Depth chart governance discussion

Would like to see the no cut restriction also applied to end of season, where the auto manager resigns starters based on years experience, instead of 6 year contracts at full value for a 6 - 10 yr vet depending on position. RB and WR are more affected once they hit the 9 yr season mark. OL and DL can go much longer, still effective in 12-13 seasons. DBs & LBs in between. All the previous 1st round draft choices are let go after their initial contract, which is what ruins a computer run team roster and unfair to a new owner having to make up for it.

I'd like to follow up now that I've had the day to ponder how to make something really bad into something I am of the belief it was intended to do.
I believe the intentions are to fix AI run teams from having such rosters with EG 4 dbs.

I would be completely fine if the current beta depth chart governance (DCG) was used ONLY for AI run teams.
User controlled teams should NOT be restricted to the current and completely impossible to achieve depth chart requirements.

If the goal is to fix a user from using a player for an edge - then we are missing the goal. We all know that is an issue with the plays themselves and not a roster issue.

Ai can have the current depth chart garbage, and the Users can manage their rosters, depth charts, and especially injury/inactive players as they wish and as injuries dictate the user to do so.
It really bothers me when I have enough players to fulfill starters plus 1+X backups post injury inactivation, yet the AI will not allow me to do so.

Unfathomably worse - I'm being forced to activate players with injury levels - or multiple injury levels below 50. My cut off for injury deactivation is 65. You got 65% or less of yer legs, arms etc - you're sitting.
Being forced to play players with severe injuries is absolute suckdom - especially when ive got enough starters and backups at that position.

If the DL requires LDE, RDE, and a DT and I have 4 DL persons available, then I better be allowed to roll with 4.

We see it in the NFL all the time.
This team is rolling with only 1 backup on the o line., or the dl, or only 1 extra WR - insert ANY position.
I'm not against requiring say 6 DL, but I'm directly opposed to only being allowed to have 2 of them inactive - same for OL, DB, LB, TE, and WR.

There are NOT ENOUGH players generated in Alpha to make this work.
There are NOT ENOUGH players generated in Alpha to make this work.
There are NOT ENOUGH players generated in Alpha to make this work.


I'm cutting players in beta to meet the unmeetable demands of the DCG.
15 players over 6 starting position should never, ever lead to the AI overriding anything the user dictates regarding inactives.

If it does not work here in the land of players of plenty, it sure as heck is not going to work in the land of scarcity that exists in Alpha.

This is where i state a question: should I put all of my LBs into my Dline on my depth chart? Is THAT the workaround no ones telling anyone about? If so, like heck Ima put DEs at LB... Like, that's cheating. Forced into doing something that the DCG is trying to fix - playing players out of position.
Which we do because there's not enough qaulity players available or generated at any position.

Any time the USer - THE CUSTOMER - is prevented or restricted by items being implemented to fix AI issues or position abuses - it is a failure.

The current DGC makes all of that the User's issue, and fully takes roster control AWAY from the user..

The current roster and depth chart in beta are not viable in Alpha. In no way.
If you want to fix AI roster issues, then limit the DGC to ONLY AI teams.

We users... The simplest thing to express is we want full control.
For a game striving to become as close to an NFL sim as possible - implementing the current DGC on users - THE CUSTOMER - is and will be a disaster if the DGC is released to Alpha.

If trying to fix the engine from screwing up a user team was the goal - 100% FAILURE.
If trying to fix AI run teams is the goal - then limit the Depth Chart Governance to ONLY AI teams.

The more that is taken away from the user, the further we are from alpha.

The bottom line is fixing plays, default player weights should come well before forcing AI rosters decisions on our customer base.. For the former is exactly why MFN is bothering with all this disastrous attempt to for roster requirements beyond positional requirements. 15 plays is MORE than enough to cover 6 positions, nut we're only allowed 3 inactives between the dl and lb. 2 on the OL.

This avenue should not be pursued further (and I absolutely think it should be dropped in entirety as concept.

It's easier to accept failure and move on than to force a failure into a success.
The current DCG is an absolute failure. Both in the fact AI takes control from the customer and that there are not enough players of quality (mediocre to exceptional) generated or available in alpha. Even in beta, where there's an abundance of players, the restrictions are unmanageable.

