Posted by damauler12 on 11/18/2010 8:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by JConte on 11/18/2010 8:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by damauler12 on 11/18/2010 8:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by JConte on 11/18/2010 8:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jibe717 on 11/18/2010 8:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by JConte on 11/18/2010 8:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by jibe717 on 11/18/2010 8:03:00 PM (view original):
A huge issue I have is if game experiance is now factored into the game but with the effectivness settings being built into the game how are my underclassmen going to get game experiance? This mainly on the lines. At this point I see no need for more than 7 linemen.

This is a valid concern.  I think most real teams like to play the same guys on the OL for continuity....so subs here I think should be based on fatigue/injury.  Teams do sub players on the defensive side of the ball more frequently and perhaps we could make some modifications here to get more players into the game.  This change could be as simple as raising the threshold for when players sub out (more frequent)....or a possible additional setting on the depth chart page.

You mean the settings that we already had?

No.  Those settings were unrealistic and did not make football sense.

But my WR FAIR CATCHING the ball at the 1 yard line "makes football sense?"

This sort of thing does happen in real games.  The return man knowing if he should field the punt or let it go in this situation is based upon his game instinct.  It should not be a common thing though.

So the Special Teams that I have worked on for every season I have had in Dayton...with my STL WR with a GI of 58...doesn't know to let the ball go?

And guys catching the ball at the 1 happens less than .001% of the time I would imagine. 

Your team's special teams rating is also used....sorry I neglected to list that as well.

I agree that it is a rare thing, but even a very small .001% chance will come up from time to time when thousands of games are simulated each day.

I posted this in the council since the council is being ignored I will post it here. This pretty much sums up how I feel about it.

I was originally going to give it 2 months but I think I am going to quit my teams sooner. I don't believe midway through the season our  season should be thrown into such chaos. This could of been avoided by introducing these changes at the start of the season and by beta testing these changes before the season, but now if customers do what they say they are going to do, they are going to  leave enmasse...... I don't care about the money or reward points, what I care about is that I spend a lot of time recruiting and setting depth charts, and I am a little upset about my Syracuse lost today, who was ranked 2nd, and they lost in large thanks too 2 bugs. Its possible the only reason I was ranked 2nd was because others lost because they got screwed......

I am pretty upset right now, maybe I will change my mind before my seasons run out, but I am a few more big bug losses away from not signing into GD anymore and letting my teams die until the credits end and my teams turn sim.

What is with all the 0 and 1 yard passes and a breakaway running play is 4 yards?

Posted by JConte on 11/18/2010 8:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tcochran on 11/18/2010 8:07:00 PM (view original):
Is the final decision for those great teams that lost critical games to terrible SIMs just basically - tough sh--?  Hope you don't leave?  This is a serious question that I think many people want answered.  It will impact whether or not people quit the game.

We are not going to undo games that have been played.  We are going to work to improve the simulation engine and make sure the results of games continue to become more realistic.  We hope that coaches will stay engaged with the game and offer suggestions for improvement.

I think coaches will appreciate this and I hope they will reconsider as well.

Posted by JConte on 11/18/2010 8:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tcochran on 11/18/2010 8:07:00 PM (view original):
Is the final decision for those great teams that lost critical games to terrible SIMs just basically - tough sh--?  Hope you don't leave?  This is a serious question that I think many people want answered.  It will impact whether or not people quit the game.

We are not going to undo games that have been played.  We are going to work to improve the simulation engine and make sure the results of games continue to become more realistic.  We hope that coaches will stay engaged with the game and offer suggestions for improvement.

Stupid dumb#ss decision!

Posted by tcochran on 11/18/2010 8:19:00 PM (view original):
You have said this new engine opens possibilities for more updates in the future that were not possible under the old engine.  Could you elaborate on the timeframe of the future changes and what they could be?  ie. More modern formations?

And seeing how Barry Sanders-esque RBs have been rendered rather usless, are there any future plans to allow for a "Wildcat" QB substitution package since QBs currently stay in until very fatigued like OL?

We would like to make updates as soon as possible, but our main focus currently as addressing the concerns of coaches with the current game play.  Adding formations is one possibility....more play by play details....more stats....

I haven't explored a wildcat type formation as yet, but it would be theoretically possible to add.  Barry Sanders-esque RBs should not be useless and we need to make sure that they are not.

Posted by plague on 11/18/2010 8:27:00 PM (view original):
I posted this in the council since the council is being ignored I will post it here. This pretty much sums up how I feel about it.

I was originally going to give it 2 months but I think I am going to quit my teams sooner. I don't believe midway through the season our  season should be thrown into such chaos. This could of been avoided by introducing these changes at the start of the season and by beta testing these changes before the season, but now if customers do what they say they are going to do, they are going to  leave enmasse...... I don't care about the money or reward points, what I care about is that I spend a lot of time recruiting and setting depth charts, and I am a little upset about my Syracuse lost today, who was ranked 2nd, and they lost in large thanks too 2 bugs. Its possible the only reason I was ranked 2nd was because others lost because they got screwed......

I am pretty upset right now, maybe I will change my mind before my seasons run out, but I am a few more big bug losses away from not signing into GD anymore and letting my teams die until the credits end and my teams turn sim.

What is with all the 0 and 1 yard passes and a breakaway running play is 4 yards?

JCont: You really ought to listen to some of the long-time coaches here. If you lose a bunch of them, it will not be good.

Thanks for chatting guys, but I'm out of time for tonight.  Have a good night.

