to play 1000 more...

Suck it drama queens. Your "retirement" from the game is a waste of our times. 

Do you even really play yet?

I mean I retired more than two years ago when they started making it random and reducing the rewards to zilch.

When you play 300 more seasons and have them gut the game under you, come share. Until then, you don't even understand the game they gutted long, long ago, because this new one is nothing like the last one.

On a site that can have something as complex and beautiful as HBD, its a shame what they did to this game. Those of us that truly loved it still miss it.

Posted by dublinuf on 6/28/2013 2:34:00 AM (view original):
Do you even really play yet?

I mean I retired more than two years ago when they started making it random and reducing the rewards to zilch.

When you play 300 more seasons and have them gut the game under you, come share. Until then, you don't even understand the game they gutted long, long ago, because this new one is nothing like the last one.

On a site that can have something as complex and beautiful as HBD, its a shame what they did to this game. Those of us that truly loved it still miss it.

+1, nicely said dubs

Posted by BTINLA on 6/27/2013 9:45:00 PM (view original):
 to play 1000 more...

Suck it drama queens. Your "retirement" from the game is a waste of our times. 

Hope at some point you double your conference championships

You're charming.

Go play with a microwave.

Let us know when you decide to play well and win.  Until then, you're just a drama queen who can only get attention with self serving posts.

No, I suck at this game. That's why I have one CC in 800 seasons. 

I am just sick of the flood of retirement posts and people ******** about the game and trying to talk coaches into quiting as well. 

Posted by BTINLA on 6/28/2013 8:06:00 PM (view original):
I am just sick of the flood of retirement posts and people ******** about the game and trying to talk coaches into quiting as well. 

If that's your take, I'd say that your reading comprehension is as poor as your coaching aptitude.

And I guess I am in the minority, but find the new game MUCH better then the old. 1.0 was very unrealistic and favored the running game. Teams were winning NC's and not throwing a down the entire year. 

Posted by BTINLA on 6/28/2013 9:11:00 PM (view original):
And I guess I am in the minority, but find the new game MUCH better then the old. 1.0 was very unrealistic and favored the running game. Teams were winning NC's and not throwing a down the entire year. 

Nobody was forcing you to run every down.  Plenty of coaches won NCs with balanced and passing attacks in the old engine.  Running was a bit easier to win with, I'll give you that, but the difference wasn't as ridiculous as people seem to think it was.  I'd much rather have a clear cause-effect relationship as to the outcome of a game compared to utter pandemonium and bizarre game results, even if it meant a slight advantage to the running game.

Nobody was forcing you to run every down. Plenty of coaches won NCs with balanced and passing attacks in the old engine. Running was a bit easier to win with, I'll give you that, but the difference wasn't as ridiculous as people seem to think it was. I'd much rather have a clear cause-effect relationship as to the outcome of a game compared to utter pandemonium and bizarre game results, even if it meant a slight advantage to the running game.


i always chuckle when somebody attempts to convince people that there was only a "slight advantage" to the running game in GD 1.0. my final season playing with that sim engine...there were 2 teams in my conference that did not pass the ball a single time all season, and one of those teams made it to the semifinals or finals of the championship tournament before losing. not a single human team in the conference (there were 7 or 8 human teams) passed the ball more than 30% of the time...and i was the 2nd highest passing ratio team at just over 20%. after about 10 seasons of that...i gave up on that engine for good. there were several issues with 2.0 when it was released, and it sounds like 3.0 is struggling to find its footing...but 1.0 was more of a math or possibly rugby simulation, than a football game

Posted by andrew5975 on 7/1/2013 7:05:00 PM (view original):
Nobody was forcing you to run every down. Plenty of coaches won NCs with balanced and passing attacks in the old engine. Running was a bit easier to win with, I'll give you that, but the difference wasn't as ridiculous as people seem to think it was. I'd much rather have a clear cause-effect relationship as to the outcome of a game compared to utter pandemonium and bizarre game results, even if it meant a slight advantage to the running game.


i always chuckle when somebody attempts to convince people that there was only a "slight advantage" to the running game in GD 1.0. my final season playing with that sim engine...there were 2 teams in my conference that did not pass the ball a single time all season, and one of those teams made it to the semifinals or finals of the championship tournament before losing. not a single human team in the conference (there were 7 or 8 human teams) passed the ball more than 30% of the time...and i was the 2nd highest passing ratio team at just over 20%. after about 10 seasons of that...i gave up on that engine for good. there were several issues with 2.0 when it was released, and it sounds like 3.0 is struggling to find its footing...but 1.0 was more of a math or possibly rugby simulation, than a football game

I wouldn't say it was as advantage to run the ball as much as there were definite issues with passing the ball that weren't addressed by the developers.  Even with those issues, you could win NCs without calling a running play all season.  2.0 and 3.0beta both have no consistent cause/effect with attributes, so you're really left to the mercy of the random number generator to a generally unacceptable level.

People ran the ball so much because they had better talent.  It was an easy win when your players are better.  That being said, I won NC's by throwing almost every play.  You needed talent to win- that was the bottom line.

Plus, the ability to change player positions with little to no penalty made it easier to find monster RBs to go along with the monster OL's.  

I don't think 1.0 was the nirvana that some people here believe it to be, but it certainly was better than what we have now.  It probably could have used some tweaks in recruit generation, to make QB's (and therefore passing) more viable.