All Forums > Gridiron Dynasty Football > Gridiron Dynasty Beta > QB's in recruting being sought after by 1aa teams?
2/24/2013 8:23 PM
Imagine my surprise. I agree with grindi.
2/24/2013 8:48 PM
Posted by grindi on 2/24/2013 8:09:00 PM (view original):
Befor eanyone thinks I am totally down on the game let me assure you I am not. I especially like choosing my Blitz frequency and being able to dhoose who does it.  I like being able to assign who catches or runs the ball and where.  I think there is a lot of good happening here.  What bothers me is the test part shows that the same wild randomness still exists and for me that will be the deal breaker.
This is what I have talking about! My analysis reveals that each option that the sim can choose to simulate overlaps all the other options and produces no clear result. It may be slightly skewed towards one choice or the other, but it still comes down to the JConte pattern of decison making. I also like all the new features, but once again, all those are geared to get a player match-up advantage, which the engine can take away with a "percentages" decision call. It may seem hard to determine now looking at DIII vs DIII, but I have simmed and analyzed D1A, D1AA against DIII and the results are just as hazey. The effect of offense being much better than the defense should produce an offensive outcome everytime. When they are close I see that give and take could occur. But an offensive advantage of 50 - 25 should not produce a broken tackle one play and a strong tackle the next. Blend the middle ranges, but make the end ranges a done deal.
2/24/2013 10:30 PM
I must be mellowing in my old age.
2/25/2013 7:37 AM
Posted by katzphang88 on 2/24/2013 8:48:00 PM (view original):
Posted by grindi on 2/24/2013 8:09:00 PM (view original):
Befor eanyone thinks I am totally down on the game let me assure you I am not. I especially like choosing my Blitz frequency and being able to dhoose who does it.  I like being able to assign who catches or runs the ball and where.  I think there is a lot of good happening here.  What bothers me is the test part shows that the same wild randomness still exists and for me that will be the deal breaker.
This is what I have talking about! My analysis reveals that each option that the sim can choose to simulate overlaps all the other options and produces no clear result. It may be slightly skewed towards one choice or the other, but it still comes down to the JConte pattern of decison making. I also like all the new features, but once again, all those are geared to get a player match-up advantage, which the engine can take away with a "percentages" decision call. It may seem hard to determine now looking at DIII vs DIII, but I have simmed and analyzed D1A, D1AA against DIII and the results are just as hazey. The effect of offense being much better than the defense should produce an offensive outcome everytime. When they are close I see that give and take could occur. But an offensive advantage of 50 - 25 should not produce a broken tackle one play and a strong tackle the next. Blend the middle ranges, but make the end ranges a done deal.
It comes down to an individual play ... you always have to have SOME probability that a guy, even the best tackler in the world, slips and misses a tackle.

It is not true that for every play and matchup decision point that if there is a clear advantage, the better team should aways get a good result.  That is just not how a 60 minute game is played.  Here is a completely dominated game where one team is the best team in the nation and the other is one of the worst in Div-1A.

Western Kentucky vs Alabama

Alabama only had one interception in 31 Western pass attempts.  Western sacked the Alabama QB 6 times, Alabama only averaged 3.3 yards per rush.  Western had 2 stuffs of -5 and -7 yards on the Alabama RBs.  Western RBs had rushes of 15, 9, 6 yards.  The Western QB completed 65% of his passes for 9 yards per completion.

