Never thought I'd send this in.... Topic

Alabama beats Southern College of Ladies Football due to talent.  Not gameplanning.  Talent.

Auburn beats Alabama by gameplanning and (a lot of) luck. 

The main point of this thread is the "unexplainable" losses to SIMs.  This is a math game, but it appears the "math" is off in many areas.

I maintain that one game does not tell you anything.....however, there are many, many games in which the same issues keep coming up.  Wishbone does not work, upper levels have trouble beating long time SIMS, individual players who appear to be great....struggle for no apparent reason, teams that appear to be "great"...struggle for no apparent reason.

For those that think everything is working fine, please do not take it "one game at a time" with your explanations....please take a look at the entire pool of problematic games and explain what is happening and why team X got spanked by team Y.  


1/21/2014 11:14 AM
I think I'm saying more that I feel like people are probably mis-evalutating talent, and like shady said, I think that may be OK.   Knowing every aspect of the game would make it pretty boring.   I think when people say their QB,RB,WR,TE,OL,DL,LB,DB are better, they look at the 2-3 things they think matter most, forget about the rest, forget about IQ, forget about the situation into which they put their players.  

I'm betting that when people go up against SIMs they still just use their default or "vs SIM" gameplan and don't put the same effort in as when they play a human coached team.    I know that there have been plenty of times I've overthought an opponent and changed my plan when I shouldn't have.    SIMs don't do that.  SIMs put a lot of time into team practice and I gather most people are all about individual development.    
1/21/2014 11:14 AM
I think one of the reasons many of the veteran players are frustrated is that when we set out to help redesign and formulate 3.0, we made it clear to Norbert that the concensus was that 2.0 did not take into account the ratings differences between players and that the games played out too inconsistently (random whatever). He made it sound as if the ratings would matter more in the coming engine - so the formations and depth charts were redesigned to help create more specific roles and make match-ups more important. Norbert and Oriole both worked on the game play to change some of the play simulation, some good, some bad and some very bad (try to run with wishbone - ha!) But ultimately, the engine and the player match-up design was repeated in the same or similar format as 2.0. So we have a new game and the same problem. DO the developers owe it to the coaches to provide all the nitty-gritty on how to format a team to win - NO they don't. But what they need to provide is a definite way for player match-ups to make sense and be consistent.
1/21/2014 11:20 AM
Posted by huckslim on 1/21/2014 11:14:00 AM (view original):
I think I'm saying more that I feel like people are probably mis-evalutating talent, and like shady said, I think that may be OK.   Knowing every aspect of the game would make it pretty boring.   I think when people say their QB,RB,WR,TE,OL,DL,LB,DB are better, they look at the 2-3 things they think matter most, forget about the rest, forget about IQ, forget about the situation into which they put their players.  

I'm betting that when people go up against SIMs they still just use their default or "vs SIM" gameplan and don't put the same effort in as when they play a human coached team.    I know that there have been plenty of times I've overthought an opponent and changed my plan when I shouldn't have.    SIMs don't do that.  SIMs put a lot of time into team practice and I gather most people are all about individual development.    
+1
1/21/2014 11:28 AM
Please don't let Coach SIM A1 know this, but I have used the same def and off game plan against sims for the most part with a win every time.  I might experiment with a different game plan, but I have yet to lose to a sim in d3 since 3.0 has rolled over.  I did lose in 2.0 more than a few times, but I think that was due to a combination of bad players and bad game planning.  Maybe d3 is different teams, my talented teams have not lost to a sim or even won by less than 20 points.  Maybe I am just good at picking and playing bad sims.  I have lost to inferior users in 3.0, but I was probably just out-coached.  As for real life, I think less talented teams beat more talented teams every Saturday in the fall.  
1/21/2014 2:48 PM
Posted by huckslim on 1/21/2014 11:14:00 AM (view original):
I think I'm saying more that I feel like people are probably mis-evalutating talent, and like shady said, I think that may be OK.   Knowing every aspect of the game would make it pretty boring.   I think when people say their QB,RB,WR,TE,OL,DL,LB,DB are better, they look at the 2-3 things they think matter most, forget about the rest, forget about IQ, forget about the situation into which they put their players.  

