way to work out the playbook.But again I personally have little success with A- arms compared to those A+ power arms that 80 arm can't match that 100 arm. (I wish they were closer to balance more teams in the leagues).
Any one else has had the same Drastic results going from A+ arms to A- or B+?????
dirtdevil
Well this is a simulation of real football, shouldn't it be as close to how real football would play out instead of just having a sim just to have something to play. [/quote]
yes and no. the nfl is the goal, sure. but we have a MUCH larger variation in calibre of GM/coaches than the nfl ever will. that has to impact gameplay and overall numbers. how many threads complaining about the game have you seen started by owners who just aren't very good? there are literally tons. I know that the nfl is the goal but what we have here in terms of owner calibre is often more analogous to NCAA where the division 1 programs occasionally schedule a division 3 team. that has to skew numbers.
I agree that the latest round of changes may have nerfed deep passing a little more than necessary, but I don't think things are anywhere near as bad as you suggest.
April 12, 2015 at 08:47PM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
[quote][i]Originally posted by Stuthecool626[/i]
Well this is a simulation of real football, shouldn't it be as close to how real football would play out instead of just having a sim just to have something to play. [/quote]
yes and no. the nfl is the goal, sure. but we have a MUCH larger variation in calibre of GM/coaches than the nfl ever will. that has to impact gameplay and overall numbers. how many threads complaining about the game have you seen started by owners who just aren't very good? there are literally tons. I know that the nfl is the goal but what we have here in terms of owner calibre is often more analogous to NCAA where the division 1 programs occasionally schedule a division 3 team. that has to skew numbers.
I agree that the latest round of changes may have nerfed deep passing a little more than necessary, but I don't think things are anywhere near as bad as you suggest.
dirtdevil
not really, but it depends on the ACC grade too. the lower the PWR goes, the higher the ACC needs to be in order to be effective, imo. if you look at the four guys I've posted their PWR range from A+ to A- (stemke dropped to B+ in the OS) and the guy with the highest PWR skill had the lowest rating. he also has the lowest ACC, though. I honestly feel like you can win with a multitude of different QBs, you just have to adjust what you do on offence to suit their skills.
April 12, 2015 at 08:51PM View BBCode
Originally posted by geosfreddy
But again I personally have little success with A- arms compared to those A+ power arms that 80 arm can't match that 100 arm. (I wish they were closer to balance more teams in the leagues).
Any one else has had the same Drastic results going from A+ arms to A- or B+?????
not really, but it depends on the ACC grade too. the lower the PWR goes, the higher the ACC needs to be in order to be effective, imo. if you look at the four guys I've posted their PWR range from A+ to A- (stemke dropped to B+ in the OS) and the guy with the highest PWR skill had the lowest rating. he also has the lowest ACC, though. I honestly feel like you can win with a multitude of different QBs, you just have to adjust what you do on offence to suit their skills.
RichNYC1
I agree.
April 12, 2015 at 09:10PM View BBCode
Originally posted by dirtdevil
Originally posted by Stuthecool626
Well this is a simulation of real football, shouldn't it be as close to how real football would play out instead of just having a sim just to have something to play.
yes and no. the nfl is the goal, sure. but we have a MUCH larger variation in calibre of GM/coaches than the nfl ever will. that has to impact gameplay and overall numbers. how many threads complaining about the game have you seen started by owners who just aren't very good? there are literally tons. I know that the nfl is the goal but what we have here in terms of owner calibre is often more analogous to NCAA where the division 1 programs occasionally schedule a division 3 team. that has to skew numbers.
I agree.
Stuthecool626
April 12, 2015 at 09:14PM View BBCode
Well yeah most coaches complain when they can't win but this is a beta forum which is where you discuss issues with the game. I'm just trying to talk about an issue that is in this game cause I am in three leagues Zeta FHFL and the DBFL and in each league I see way too many picks or teams have drives ended because they can't complete a pass beyond 10 yards. Even in Butkus which is a single season league I see passing games struggles plus I had struggles myself and I went 12-4 there. My point is maybe I over exaggerated a bit but you have to admit it is a problem and problems are meant to be solved. I'm still watching football games and I see about half the time passes that go beyond 10 yards have a 50/50 chance of completion or a miss compared to the sim where its a 1/3 chance of either a pick completion or miss, basically you have only a 33% chance of completion compared to 40-50% which may not seem like much but with 16 or 32 other teams make a huge difference.
geosfreddy
April 12, 2015 at 09:18PM View BBCode
Thus I guess using the numeric system should help more players than I originally thought. This would help players understand their limitations and strengths better?
