NOTICE: This league is using the BLEEDING EDGE game engine. For more information, click here.

The new user interface is in preview!

Want to check it out? Click here! (If you don't like it, you can still switch back)

League Forums

Main - General MFN Discussion

Re: May 2024 Update

By martinwarnett
5/17/2024 6:17 pm
Waitwut wrote:
Doesn’t really address the issue of why people do most position changes or play out of position. Adding penalty to a game that is full of penalties within the coding would border unbearable.


Position changes and play oop are two very separate things with different rationales.

You see a TE with high acc, speed, good blocking stats and strength but poor route running, hands, ball carrying. As a GM, you assess and figure converting to an O Lineman leads in increased weight, lowering speed but not necessarily too much. A good GM would position change because they view the play as a more natural lineman based upon the stats.

Playing oop is a way of gaining an advantage by gaming the system. I seem to recall boss man mentioning along the lines of speed not being a constant across all positions - 75 speed on a WR is different than 75 on a RB, different than 75 on a C... So playing a WR at RB having not converted them means they'd retain WR speed rather than use the RB speed. As players in a position tend to a certain weight, and since WRs are generally lighter than RBs, converting means the WR would lose some speed (not a great deal, but still).

The latter is why some leagues are tight on oop. IMO, where a player played oop is heavier than the standard weight for the position, there's no real advantage gained, indeed, often the opposite. Where the player is "too light", then there's a problem.

Re: May 2024 Update

By Cjfred68
5/17/2024 8:47 pm
Years ago I had a league (General manager league) where every team had to have a minimum number of players at each position and each position had a minimum weight requirement.

Position changes were OK but players couldn't be active until they "made weight". The concept worked very well but it became a nightmare to do game weekly compliance checks for all 32 teams.

If JDB can do the same but the Sim tracks everything then I'm all in!!!

Re: May 2024 Update

By Pernbronze
5/17/2024 10:01 pm
Cjfred68 wrote:
Years ago I had a league (General manager league) where every team had to have a minimum number of players at each position and each position had a minimum weight requirement.

Position changes were OK but players couldn't be active until they "made weight". The concept worked very well but it became a nightmare to do game weekly compliance checks for all 32 teams.

If JDB can do the same but the Sim tracks everything then I'm all in!!!


Loved that league!

Re: May 2024 Update

By Waitwut
5/18/2024 7:55 am
martinwarnett wrote:
Waitwut wrote:
Doesn’t really address the issue of why people do most position changes or play out of position. Adding penalty to a game that is full of penalties within the coding would border unbearable.


Position changes and play oop are two very separate things with different rationales.

You see a TE with high acc, speed, good blocking stats and strength but poor route running, hands, ball carrying. As a GM, you assess and figure converting to an O Lineman leads in increased weight, lowering speed but not necessarily too much. A good GM would position change because they view the play as a more natural lineman based upon the stats.

Playing oop is a way of gaining an advantage by gaming the system. I seem to recall boss man mentioning along the lines of speed not being a constant across all positions - 75 speed on a WR is different than 75 on a RB, different than 75 on a C... So playing a WR at RB having not converted them means they'd retain WR speed rather than use the RB speed. As players in a position tend to a certain weight, and since WRs are generally lighter than RBs, converting means the WR would lose some speed (not a great deal, but still).

The latter is why some leagues are tight on oop. IMO, where a player played oop is heavier than the standard weight for the position, there's no real advantage gained, indeed, often the opposite. Where the player is "too light", then there's a problem.


In both scenarios you’re changing a player to maximize their potential and impact. The reasoning behind each are the same. One is just out of position. It is not entirely a different thing. The game itself treats them differently but that is built into the game. It’s hardly an advantage if it was by design to work that way.
Last edited at 5/18/2024 7:57 am

Re: May 2024 Update

By martinwarnett
5/24/2024 3:20 pm
Waitwut wrote:
martinwarnett wrote:
Waitwut wrote:
Doesn’t really address the issue of why people do most position changes or play out of position. Adding penalty to a game that is full of penalties within the coding would border unbearable.


Position changes and play oop are two very separate things with different rationales.

You see a TE with high acc, speed, good blocking stats and strength but poor route running, hands, ball carrying. As a GM, you assess and figure converting to an O Lineman leads in increased weight, lowering speed but not necessarily too much. A good GM would position change because they view the play as a more natural lineman based upon the stats.

Playing oop is a way of gaining an advantage by gaming the system. I seem to recall boss man mentioning along the lines of speed not being a constant across all positions - 75 speed on a WR is different than 75 on a RB, different than 75 on a C... So playing a WR at RB having not converted them means they'd retain WR speed rather than use the RB speed. As players in a position tend to a certain weight, and since WRs are generally lighter than RBs, converting means the WR would lose some speed (not a great deal, but still).

