pointless to argue because I feel strong about blitzing being exploited also don't think teams who blitz more in a game are more probable of winning.

leagues are harder now. The chances went down extremely. A league which had five good solid owners now has 12-15 in a couple leagues and 32 in one league. You have to take that into account for less championships.

All the other stuff mentioned I have no argument with. I was curious so I added up my last 10 games plays of blitzing compared to not. I'll do another league but the numbers will be more blitzes I'm sure.
. lG 75 ,
355-305 Blitz-No Blitz

Just to respond to this, my desire is that it is a realistic sim of real football. In the end I hope to have the same level of strategies/counter strategies you would see in real football. Unfortunately there are weaknesses in the game engine that people are using to their advantages - but rest assured that it is my goal to continue to reduce them without creating new weaknesses. The nature of it being a simulation probably means there will always be weaknesses in the engine, but if I can minimize the effect and give you the opportunity to be successful with more than a single strategy then I'll feel like I'm reaching my goal here.

I haven't said this for a while but I still want to emphasize my gratitude for all of your patience as the issues are worked out, and for your honest and candid feedback when you do find an issue. Rarely do I feel like feedback is sent without a true desire to make the game better, and I feel very honored that you all are willing to support this game in that manner.

Thats really good to hear :)

I think one of the ways a band aid could be applied is to have the AI fill in missing plays, eg: 40 O plays + 30 D plays, that way any exploit is going to get watered down.

The problem is that it is easy enough to create a gameplan with a full set of plays in the playbook, but set the other options to ensure that only a small amount of those plays actually happen (by eliminating a complete personnel set on offense or a complete LB style on defense, for example). I've considered reducing the probability of a certain play being called the more you call it, with the caveat that on defense if you are responding to an offensive personnel the plays you call from continue to be within that personnel response, but that then introduces some complexity that makes it more of a feature update.

I see.

Maybe then have a cap triggered by multiple use?

I'm experimenting with some ideas in MFN-1 as far as giving your opponent an advantage if you overuse a play. We'll see whether this particular round of updates makes it into the next version, or if this will get pushed into the following version.

My take is that the game is progressing, slowly, toward a more realistic simulation, and at this point is the best NFL simul game online, unless someone can show me a better one. Yeah, you have to blitz most of the time if you want to compete for and have a better chance at the LC, and you need to know what type of players/attributes will make the blitzing more effective. The trade meter is the only thing that allows for a serious imbalance at this point, everything else is based on knowing key attributes (not overall default values) and gameplan, using your best plays a majority rather than a minority of the calls. The other thing that would correct the play call imbalance is a control, like the roster control when you have too many players, the AI takes over and corrects it.

As in most everything, there are exceptions, blackflys and I had an epic conf champ game in L10, one of the more competitive leagues in MFN. We both used blitz heavy defensive schemes and the final score was 65 to 64. The heavy blitz does not always result in a shut down, as the blitz can be countered with players with key attributes, (QB w speed, WRs w speed, OTs w speed, RB/FB w speed/pass block). As many have posted, I also would prefer to see a better balance in play performance between blitzes and coverages. But, am not seeing it in the play result averages yet and that is what I go by when selecting my active plays, its based on the results, both short (1-3 games) and long term analysis. The only time that I have had super play call imbalance (1 defensive play called more than 50%) is when Ive used rules for common defensive situations, like 3rd and med/long. So, Ive quit trying to use rules to do that. I understand that its not easy to get it exactly right and the way you want it when it comes to code & the "engine", and appreciate JDB's efforts & diligence to continually improve an already great game, many thanks JDB

As far as the trade meter goes, at least make 1,2 & 3 round draft picks more valuable, and 6 yr or older vets, FBs, TEs, OL/DL less valuable. That should not be hard to do, as was done to fix the problem with using kickers to complete BS trades. Seeing a team that has been in the playoffs four or more straight seasons with a high number of 1 & 2 picks is also not a very good simulation of real pro football.

I have 3 Teams.

Denver was my first, in good ol' MFN 7. I made a lot of early mistakes, but made a quick turn around in Year 2. I took over what was largely a dumpster fire, in terms of W/L, but made some moves and got the team on track.

There I do All Blitz... largely because I made major Trades to acquire the Top 3 Line Backers in my 2nd Draft, all Top 10 Picks. The irony is, by 'definition', all 3 of these guys 'Busted'... all fell from their Projected Overall.

Despite this, my Defense in MFN-7 is one of the best in the business. It hinges on those 3 LBs to be sure, but I have key guys all over my Defense. I'd even put my Rotational LB and DB up against a lot of Starters.

But I paid a HUGE price... I literally sold my next Three Drafts to acquire those players overall. It could be argued that I over-paid.

Now my Defense is carrying my fledgling Offense (supported by Tight Ends to Running Backs Leon Arana and Sergio Phillips) into the Play Offs, where I've lost the last 2 Seasons to the Team that lost the Super Bowl. We're close.

I have no issue with my play style, because for me I view it as having Bruce Smith, Lawrence Taylor and Derrick Thomas from that Draft, along with Ray Lewis and Ronnie Lott at MLB and SS. I've got THAT kind of Talent on the D, and in real life if I had that kind of Talent I'd never relent and send the dogs to hunt every play.

But to balance that, I have Cleveland in MFN-73. Literally only run Zone at all times. Not a single Man Coverage in the book. I Drafted Offense in Cleveland to be Pass Happy, Throw about 80% of the time. Put up over 6K Passing two Season's ago.

Fukashima in Cust-78 is also All Blitz, but I built All Offense first for an All Run Offense. Literally not a single Pass in the Play Book, and the D is young (and lacking Talent) so Blitzing isn't doing me any favors.

Blitzing on it's own won't get you Wins. Talented Players will get you Wins. And Good Players with Better Game Planning will beat Talented Players with no Game Planning. But the bottom line is, you aren't going to Win if you don't have Talent. And if you DO have Talent, other Teams can beat you if they aren't full of Bad Players AND they take advantage of you in Scheme/Game Planning.

Some times people complain about this or that... then I look at their Team, and it simply isn't very good. I've got a Team that is only Defense with RBs that are Converted TEs (which everyone will tell you doesn't work) that is competing. I've got a Team that passed 80% of the time, and a D that only plays Zone that is competitive. I've got a Team that only Runs, and they aren't the worst Team in the League.

Point being... IF you have the Talent, just about any Strategy will Win. Until you come across a Team with comparable Talent, and a BETTER Strategy.