Stuthecool626
YES! because the number system you can know so much more about a player compared to Letters, I use numbers hear and I wish we could use it in every league on the game but you know some guys are used to the old way.
April 12, 2015 at 09:20PM View BBCode
Originally posted by geosfreddy
Thus I guess using the numeric system should help more players than I originally thought. This would help players understand their limitations and strengths better?
YES! because the number system you can know so much more about a player compared to Letters, I use numbers hear and I wish we could use it in every league on the game but you know some guys are used to the old way.
geosfreddy
How easy is this to do Chris????????????????????????
April 12, 2015 at 09:32PM View BBCode
I was looking at stats in pay leagues to see my A+ vs A and A- theorem lol.. I love what I see in the TDFL numeric player cards alphabetical team cards I think this is super smart.How easy is this to do Chris????????????????????????
dirtdevil
well, first of all, I don't agree that it's a problem, so i'm not really inclined to solve it unless you can convince me that it is and a raft of subjective impressions isn't going to do that. I've posted 4 QB cards and the players in them went 31.4%, 42.4%, 51.8% and 48.1% between 20-39 yards in their last full season. so while that's a hugely insignificant sample size, my subjective impressions are completely different than yours. which means you'll need some objective evidence to convince me tat there's a problem. if there is, then by all means let's fix it, but i'm not in any way convinced that any action is required.
April 12, 2015 at 10:14PM View BBCode
Originally posted by Stuthecool626
Well yeah most coaches complain when they can't win but this is a beta forum which is where you discuss issues with the game. I'm just trying to talk about an issue that is in this game cause I am in three leagues Zeta FHFL and the DBFL and in each league I see way too many picks or teams have drives ended because they can't complete a pass beyond 10 yards. Even in Butkus which is a single season league I see passing games struggles plus I had struggles myself and I went 12-4 there. My point is maybe I over exaggerated a bit but you have to admit it is a problem and problems are meant to be solved. I'm still watching football games and I see about half the time passes that go beyond 10 yards have a 50/50 chance of completion or a miss compared to the sim where its a 1/3 chance of either a pick completion or miss, basically you have only a 33% chance of completion compared to 40-50% which may not seem like much but with 16 or 32 other teams make a huge difference.
well, first of all, I don't agree that it's a problem, so i'm not really inclined to solve it unless you can convince me that it is and a raft of subjective impressions isn't going to do that. I've posted 4 QB cards and the players in them went 31.4%, 42.4%, 51.8% and 48.1% between 20-39 yards in their last full season. so while that's a hugely insignificant sample size, my subjective impressions are completely different than yours. which means you'll need some objective evidence to convince me tat there's a problem. if there is, then by all means let's fix it, but i'm not in any way convinced that any action is required.
geosfreddy
April 12, 2015 at 10:14PM View BBCode
So do I hare hate it ,,,,, but the TDFL impressed me with the abc's in general and the 123's on the individual player card. Me like.
dirtdevil
it's not about being used to the old way. yes, I find the look of numbers gives me a headache but it also removes a layer of skill. it dumbs down the game and I don't think that's a good idea.
April 12, 2015 at 10:16PM View BBCode
Originally posted by Stuthecool626
Originally posted by geosfreddy
Thus I guess using the numeric system should help more players than I originally thought. This would help players understand their limitations and strengths better?
YES! because the number system you can know so much more about a player compared to Letters, I use numbers hear and I wish we could use it in every league on the game but you know some guys are used to the old way.
it's not about being used to the old way. yes, I find the look of numbers gives me a headache but it also removes a layer of skill. it dumbs down the game and I don't think that's a good idea.
dirtdevil
on your own players cards, if you have to, fine. but there's no realistic reason that you should be able to see the exact number values for players on every other team in the league too. it's not reality.