I'm betting that when people go up against SIMs they still just use their default or "vs SIM" gameplan and don't put the same effort in as when they play a human coached team.    I know that there have been plenty of times I've overthought an opponent and changed my plan when I shouldn't have.    SIMs don't do that.  SIMs put a lot of time into team practice and I gather most people are all about individual development.    
Enlighten me huck...what is the huge gaping weakness that makes Lee Garcia a pedestrian player against a team that across the board has lower cores? Can you point to any superior players on the other team?? Team practice means nothing but IQ. My IQ = superior to the team I played against. I'm fine with people saying this, but grief buddy give a gosh darn example for pete's sake.
1/21/2014 3:02 PM
People are acting like SimAI can adjust their gameplans. News flash...they don't adjust anything. The dice rolls differently each time just like any of us, but they don't adjust their gameplans. If i lose to a human, even one thats pretty inferior..ok. SimAI that is that significantly worse Nah. Wasting my time. Its not just about winning and losing. Its about being able to play the game. People are asking like we are asking for everything that makes the engine work. No, what we want is SOMETHING about how it works so we can make sense of the game as it is being played. If everyone has this information it doesn't make it unfair in any way. If it is going to be this way, they should never have involved users in beta at all. Cause I will tell you, in beta we HAD an idea of what went in to every play even with all the wild swings and bugs.
1/21/2014 3:10 PM
Posted by jtd79 on 1/20/2014 5:50:00 PM (view original):
Noah,

I dont understand your complaint.  The game you posted you won.  Yes, you outclassed the team by a large margin but your LB's are very young and the rest of your defense lacks elite players.  Just look at your GUESS report for the passing defense, you're  B.  Everywhere else you are an A.  If you just step back and look at this game, you were on the road, being pretty predictable with your play calling and your young defense wasn't making the stops you would expect in this matchup.  There is no sorcery here or five-card-monte, you just ended up in a tighter game than you expected but still won.  I noticed you varied your play calling afterwards and it looks better overall.  I just don't understand the complaint here.
I used my tokens to upgrade my wizards.  We'll see how well it works in three days after the 50% training boost is complete.

The lack of comms from the dev team is pretty disappointing but frankly I think the game is fairly solid and while every game result is NOT what I expect, I think the level of "randomness" is appropriate.  Generally, when I see folks complain I can look at their team and find at least one obvious problem (often something they overlooked or didn't think was terribly important).?
1/21/2014 3:17 PM
ddingo...did you read my response to that post? That post had nothing to do with my complaint. Someone find me what my obvious problem was to led this to even be in the realm of possibilities. It wasn't about winning or losing, its about the whole game consistently not being able to run the ball to the talent of my running back and offensive line corps that I showed exactly how they were superior.

This post had NOTHING to do with me winning or losing. It had NOTHING to do with it being a close game. What it had to do with was my lack of production on offense in the running game that was clearly superior to the other sides run defense. Nothing more nothing less.

1/21/2014 3:40 PM
When my players are all better than their players and my game IQ/Formation IQ is higher and I don't play Dime against the Box - how can the game decide that that game should be close or I should lose? I should blow the other team out every time. EVERY TIME. If teams are close it can come up with a variety of situations where I can win or lose. The big problems I see is that when the teams differences are greater, some weirdness can happen.
1/21/2014 4:07 PM
Okay, so 213 yards in a game (4.0 yards/carry) is considered a lack of production.  There are not the ridiculous numbers that running teams put up in beta, so I really don't see as 213 yards rushing in a game as a lack production.  Maybe if your average was around 3 yards per carry or so.
1/21/2014 4:10 PM
Posted by noah23 on 1/21/2014 3:02:00 PM (view original):
Posted by huckslim on 1/21/2014 11:14:00 AM (view original):
I think I'm saying more that I feel like people are probably mis-evalutating talent, and like shady said, I think that may be OK.   Knowing every aspect of the game would make it pretty boring.   I think when people say their QB,RB,WR,TE,OL,DL,LB,DB are better, they look at the 2-3 things they think matter most, forget about the rest, forget about IQ, forget about the situation into which they put their players.  

