Posted by noah23 on 6/3/2013 1:47:00 PM (view original):
Posted by slid64er on 6/3/2013 12:00:00 PM (view original):I seriously hope he does not listen to you. I will not play this game you seem to enjoy. Talent should be the factor, but there are wide disparities of talent in real life as well particularly in DII and DIII. If there are talent descrepencies that are larger then what they are in real life between the best and worst teams that are so bad it causes ridiculous stats, then recruit/player generation should be looked at as a problem. Either way, I'm good. I do not enjoy a team beating another 120-0 nor do I enjoy a game that allows for 120-115 games on a regular basis. For pete's sake there were weeks in the playoffs where teams AVERAGED 60 points a game.
Posted by oriole_fan on 6/3/2013 9:56:00 AM (view original):Keep the stats close to numbers that are seen in a normal (real llfe) college football season only when simming against teams of equal talent. Talent should still be a large factor in how realistic those numbers should be.
Thanks for all the input guys. Obviously the Passing game still seems to be out of whack so I'll look into that this week. I'll try to smooth everything out so that it feels real. The other stuff will come in as we can smooth some of these tricky spots out. You input has been logged and I'll get through my list the best I can. Again, thanks for the support and I look forward to hearing about what you think of the latest tweaks as I get them in, so I'll be sure to update you when there is new stuff to look at.
Also, concerning the conversation about playability and reality of play, I do not believe that one has to come at the expense of the other. I'll be working hard the next few weeks to make it easier to play and understand the game while keeping the stats close to numbers that are seen in a normal (real life) college football season.
I think it's fine that we have differing opinions, it creates good debate.
Having said that, this line of thinking (no unrealistic scores, everyone has a chance to win every game) is what killed GD. This was a driving force for 2.0, jconte said outright that 2.0 was designed to end dynasties. In order to keep scores realistic and give every team a chance to win every game, he had to significantly shrink the effect of differentials in all the levers of the game, especially talent. What that did was allow any reasonably coached team a legitimate chance at an NC, but it made all the little things that made great teams pretty worthless. Coaches who didn't put in the time or effort to learn the nuances of the game loved it because it gave them a much higher chance of winning an NC, they just needed to get on a lucky streak in the playoffs. Those that expected to win with superior talent and gameplanning left. Now the worlds are empty.
As I see it, your suggestions suggest to me that you want to level the playing field for incompetent coaches. I, and many other coaches I've known in my time with GD, are vehemently opposed to this. So much so that most have left or have a minimal number of teams. It killed the game we loved and the worlds are empty.
As I've said before, passing is broken. It is especially apparent when two passing teams play each other. But, that doesn't mean there shouldn't be blowout games. I'm fine with the 120-0 games where one team is vastly superior to another. I'm against the 120-115 games where the scores are only high because of passing being broken.