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.