Posted by JConte on 11/18/2010 7:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bhouska on 11/18/2010 7:53:00 PM (view original):
Joe, why does it seem like my QB is going to be my leading rusher on all my teams even though they are set to "none" on the rushing distribution?  I understand sacks, but most attempts on every team I have???

There was a bug that caused players who were set to none to still get carries in certain situations which has since been fixed.  You should not see your QB run on a designed running play unless you choose to run out of shotgun (no RB) and everyone on the field is set to none.  Your QB will still get rush attempts on sacks and scrambles though.

My QB (Southern Arkansas) ran 14 times in the first day of the update, it was in the first round of the playoffs and cost me the game. I am fine with us testing the game for you, but it shouldnt be in situations like this. It took me 5 months to build SAU into a late playoff team, only to leave the 5th season out of my hands as I get routed in the first round of the playoffs.

I dont pay to Beta test your game sir, you need to have an open beta and revert the worlds to before the update.

Posted by plague on 11/18/2010 8:27:00 PM (view original):
I posted this in the council since the council is being ignored I will post it here. This pretty much sums up how I feel about it.

I was originally going to give it 2 months but I think I am going to quit my teams sooner. I don't believe midway through the season our  season should be thrown into such chaos. This could of been avoided by introducing these changes at the start of the season and by beta testing these changes before the season, but now if customers do what they say they are going to do, they are going to  leave enmasse...... I don't care about the money or reward points, what I care about is that I spend a lot of time recruiting and setting depth charts, and I am a little upset about my Syracuse lost today, who was ranked 2nd, and they lost in large thanks too 2 bugs. Its possible the only reason I was ranked 2nd was because others lost because they got screwed......

I am pretty upset right now, maybe I will change my mind before my seasons run out, but I am a few more big bug losses away from not signing into GD anymore and letting my teams die until the credits end and my teams turn sim.

What is with all the 0 and 1 yard passes and a breakaway running play is 4 yards?

Plague, a lot of teams in Camp that were in NC contention were screwed (probably nobody more than Ebel at UCF).  The sad part is there's about 20 Syracuses in every single world.

I feel that the negative impact of this update is now being downplayed because JConte is answering questions, but shouldn't these questions have been answered earlier?  Shouldn't many of these problems have been noticed in testing?

In this thread I am starting to feel like I am overreacting.  We're being charged $10 per team per month to have our dynasties lose to 110th ranked SIM teams or punt from the 30 yard line if your kicker has low tech.  I mean, I play Hardball Dynasty and see all of the detail, see the history of updates that is much longer than the 1.5 years since anyone touched this game, and I just have to think that now it's damage control and convince everyone that this wasn't a big deal.

Posted by JConte on 11/18/2010 8:33:00 PM (view original):
Thanks for chatting guys, but I'm out of time for tonight.  Have a good night.

Good thing I am not part of FOX management. After listening to all the complaints and ******** here (MOST ALL 100% VALID) I would have canned yer butt if it wasn't fixed by the next day.

Posted by JConte on 11/18/2010 8:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by rdawg on 11/18/2010 8:17:00 PM (view original):
JConte, I have a question for you that is probably on the minds of many coaches: what was the rationale behind rolling out a completely NEW game logic with this update?

Please note that I am not criticizing the decision to utilize an updated game engine rather than untangle the complexity of updating the code of the old one--no issue with that. 

I'm referring to the strategic decision to essentially scrap the old game and make gameplay fundamentally different, with an entirely different set of relevant variables?  Beyond allusions to the changes being implemented to make the game"better," "enhanced," or "improved," since those are entirely subjective outcomes?

Given some of the comments above about losing membership / participants, I think this may have been a miscalculation.

Thanks in advance for your reponse.

The reasoning behind the changes are in the Critical News post (Update FAQ...last question I think).  We decided that the old engine (written in VB6) was past its prime and was becoming difficult to maintain and update.  We decided to rewrite the engine (in C#) and rather than simply copy the logic, we took the opportunity to analyze everything and make all necessary changes to make the final result as realistic as possible.  The items listed in the FAQ were some of the main focus items.  The engine is also now positioned to run both college and NFL games with an eye towards creating an NFL Dynasty game using the same engine.

Did you ever think about testing it first?  You could have put your C# to test on the Soccer guys they're playing for free.  Why get your paying customers upset?

WIS you have a mess and your asking me to be patient and burn up my seasons that I have on account while you continue to test this thing out. Then after my seasons are gone I supposed to pay for more and waste my time on this game to boot. Aint happening.

And I thought the comment about possible NFL Dynasty was terribly mistimed.  You're thinking about starting a new game when this one is broken?

JConte,  can you look at the logic that my lone Kicker won't kick a field goal anymore but he can punt an average of 10 yds longer now?  i kinda liked the reverse, but thats me thinking not C#.

It's hard to  even believe this:

Talent is still very important with the new engine and is the basis for every single outcome within it.  Each outcome within the engine is still decided by the talent on the field and a player who is rated 85 is still better in that given skill than a player who is rated 75.  However, those skill ratings are not used "as is" within the engine and are modified by the player's IQ and experience.  This modification can be as much as 12.5% in either direction.  This means that the player who has the 85 rating could actually be playing at an equivalent of a 74.375 to 95.625 rating and the 75 rated player could be playing at an equivalent rating of 65.625 to 84.375.  Those are the extremes, but you can see that there are 10 points of overlap where these two players could be performing. 

with all the upsets that have happened in the past two days.  even with the EXTREME modifier.

And yazr's numbers just make everything seem even more fishy.