April 12, 2015 at 10:17PM View BBCode
Originally posted by geosfreddy
So do I hare hate it ,,,,, but the TDFL impressed me with the abc's in general and the 123's on the individual player card. Me like.
on your own players cards, if you have to, fine. but there's no realistic reason that you should be able to see the exact number values for players on every other team in the league too. it's not reality.
tworoosters
IN the BPFL I've also had 10 QBs attempt 500+, and only 4 of those 10 were below 40% for their careers, overall my BPFL QBs averaged a 45.8% completion rate, including those that attempted less than 500 attempts but still qualified for passer rating.,
The ZFL overall % is dragged down by the fact that the 4th highest number of attempts were by a 65/100 QB who completed only 28.1% from 20-39 yards .
I think that, based on my beta experience only, that overall completion %s are a bit low, and TDs are way low but I don't think it's a huge issue.
[Edited on 4-13-2015 by tworoosters]
April 13, 2015 at 12:12AM View BBCode
I just took a look at my beta teams passing histories, in the ZFL I've had 10 QBs attempt 500+ passes between 20-39 yards, only two of those ten completed less than 40% of those passes and they were both QBs with B+ throwing power, overall my ZFL QBs averaged a 41.7% completion rate on 20-39 yard passes, including those that attempted less than 500 attempts but still qualified for passer rating.IN the BPFL I've also had 10 QBs attempt 500+, and only 4 of those 10 were below 40% for their careers, overall my BPFL QBs averaged a 45.8% completion rate, including those that attempted less than 500 attempts but still qualified for passer rating.,
The ZFL overall % is dragged down by the fact that the 4th highest number of attempts were by a 65/100 QB who completed only 28.1% from 20-39 yards .
I think that, based on my beta experience only, that overall completion %s are a bit low, and TDs are way low but I don't think it's a huge issue.
[Edited on 4-13-2015 by tworoosters]
geosfreddy
Now top teams are at a cozy 45+% but half of 32 team struggle in the mid 20's to low 30's. Understanding what stu was trying to say.
On a personal level I do prefer the results way more than what we saw before.
April 13, 2015 at 03:47AM View BBCode
The thing to understand in zeta the results are for testing and not all 32 players are active as compared to the regular free leagues and the ultra competition in the pay leagues. What I see is a huge discrepancy between the top to bottom I will look further to get some stats but here's what I see prior to the much needed changes a top team passed for ouch 60+% the worst team was at 25% +- but 75% of the teams were at 40%+.Now top teams are at a cozy 45+% but half of 32 team struggle in the mid 20's to low 30's. Understanding what stu was trying to say.
On a personal level I do prefer the results way more than what we saw before.
Admin
The grades in football seem to be more difficult to pin down than in baseball. This is partially by design, in that I don't want people to be able to count improvements to pin down exact numbers, but part of the problem is that Tyson tends to use linear formulas whereas most of my formulas are curves. Add that to the fact that players have many more ratings, and it becomes a lot harder to pin down which players are better than others by ratings alone.
One way I have thought about dealing with this is to change the scale: Anything below 40 would be rated F. Above that:
40.1-45: D-
45.1-50: D
50.1-55: D+
55.1-60: C-
60.1-65: C
65.1-70: C+
70.1-75: B-
75.1-80: B
80.1-85: B+
85.1-90: A-
90.1-95: A
95.1-100: A+
Although no one usually cares about exact ratings below 40, I'd distinguish them with labels F1 through F8 in 5 point increments.
For owners that wanted to see numbers in a "non-numbers" league, it would simply show the top number for each range, so an A- rating would show as 90 (even if it was actually 86 or 87).
So you'd have the same uncertainty as now, but the ranges are a little tighter, and the grades more logical: an average rating is now C or C+ as opposed to B or B+. The hard part would be for the few ratings that actually do average out between 50 and 60 like Health, Execution and Stamina; I might just always show these ratings in numbers rather than grades (again, though, rounded to 5's rather than exact numbers). It might be an annoyance for owners going back and forth between baseball and football, though, since the scales would be different.