It is hard to find a bigger differential in "Player Attributes" than this in a game but even in this game Alabama did not win every matchup on offense and defense on every play ... even though Alabama certainly did win every player attribute matchup at every single decision point.
2/25/2013 12:35 PM
But Alabama was never in danger of losing the game.  The way the test is working you can win by 50 or lose by 50.  Where is the difference in the randomness we have already been dealing with?  If you have a highly superior team than your opponent you should not have to worry about losing that game.  This is not the case with the current engine or the Beta. .Same stuff just a different look.  For me WIS can put all the window dressing and seemingly better controls on the game but the randomness of the outcomes is a deal breaker.  If I have to worry about losing to a vastly inferior team when I am ranked in the top 10, then where have they made a change?  They might as well have added a screen where we could paint the uniforms and add cheerleader clips.  If the abominal randomness is still there, like beating a team by 50 and then losing by 50 to the same team when no changes are made, what difference does the fluff make?
2/25/2013 6:38 PM
Posted by grindi on 2/25/2013 12:35:00 PM (view original):
But Alabama was never in danger of losing the game.  The way the test is working you can win by 50 or lose by 50.  Where is the difference in the randomness we have already been dealing with?  If you have a highly superior team than your opponent you should not have to worry about losing that game.  This is not the case with the current engine or the Beta. .Same stuff just a different look.  For me WIS can put all the window dressing and seemingly better controls on the game but the randomness of the outcomes is a deal breaker.  If I have to worry about losing to a vastly inferior team when I am ranked in the top 10, then where have they made a change?  They might as well have added a screen where we could paint the uniforms and add cheerleader clips.  If the abominal randomness is still there, like beating a team by 50 and then losing by 50 to the same team when no changes are made, what difference does the fluff make?
I am not suggesting that WIS can not try to target and reduce the variability some .. I am saying that we should not have the better team win each and every matchup though.

10% better score does not mean an insurmountable win ... but bigger differentials should certainly mean the better team wins almost all the time, yes.

I would also like to see more consistent scores too.  But there will be some outliers.

Now, your 50 point swing with no changes should not happen very often ... so they do need to tone that down.



2/25/2013 7:16 PM
not much point in testing a second season when I am going to have a freshman QB who will have to be pathetic. Guess I'll grab a different team that does not have all senior QB's.
2/25/2013 7:16 PM
Some of the differences I have seen are 100% towards the offense (double the rating), yet the defense gets the highest rated result.
2/25/2013 7:18 PM
Crap I can't have a second team this is stupid.
2/26/2013 10:44 AM
This thread is funny.   It's DIII.  What type of stud QB were you expecting to get anyways?   QB's have always needed to be developed in this game. 

I am perfectly ok with the QB I signed....  Sure I had to spend a few campus visits to beat off a few DII Schools but I'm not sure why that was a big deal.....
2/26/2013 11:02 AM
Pola,

I had that QB on my board in BAVA but opted out after seeing 2 D2 teams and your D3 team on him. I'll know better next time!
2/26/2013 11:49 AM
Well $6500+ on one team and $5000+ on the other, and they are only yellow?  Yea I got a problem with that.  Especially when they are within 50 miles of my school.  Plus their SR says basicallly they should be tickled pink if they get an offer from a community college.  It shows me that WIS still has problems and they are not very good at getting the meaningful details right.  Remember that this was an issue in the last revision?   They finally made it so it was easier to drive the SIMs off at DIII and DII.  Who wouldn't be down on them when they start the new version off with a load of the same problems?  So this thread being funny?  Not hardly.  Someone being short sighted is what I see.
2/26/2013 12:12 PM (edited)
FWIW - I spent $6,868 on Pedro Wong

 Gridiron Dynasty - Football Sim Games - Recruit Profile: Pedro Wong
    to sign him.... After $4,824 it was down to me and one DII team.... and I was leading a few cycles after signings when I checked on him...

I just threw two more $1,022 campus visits because I had money I wasn't doing anything with... and he of course immediately signed.... So I overpaid. I suspect I would have gotten him at $4,824.

This included a promised start and a 75% playing time... of course... since it's season one he will be starting and playing for me....

Again... I don't see it being an issue. I noticed just like everyone else that QB's had the trickled down effect (same as it was for YOST when they started) and figured then I would just go get one.... It really wasn't that big of deal.

I don't feel like I was the one who was "short-sighted"..........
2/26/2013 12:11 PM

And it's not like he is some stud QB I had to have... it's DIII.. He was just a close, high potential, good work ethic QB....
 

2/26/2013 12:35 PM
To clarify I meant that I can't get a second team was stupid. I am looking at ending up with a guy with a 1 technequie as my starter next season. Not sure I will learn much about the game from that.
of 4
All Forums > Gridiron Dynasty Football > Gridiron Dynasty Beta > QB's in recruting being sought after by 1aa teams?

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.