It's time to try another path for the ideas trying to be accomplished, or scrap such notions entirely.

MFN-1 is 18 (EIGHTEEN!!!) pages in regarding the DCG, and the current approach is not working.

To attempt to fail, to try again, and then continue to work towards the solution is exactly where achievement is obtained.
Never test to see if something works - always test to see if something does not.
The difference between making a profit and taking a loss is knowing when to take the loss.

The current DCG is the loss.

It is definitely time to start considering the DCG is worth tabling as a future fix.

**Specifically: after fixing player weights, player generation, the number of players generated for (any) draft, and the very long term and systematically destructive broken play issues instead of focusing on preventing users (the Customer, the purchaser, the source of all things profitable which is the actual and never forget long term objective) from directly managing and controlling their rosters.**

Once again instead of fixing the gander (broken plays, player weights, and player generation), MFN is trying to fix the goose (the user).

Customers pay for the idea of control. The purchasing funnel always ends with an exchange of actual money for the perception of empowerment and/or control of something.
Let us not forget that as we move forward.

It's clearly time to try a different approach IF the DCG is going to be a continued avenue of "improvement."

I suggest again that the current DCG is either abandoned, tabled, or the peasants way out - only forced upon AI run teams.
Taking control from the user and giving it to the AI is always the wrong choice.

I WANT MY PLAYER BACK.
Forced and decided by the AI for a cut, and althoug h my first priority waiver claim, DENIED.
GIVE ME MY ROOKIE BACK.

I didn't cut him, the AI did.
The depth chart disaster is simply a disaster.

I'm trying to sign players to meet the position requirements while having the AI cut players I want to keep.Ive got 8 DL. I should be able to have 4 of them inactive.
I used to be able to. In alpha I still can do so.
Here, Signings occur at game sim instead of midweek (midweek is alpha, dafuq is it not that way in beta?). AI cuts of players I signed AT THAT SIM (which was a sim that in alpha does not sign players).

OMG, the roster - which used to be just fine and not broke for the USer, is completely broken for the USer.

this is fix the engine or i quit territory - but I won't paint myself into that corner again.
The gravity is the same.
The DCG is so broken its a gamebreaker.
The DCG, if released as is into alpha, will destroy this game.

I certainly will not pay for MFN in it's current state.
The giving of roster control to the AI and being completely taken from the USer is the type of thing that kills games.

I should not be frantically trying to fix what the AI did to my team. EVER.
The situation is a clear example that the current roster ideas absolutely FAIL in their implementation.
Dealbreaker. Game breaking. Untenable and unacceptable to take 100% of the control from the customer and give it to the AI.

It's high time we beta's had some guidelines, too.
Here it is; Test this; here's how to test it and here's what you need to do to test it.
The fact that I was surprised by this is the experience JDB needs to focus on.
Thank god im not new.
Read the above as Ive been around long enough to know well enough what I've chosen to be a part of - and that rando Joe Newcomer will just walk away in frustration.
I have no idea exactly what is being tested, nor do I have any direction about HOW to test whatever "it" is.

The bonus is now i'm short a player for the DCG active requirements at DB and will have to cut more quality only to sign some trash player to meet the demands of the DCG.
I spent a couple hours trying to get my Dline to be acceptable to the DCG demands, only to end up having the AI cut players and leave me absent of meeting the DCG requirements not only at Dline, but alaso at DB.
Trying to sign players to fix DCG requirements at Dline actually resulted in me being unable to meet the requiremenst I had fulfilled at DB.
I added players to correct the DCG requirements only to end up going from -3 players to -4. My roster problems were compounded by signing players to fix my roster issues.
What a catch-22.
an infinite loop of trying to fix something that's only going to become more broken.
I'll stop efforting before i go to -5, -6, -7 , -X players.

There is no net gain to be had. Only a compounding of the og issue.
3 hours is a lot of roster work to go from -3 down to -4 down.
SO, i'm not gonna try to keep the pace with the AI anymore. It's not 2 steps forward to get 1 step back. it's just 1 step back.
I gained three to end up down 4.
NOPE!

