This is not part of the depth chart management issue, but ... Just had a game in other league where the GL defense was used on every play. Play overuse did kick in but was not effective enough to offset the extreme overuse, or "exploit". Instead of the play overuse function, I would prefer to see the game engine/program handle play selection and useage in a similar manner to the roster control. Once a play has been used a maximum # of times, the auto coach calls a different play from the active plays selected, which should also have a minimum to avoid play overuse. I dont like having to use one exploit to counter another, its not a better simulation of RL NFL football, as no team keeps using the same play(s) over and over, or even more than a few times per game. Here are the google search results for NFL play selection and use........

Offense : NFL teams typically run between 60 and 65 offensive plays per game. For a specific game plan, a team will typically select a refined menu of 75 to 100 passing plays and 15 to 25 rushing plays out of their expansive 2,000+ play playbook.

Defense : NFL defenses use about 15 to 25 distinct base calls or concepts in a single game. While a standard playbook holds hundreds of options, defensive coordinators trim these down to a weekly game plan that generally features 4 to 6 core formations and up to 20 specific pass coverages and blitz packages.However, because most modern defenses are "multiple" (meaning players execute conditional rules based on pre-snap offensive motions), those base calls can morph into dozens of unique on-field variations. Throughout the average total of 65 to 75 defensive snaps per game, the exact same play call could end up looking entirely different depending on what the offense presents.

I dont think we need to go near that extent, I think what we have now as far as the number of plays is adequate, I would just like to see play overuse prevented. I would like to be able to be on a level playing field without having to limit play selection and use, which I do now on my teams based on play results and averages. So, I think we could use another thread on the subject of Play Selection & Use if there are others who agree.

Questions:
1. Manual activated Auto-Set Depth Chart?
2. 'Use Future Ratings Instead of Current' -> Checkbox activated?

If yes, it's weird.

That shouldn't be related in any way to this issue. I only ever use auto set for the three big columns in ST (gunner, rusher, and blocker). Those checkboxes always default to unchecked. I always check "use future..." when I use it, and when I go back to do it the next time, I have to check it again. It is unrelated to the sim deciding to deactivate players that I had active coming into the game.

It's good you're thinking about play overuse - it's an issue, some do focus on a small core of plays - but in my opinion, the ideas are more a plaster (bandaid?) over an open fracture that has sliced arteries open.

The game has always had, will always have a delicate balance between offence and defence. The problem is that balance is delicate - even a minor small tweak can have consequences.

The goal would be for every offensive play to work well against some defences, poorly against others. Ditto for defences against offensive plays. In short, if you have an offensive play X, then it'll have a good probably of working against defence Y but would be stuffed by defence Z.

The problem for the game is to get that kinda balance, it's going to be low level. Right now, the game has to have generalisations improved NOT specific plays - ie Zone defence against rush, passing etc. As general concepts, they need the JDB love because we need to be in a position where you are able, with good planning to be in a position where running, passing, mix, man, zone, blitzing, all have strengths and weaknesses but it's down to gameplanning that you maximise strengths and weaknesses.

As that generalisation gets resolved, then there's more upside to offences expanding their range - which in turn drives defensive planning.

I get the points you make, and there's an argument to increase the effect of play over use, but for now things need to develop organically rather than artificial constraints - especially given there's a RNG element.

You're driving late in title game... 3rd and 10 at the opp 15 with 2s left. Want your best passing play as per rule - oh ****, you've not used enough diff plays due to randomness, so end up with a GL run up the middle, stuffed.

Thanks for your patience! I think I finally have found what's happening. Let's see if it works this time, I'm making a fix for the week 13 games. Please check your depth chart - I did activate/deactivate a few players to check some things just now and I should have restored it to where it was but would like you to double-check it.

Just looked everything over, good to go.

Here's hoping it's fixed - your patience is exactly what the test league is all about.

A call by the AI coach in that game situation also needs to be prevented, which is part of improving the AI coach and play calls in general. Currently the AI coach is using GL plays in non GL situations, and that needs fixing. Also should be a come from behind mode, which is pass oriented or all passing depending on field position, score, and clock. Ive got a list, another is using time outs when you have oppossing team pinned near their end zone at the end of the first half. Going for it on 4th and inches based on field position, which is only by rule but should also be available to AI/program managed teams. Automatic use of the GL to defend against the Power I and 2 TE formations should also be changed and/or eliminated, I use a rule to prevent that and use a different defense based on opposing teams tendencies. Punt returner having higher % of not catching the punt inside the 6 yard line, that happens rarely in the NFL or the teturner loses his job.

Several years ago someone posted that the game was more a simulation of HS than NFL. I would say that the current version is more a sim of Pop Warner with better passing %'s, no long passes. Overuse of the GL both by the AI coach and either intentional or not by human team management is much less of a simulation of any level of football.

Do you mean AI owned team or the head coach of an owned team? For the former, it may be previously setup rules by a human owner. Equally, we can quibble that some AI decisions can be improved, an evolution not a revolution, but the risk you then have is a perfect AI dominates - and shows human owners how to play the game.

IMO, AI owned teams shouldn't be dominant. Any league with 16 AI, 16 humans where the playoffs are contested solely by AI will die.

Think punt returns have been discussed before, can recall some talks around that.


Think it was you saying that in a league thread ;)

I just think discussing in this thread is kinda a distraction - not that the comments aren't valid - just that the thread was set up for discussion / feedback on depth charts work; I'm as guilty as you are by responding, but the more off topic replies, the more difficult it'll be for JDB to sort the signal to noise ratio out.

Might it be an idea for you to create a separate thread?

Both, and youre right Martin, need to start a different thread for AI play selection and use issues. Will do.