3/7/2013 5:46 PM (edited)
I've had the chance to sample the new engine and play a few games. Quick impressions:

1. Norbert, you gave us mostly what we asked for.  Coaches have greater control over formations and it's clear in a world populated by essentially equal teams that gameplaning makes a difference.

2. The set up screens for starters, formations, playbooks, etc. are a lot of work and initially confusing.  That said, once you work with the screens a bit they're not terrible.  Pull downs and simplification would help, but that's pretty small criticism and suggests tweaking rather than a make over.

3. The engine itself is pretty solid, with few outliers.  Cause and effect are reasonably well correlated. Are there too many return TDs?  Probably.  Do sacks need adjusted?  Maybe a bit.  Again, we're looking at tweaks and not a full make over.

4. I wrote off GD when a SIM team (UConn) won an NC over human competition.  I get the sense that the potential for that kind of travesty is significantly lessened in this iteration of the game.  I haven't really seen any 'coin flip' games, although it's hard to be sure when the testing universe is composed of SIM recruited, equally talented teams.

My assessment is that the new engine's certainly imperfect and needs tweaks.  But do I think the output is much better than 2.0? Absolutely.  Not even close.  3.0 needs a few changes and some improvements to the set up process, but I think you've done a heck of a job and deserve recognition for the effort.
3/7/2013 6:10 PM
Thanks for the feedback.  I would ask everyone to keep in mind that this initial phase of beta is by no means what we expect the final 3.0 product to be by the time we roll it out.  In fact, the game results are still very raw and even right now they are in a bit of chaos as I'm in the middle of reworking some of the code.  So far the feedback has been very helpful and I think we can make a lot more improvements during the beta.
3/8/2013 5:26 AM
Posted by bjaygee on 3/7/2013 5:46:00 PM (view original):
I've had the chance to sample the new engine and play a few games. Quick impressions:

1. Norbert, you gave us mostly what we asked for.  Coaches have greater control over formations and it's clear in a world populated by essentially equal teams that gameplaning makes a difference.

2. The set up screens for starters, formations, playbooks, etc. are a lot of work and initially confusing.  That said, once you work with the screens a bit they're not terrible.  Pull downs and simplification would help, but that's pretty small criticism and suggests tweaking rather than a make over.

3. The engine itself is pretty solid, with few outliers.  Cause and effect are reasonably well correlated. Are there too many return TDs?  Probably.  Do sacks need adjusted?  Maybe a bit.  Again, we're looking at tweaks and not a full make over.

4. I wrote off GD when a SIM team (UConn) won an NC over human competition.  I get the sense that the potential for that kind of travesty is significantly lessened in this iteration of the game.  I haven't really seen any 'coin flip' games, although it's hard to be sure when the testing universe is composed of SIM recruited, equally talented teams.

My assessment is that the new engine's certainly imperfect and needs tweaks.  But do I think the output is much better than 2.0? Absolutely.  Not even close.  3.0 needs a few changes and some improvements to the set up process, but I think you've done a heck of a job and deserve recognition for the effort.
+1,000...great assessment bjaygee, spot on!
3/13/2013 3:19 PM
I agree completely with this assessment, and although I have not been able to direct much of my time to learning the new controls, I believe that I will really like it a lot. But I have invested a lot of time into learning the old engine and I have only recently gained confidence in my ability to compete in that game, and this is going to be a completely remodeled engine with only a basic likeness to the other version. So I'm wondering if I'm going to lose what I have gained over there and have to immediately invest the time and effort to relearn a new game, or if you will be keeping the old engine as a basic version, and adding this game as an advanced version?
3/13/2013 3:49 PM
I REALLY appreciate the extra beta features, like the expanded pbp and the test game function. I hope they make it to the final roll-out.
3/13/2013 4:44 PM
I see the expanded pbp making it, but not the test game feature.
3/13/2013 5:39 PM
Not the biggest fan so far but a lot of that is just learning the new features. One thing I find interesting is the number one team (Loras) seems to be running with the default settings. They are in my conference and did not sign one player? Seems strange they would be undefeated with their coach seemingly not running the team? I miss the old depth chart with full backs, inside and outside linebacker ect. It gave me more control of my bench I felt. Overall interesting so far
3/13/2013 6:31 PM
I'd like to see the test game feature make it to the final product as well...  Maybe add the test game feature, but have it block testing against teams on your schedule.  That way you can still try stuff out but not necessarily against an upcoming opponent?
3/13/2013 6:49 PM
I wonder if each coach could have a scrimmage Sim team consisting of either average Sim players, or a practice squad consisting of players off of your own roster. You could then have the same conditions that would be available to a real coach at a real college. It would probably be too hard to add in, but I'm just throwing ideas out there.
3/14/2013 1:30 AM
Posted by walkenha on 3/13/2013 5:39:00 PM (view original):
Not the biggest fan so far but a lot of that is just learning the new features. One thing I find interesting is the number one team (Loras) seems to be running with the default settings. They are in my conference and did not sign one player? Seems strange they would be undefeated with their coach seemingly not running the team? I miss the old depth chart with full backs, inside and outside linebacker ect. It gave me more control of my bench I felt. Overall interesting so far
Walkenha, 

If you go to advanced depth charts, then you have the opportunity to use FB, ILB, OLB, etc. 
3/14/2013 1:31 AM
Posted by mannowar on 3/13/2013 6:31:00 PM (view original):
I'd like to see the test game feature make it to the final product as well...  Maybe add the test game feature, but have it block testing against teams on your schedule.  That way you can still try stuff out but not necessarily against an upcoming opponent?
Thats the reason I said above that I didn't believe that test game would make it to the final product... but if something were added in that would prevent you from testing against teams on your schedule, then I think that would be great!
3/14/2013 5:06 AM
You could always leave the test game, and make it only usable against your own squad.  You can simulate game conditions against potential opponents by using the playbooks available rather than using actual opponents.  This way it becomes like a scrimmage during practice time.  Limit the use so it does not become too advantageous, but still allows for refining the game plan.  Maybe 3 per day (a week wis time).  Just an idea... 
3/14/2013 12:29 PM
Yes, I am thinking about leaving the Test Game page in (probably renamed) and lock it in on your own team.  That would allow you to test your own game plans without worrying about people spying other people's game plans.  I don't know if I need to limit it in this case, but we could always throw a limit on it later if we decided it was needed.
3/14/2013 3:39 PM
I was thinking to allow it's use during recruiting period, to try various things, but also give newer coaches a chance to see a cause and effect.
Then, once recruiting is over, lock out the feature until the next recruiting period.
3/14/2013 7:08 PM
Posted by norbert on 3/14/2013 12:29:00 PM (view original):
Yes, I am thinking about leaving the Test Game page in (probably renamed) and lock it in on your own team.  That would allow you to test your own game plans without worrying about people spying other people's game plans.  I don't know if I need to limit it in this case, but we could always throw a limit on it later if we decided it was needed.
I think this would be awesome! The more realistic, the better, and this would be another step in the right direction!
of 2

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.