Chris
April 15, 2015 at 05:00AM View BBCode
Taking a moment to talk about the numbers vs letters debate:The grades in football seem to be more difficult to pin down than in baseball. This is partially by design, in that I don't want people to be able to count improvements to pin down exact numbers, but part of the problem is that Tyson tends to use linear formulas whereas most of my formulas are curves. Add that to the fact that players have many more ratings, and it becomes a lot harder to pin down which players are better than others by ratings alone.
One way I have thought about dealing with this is to change the scale: Anything below 40 would be rated F. Above that:
40.1-45: D-
45.1-50: D
50.1-55: D+
55.1-60: C-
60.1-65: C
65.1-70: C+
70.1-75: B-
75.1-80: B
80.1-85: B+
85.1-90: A-
90.1-95: A
95.1-100: A+
Although no one usually cares about exact ratings below 40, I'd distinguish them with labels F1 through F8 in 5 point increments.
For owners that wanted to see numbers in a "non-numbers" league, it would simply show the top number for each range, so an A- rating would show as 90 (even if it was actually 86 or 87).
So you'd have the same uncertainty as now, but the ranges are a little tighter, and the grades more logical: an average rating is now C or C+ as opposed to B or B+. The hard part would be for the few ratings that actually do average out between 50 and 60 like Health, Execution and Stamina; I might just always show these ratings in numbers rather than grades (again, though, rounded to 5's rather than exact numbers). It might be an annoyance for owners going back and forth between baseball and football, though, since the scales would be different.
Chris
geosfreddy
See at this time a B+ can be at 68 vs an A- at 83 that is a 15 point max between the two extremes and thats where there is too much uncertainty.
Just like in the NFL coaches know to a science their roster attributes.
This is a very welcome adjustment in my opinion.
Thanks for the feed back Chris.
[Edited on 4-15-2015 by geosfreddy]
April 15, 2015 at 06:20AM View BBCode
I already love this idea. this would make a fair difference that the 4.9 vs the 8 between grades will allow us to better know our players. It quickly ends the ABC vs 123 debate on the spot.See at this time a B+ can be at 68 vs an A- at 83 that is a 15 point max between the two extremes and thats where there is too much uncertainty.
Just like in the NFL coaches know to a science their roster attributes.
This is a very welcome adjustment in my opinion.
Thanks for the feed back Chris.
[Edited on 4-15-2015 by geosfreddy]
dirtdevil
I like that it's not linear now, that you can't count improves to pin down numbers. I like the uncertainty and I think that's good for the game. one of the main issues with baseball is it's too predictable. after having deliberately created a system that removed that issue, why do we want to go back?
I just really think that we're trying to fix something that isn't broken. this game is both easier and harder to pick up than baseball. it's far easier and more intuitive to start- the learning curve to the point of having early success is much more flat than baseball. at the same time their are more intricacies that reward those who put in more time. I think that's a perfect balance. we should keep that, not dumb it down.
I think this is a terrible idea, to be honest.
April 15, 2015 at 12:46PM View BBCode
I don't like it, personally. for one thing it's going to change the ratings of every player we've been dealing with on all of our teams overnight, which is going to cause chaos. also, as chris said, the different scales going back and forth will be annoying/confusing.I like that it's not linear now, that you can't count improves to pin down numbers. I like the uncertainty and I think that's good for the game. one of the main issues with baseball is it's too predictable. after having deliberately created a system that removed that issue, why do we want to go back?
I just really think that we're trying to fix something that isn't broken. this game is both easier and harder to pick up than baseball. it's far easier and more intuitive to start- the learning curve to the point of having early success is much more flat than baseball. at the same time their are more intricacies that reward those who put in more time. I think that's a perfect balance. we should keep that, not dumb it down.
I think this is a terrible idea, to be honest.
Admin
Chris
April 15, 2015 at 01:07PM View BBCode
It would certainly be something a league would have to choose to enable,although if it became popular I might default new leagues to this.Chris
Pages: 1 2