Posted by slid64er on 11/18/2010 5:48:00 PM (view original):
If formation IQ isn't part of the issue, what is it for?  If it doesn't affect play outcome, should we even care about it?

Posted by dravz on 11/18/2010 6:13:00 PM (view original):
JConte said that variable in your equation is 12.5%, not 30%.

Posted by hughesjr on 11/18/2010 6:13:00 PM (view original):

Posted by slid64er on 11/18/2010 5:48:00 PM (view original):
If formation IQ isn't part of the issue, what is it for?  If it doesn't affect play outcome, should we even care about it?

OK,

According to the developers, Formation IQ is something that each recruit has when they join the team.  Think of it as any other attribute.  It behaves like any other attribute.

As players do things, just like a RBs SPD/ELU/SPD is compared to the DTs STR/;TKL/ATH how much yardage is gained... the RBs Formation IQ is a modifier to his attributes, and the DLs .Formation IQ is a modifier to his attributes.

In the old engine, maybe it was worth 1%, now it is worth more ... maybe 20% or 30%.

If a guy comes in with 60 for his Formation IQ, and if the SIM practices it for 4 years, then that will grow to 80-90 .... if you never practice, your Formation IQ for the RB falls to 40.

Now, if STR makes up 70% of some "roll" and formation IQ makes up 30% (as an example) ... and if you have a RB with a STR of 90 and a Formation IQ of 40 ... well you have this for your modofoed STR:

(90 x 0.7) + (40 x 0.3) = 63+12 = 75 for your attribute

And lets say the STR of the DL is 80 and his Formation IQ is 90 ...

(80 x 0.7) + (90 x 0.3) =   56 + 27 = 83

So, your stud RB is a 75 STR and the whimpy DL has 83 STR ... he wins the roll, you don't get the yardage.

Once we build up our formation IQ to a decent level, we will be closer to our actual stats and we will beat the SIMs.

Formation IQ does matter ... it is not he be all and end all, but it is a factor and it was increased in importance.

There is Formation IQ in HD and it does have a major impact there.

Now, yes, I want to see the Formation IQ, it is absolutely stupid that we can see at least OUR team's values.  But including formation IQ as a factor in every play,with SIMs getting a net gain and humans (for the most part) getting a net loss ... that would basically make the SIMs and the Human teams fairly equal in overall attributes until the humans build up a decent Formation IQ.

Now, I know there are guys out there who say it does not exist ... if you think that, then take a chance.

JConte will likely make adjustments in the next couple of days (after getting some more info) which will lessen the effect for a little while as we build up our IQs ... hopefully he will also show us what our player's IQs are so we can make informed decisions on how much to practice.

Posted by dravz on 11/18/2010 6:20:00 PM (view original):
And even that maximum 25% swing (assuming a lot of things) does not explain what we're seeing.

My point Dravz.  The IQ variance is only part of it.  The running game has some sort of governor on it to keep teams from pounding it up and down the field ... That is how they are creating all the punts.  My example is an educated guess and/or a theory on one way they could have done it.  I threw it out there as a discussion point to get things going.  I really want to understand how a significantly inferior team can shut down a great team.  This is a SIM game and has no emotion.  It is based on numbers.  Numbers create consistent outcomes.  There is nothing consistent about the last two days.  The only way to make these calculations inconsistent was to introduce randomness.  To do that, you have to have specified ranges with deviation factors.  In other words, they purposefully manipulated a numbers driven game to give inconsistent results in the name of realism (parity).  You are penalizing those who are good at the game in order to spread the wealth.   In my opinion, that is unethical.  Please keep in mind that I have not a single NC to my name so I am not trying to protect my status in this game.  I just want a game that is fair and equal.  JConte freely admits that one of the intents of this engine was to limit Dynasties.  Why?

Posted by tenaciousdx on 11/18/2010 9:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dravz on 11/18/2010 6:20:00 PM (view original):
And even that maximum 25% swing (assuming a lot of things) does not explain what we're seeing.

My point Dravz.  The IQ variance is only part of it.  The running game has some sort of governor on it to keep teams from pounding it up and down the field ... That is how they are creating all the punts.  My example is an educated guess and/or a theory on one way they could have done it.  I threw it out there as a discussion point to get things going.  I really want to understand how a significantly inferior team can shut down a great team.  This is a SIM game and has no emotion.  It is based on numbers.  Numbers create consistent outcomes.  There is nothing consistent about the last two days.  The only way to make these calculations inconsistent was to introduce randomness.  To do that, you have to have specified ranges with deviation factors.  In other words, they purposefully manipulated a numbers driven game to give inconsistent results in the name of realism (parity).  You are penalizing those who are good at the game in order to spread the wealth.   In my opinion, that is unethical.  Please keep in mind that I have not a single NC to my name so I am not trying to protect my status in this game.  I just want a game that is fair and equal.  JConte freely admits that one of the intents of this engine was to limit Dynasties.  Why?

And I see your point as well.  I will admit that I could be wrong.  My intent is to explore a theory.  I just want to understand what factors make the current results inconceivably consistent when they should not be. So, when i say 'inconsistent results'  i should be saying 'inconceivable results'. If they wote a code that  introduced a governor on the run game to create parity then they are manipulating numbers to get a desired result.  IMO, that is just wrong.  I do not think it is right to undo the hard work of the best players in this game just because other players couldn't figure it out. 

I just see a lot of 1,2,3 yard runs with some negative runs and some longer gains no matter whether it's human or sim. There seems to be a lot of series featuring 1 to 5 yards of gains by run or pass and then a pass out of bounds just like there was the nearly standard 10 yard sack with the old engine. I was hopeful that the run, run, run to 40 minutes of possession time would change but the cure looks worse then the disease and why acquire talent when walkons run for 1,2,3 yards a carry and throw the ball out of bounds at the same rate too. The title of the game is Gridiron Dynasty not Gridiron Mediocrity. Recruiting starts in Warner tomorrow and for once I am clueless on what to key in on. Looks to be a run on QB's and WR's since there is still a little dynamism there. I just see a lot of needless havoc for little gain by current or future players.

Posted by slid64er on 11/18/2010 10:35:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tenaciousdx on 11/18/2010 9:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dravz on 11/18/2010 6:20:00 PM (view original):
And even that maximum 25% swing (assuming a lot of things) does not explain what we're seeing.

My point Dravz.  The IQ variance is only part of it.  The running game has some sort of governor on it to keep teams from pounding it up and down the field ... That is how they are creating all the punts.  My example is an educated guess and/or a theory on one way they could have done it.  I threw it out there as a discussion point to get things going.  I really want to understand how a significantly inferior team can shut down a great team.  This is a SIM game and has no emotion.  It is based on numbers.  Numbers create consistent outcomes.  There is nothing consistent about the last two days.  The only way to make these calculations inconsistent was to introduce randomness.  To do that, you have to have specified ranges with deviation factors.  In other words, they purposefully manipulated a numbers driven game to give inconsistent results in the name of realism (parity).  You are penalizing those who are good at the game in order to spread the wealth.   In my opinion, that is unethical.  Please keep in mind that I have not a single NC to my name so I am not trying to protect my status in this game.  I just want a game that is fair and equal.  JConte freely admits that one of the intents of this engine was to limit Dynasties.  Why?

I see where you're going, but I respectfully disagree.  The outcomes are too consistent.  I think your theory is correct on play determination.  But I think the process is too consistent and doesn't take into effect talent, gameplan, fatigue, out of position players, etc.  The results are the same regardless of who's on offense or defense.  This is what is giving inferior teams an even chance of winning games.  Nothing matters except the consistent output which puts them on an even playing field.