The latter is why some leagues are tight on oop. IMO, where a player played oop is heavier than the standard weight for the position, there's no real advantage gained, indeed, often the opposite. Where the player is "too light", then there's a problem.


In both scenarios you’re changing a player to maximize their potential and impact. The reasoning behind each are the same. One is just out of position. It is not entirely a different thing. The game itself treats them differently but that is built into the game. It’s hardly an advantage if it was by design to work that way.


To me it is; the second scenario is exploiting the game engine. A WR at RB will have an oop penalty - which I'm yet top be convinced is a factor - but an advantage due to WR speed being quicker than RB speed...

Re: May 2024 Update

By brxnivy
5/24/2024 11:05 pm
Pernbronze wrote:
Cjfred68 wrote:
Years ago I had a league (General manager league) where every team had to have a minimum number of players at each position and each position had a minimum weight requirement.

Position changes were OK but players couldn't be active until they "made weight". The concept worked very well but it became a nightmare to do game weekly compliance checks for all 32 teams.

If JDB can do the same but the Sim tracks everything then I'm all in!!!


Loved that league!


Agreed, the league was great. Hopefully JDB can automate something similar.

Re: May 2024 Update

By Waitwut
5/25/2024 8:26 am
I guess my opinion is that I don’t think the game necessarily changes for the better if it were boxed up. Sure everyone would have to abide by the positions (which is supposedly done in league with position rules), but I interpret that to be already equal to a league who has no positional rules.

I get the sense people think this somehow levels the playing field. I don’t agree though. A good owner will just try to ensure a TE is covered by a CB - given the speed variation at weights, wouldn’t this render TE as a less suitable target for plays?

Re: May 2024 Update

By Mcbolt55
5/25/2024 10:03 am
Waitwut wrote:
I guess my opinion is that I don’t think the game necessarily changes for the better if it were boxed up. Sure everyone would have to abide by the positions (which is supposedly done in league with position rules), but I interpret that to be already equal to a league who has no positional rules.

I get the sense people think this somehow levels the playing field. I don’t agree though. A good owner will just try to ensure a TE is covered by a CB - given the speed variation at weights, wouldn’t this render TE as a less suitable target for plays?


Maybe some ppl feel that way, but it’s definitely not true. The more restrictive the rules or more everyone has to conform to the same gameplan, the more the little details of that plan end up making the difference. That is where the experienced and meticulous strategists find advantages the casual gamer doesn’t.

I just think the point of clarification we need to know is if there will be harsher penalties for playing players out of position, or what kind of changing of positions will actually be allowed.

Re: May 2024 Update

By Big Poppa
5/25/2024 10:15 am
Once again...if the player generator would generate players that actually had attributes for their respective positions, very little of this player out of position would be happening. Players would more than likely play their actual positions.
This game doesn't need more bandaids, it needs fixing.

Re: May 2024 Update

By Waitwut
5/25/2024 10:24 am
Mcbolt55 wrote:
Waitwut wrote:
I guess my opinion is that I don’t think the game necessarily changes for the better if it were boxed up. Sure everyone would have to abide by the positions (which is supposedly done in league with position rules), but I interpret that to be already equal to a league who has no positional rules.

I get the sense people think this somehow levels the playing field. I don’t agree though. A good owner will just try to ensure a TE is covered by a CB - given the speed variation at weights, wouldn’t this render TE as a less suitable target for plays?


Maybe some ppl feel that way, but it’s definitely not true. The more restrictive the rules or more everyone has to conform to the same gameplan, the more the little details of that plan end up making the difference. That is where the experienced and meticulous strategists find advantages the casual gamer doesn’t.

I just think the point of clarification we need to know is if there will be harsher penalties for playing players out of position, or what kind of changing of positions will actually be allowed.


Oop becomes less of an issue if the weight/speed variable is addressed. This whole conversation is moot if the focus were purely on what is coded rather than layering controls. Everyone FEELS as though there is an obvious issue at the core.

I would just go further to say JDB is the only person I’m aware of that has insight into the coding, and therefore the truth of why this or why that. The only thing any of us have is observance to work with.

I’m just really trying to get back to that point at the end of the day. What makes weight change speed and why can’t that just be addressed so oop is not relevant?

To the point clarity - I do wish there were a matrix provided by JDB. I do sometimes wonder if these technical issues are not so easy to fix because of a need to relearn what was done in order to fix without breaking more.
Last edited at 5/25/2024 11:34 am