I'm betting that when people go up against SIMs they still just use their default or "vs SIM" gameplan and don't put the same effort in as when they play a human coached team.    I know that there have been plenty of times I've overthought an opponent and changed my plan when I shouldn't have.    SIMs don't do that.  SIMs put a lot of time into team practice and I gather most people are all about individual development.    
Enlighten me huck...what is the huge gaping weakness that makes Lee Garcia a pedestrian player against a team that across the board has lower cores? Can you point to any superior players on the other team?? Team practice means nothing but IQ. My IQ = superior to the team I played against. I'm fine with people saying this, but grief buddy give a gosh darn example for pete's sake.
Man, Its been a while since I've looked at DIII numbers, but my best shot would be:

a) what about this is 'pedestrian'?   Looks like the top 5 in DIII are at about 5.5.  He's at 4.9 per carry, looks pretty good.  

b)  formation IQ is not that different between him and the top level defenders, neither are "cores" (see above about that).   One thing I noticed right away is that 4 of the 5 top tackelers in that game had better GI and TECH than he does.   Its not all about cores, that is what I was trying to say before.  
1/21/2014 4:11 PM
Until a certain point..there is a point (and it seems to be 12 point core advantage) where that does seem to work correctly.
1/21/2014 4:11 PM
Noah, I know you don't want to hear this but after reviewing the game you posted your play calling on both sides was just far too vanilla even for a SIM.  You decided to run it up the gut out of PS on roughly 80% of your plays with a handful of passing plays out of PS and SG.  Just looking at it, you clearly expected to get 4+ YPC every play running it right up the gut into their best defenders (DL).  Since the engine doesn't work like that, all it took was one stuff per series or an inopportune penalty to derail you and put you into a 3& Med/Long and you struggled to complete a pass regularly to keep your drive alive.  This shows me that your formation's and play calls for 3rd and med/long were flawed in some way.  Go back and look at your 3rd down play calls and you'll see what I mean.  For some reason you were allowing your QB to check down to a short pass on 3&7+ multiple times which killed drives.  Even if you complete that pass, you were gaining 1-6 yards unless you broke a tackle and this forced you to punt.  Again, poor play calling by allowing your QB to check down to that level.  Think about how often you curse an NFL or College team for not throwing beyond the sticks on 3rd down....that's what you were doing.  Add in some turnovers and settling for long FG's and you have a recipe for making it easy for your opponent.

On the other side of the balm you invited disaster.  Defending every play call with the 3-4 or 4-3 just doesn't cut it most of the time.  You were giving up easy completions to Trips when you were in the 3-4 on obvious passing down against that formation.  

Im not sure why your were so vanilla, but like DDingo said, the answers to your questions are right there in the PBP.
1/21/2014 4:14 PM
Posted by huckslim on 1/21/2014 4:11:00 PM (view original):
Posted by noah23 on 1/21/2014 3:02:00 PM (view original):
Posted by huckslim on 1/21/2014 11:14:00 AM (view original):
I think I'm saying more that I feel like people are probably mis-evalutating talent, and like shady said, I think that may be OK.   Knowing every aspect of the game would make it pretty boring.   I think when people say their QB,RB,WR,TE,OL,DL,LB,DB are better, they look at the 2-3 things they think matter most, forget about the rest, forget about IQ, forget about the situation into which they put their players.  

I'm betting that when people go up against SIMs they still just use their default or "vs SIM" gameplan and don't put the same effort in as when they play a human coached team.    I know that there have been plenty of times I've overthought an opponent and changed my plan when I shouldn't have.    SIMs don't do that.  SIMs put a lot of time into team practice and I gather most people are all about individual development.    
Enlighten me huck...what is the huge gaping weakness that makes Lee Garcia a pedestrian player against a team that across the board has lower cores? Can you point to any superior players on the other team?? Team practice means nothing but IQ. My IQ = superior to the team I played against. I'm fine with people saying this, but grief buddy give a gosh darn example for pete's sake.
Man, Its been a while since I've looked at DIII numbers, but my best shot would be:

a) what about this is 'pedestrian'?   Looks like the top 5 in DIII are at about 5.5.  He's at 4.9 per carry, looks pretty good.  

b)  formation IQ is not that different between him and the top level defenders, neither are "cores" (see above about that).   One thing I noticed right away is that 4 of the 5 top tackelers in that game had better GI and TECH than he does.   Its not all about cores, that is what I was trying to say before.  
if you throw out his long, his average ypc is 4.0. Which is slightly above average. Tech has only been attributed by oriole to consistency. GI..ok. He does have a slight disadvantage there. But remember, its not about the running back only. Its about the Line vs the defensive line first and foremost. With a line that has as big an advantage against the DL as mine does, I should be able to produce 4.0 with my backup running backs, much less this guy.
1/21/2014 4:16 PM
◂ Prev 123456 Next ▸
Never thought I'd send this in.... Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 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.