WHat in the heck???
HOW??? WHY???

Im still short at DL.
And now at DB, too.
Trying to fix a problem created by the AI has only created an even bigger problem.
And I lost my best Rook, the long term core of my DBs, to boot.
Sisyphus had a better situation.

There is no solution, I'm caught in the spiral that has been created by the DCG.
Instead of being short 3 players because of injuries, now I'm short FOUR because of AI fruckeries.

Which will lead to the AI going full ape at the next sim.g
Honestly, I give. I don't have the time to try to outmaneuver the DCG.
I'm scre wed, see ya next season, with whatever I have left.
CLearly, the choices are not mine.
So, I give up. The AI will do what it's going to do no matter what I do.

I'm defeated to the point of becoming unwilling to try.
Can't fix what the AI keeps breaking.
Even if I wanted to, i don't have the HOURS to do so, and i'm "mostly retired."
As in i got time, but there is no amount of time I can put in to counter the DCG and the AI.
3 hours. Only to end up worse than I was.
I'm lucky I had the time that day. Most folks do not have that kind of time to give on any day. Even as "mostly retired," I actually do not have 3 hours to give very often. No one should ever have to spend 3 hours of roster time post draft. Ever.
Mostly retired guy works 2 jobs and is raising a grandson, but hey, call me lazy, I've gotten used to it.

*************************************
A constant cycle of fixing things that will be broken the next day, anyway.
SO, i'm done trying to compete with the AI for control of my roster.
It is not fun. Not at all. It's exhausting and a CHORE. Not fun. Not fixable. Uncontrollable.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

NOT OK. NOT RELEASABLE.

I can not spend that much time fixing wat the AI does after spending all the time trying to fix what the AI has done the night before.

I spent about 3 hours going through FA's and putting out contracts prior to wk 5 game sim - thinking that contract would execute on midweek AS THEY DO IN ALPHA -only to have players cut - including one of the players i put a new contract on.
Sc REW that madness.
In the immortal words of HArry Carry - HOLLEEE COOOW!

There's not even a day of grace for the user to implement the "next step" after cuttings and signings.

WHAT A NIGHTMARE.

as a now 8 year player of MFN, this is not my mistake!
I know what I'm doing. I consider roster stuff to be a skill I'm better at. I wrote the book on overrides a few years ago (since deleted by MFN because nothing in MFN is permanent - not even forum posts).

FIx this DCG garbage, abandon the current efforts of forcing something that will not work and can not work into something that some - not many - want to force to work, and let's get back to making progress instead of creating mistakes.

No one likes it. 18 pages!!!

Just a terrible terrible roster engine right now.
WORST EVER.
STOP STEALING MY CHOICES. STOP RANDOMLY CUTTING MY PLAYERS> JUST STAHP this absolute mistake of a DCG!!!
I tore down my roster to 33 players. I hit TC with 60.
I made every choice i wished and was absolute in my decisions - and im in absolute AI roster takeover purgatory/hades/the Inferno H, E double hockey sticks (that's a lot of effort to say h e l l btw- because of the DCG.

Cutting my best rookie and getting screwed by the waiver (and by an AI run team to boot) is a reason to quit.
Thank goodness this is not my alpha team.
Thank goodness I'm not a newcomer.
STEALING 2 weeks of my time spent on roster work in a single sim is not ok.

HOURS of my time gone in a 30 minute sim.

What a waste of my time.

TIME IS MONEY.

I won't get all those hours back.
EVER.

Im tired and frankly getting a bit peessed off that the AI is screwing me in ways Its never screwed me before because of the DCG requirements.

Fix what the AI did to my team, get rid of the current DCG. Beta signing should execute as they do in Alpha - AT THE MID WEEK SIM.

Holy cow. tear down, rebuild, work work work, and just like that I lose my best talent - and it's not because of anything I did. Not my choices.
If this DCG gets to ALPHA, MFN is scre- wed.

What a total punch in the mouth. What a total waste. Forced to take action to meet the DCG and completely F;d over because of the DCG.
Explain to me how 15 players is not enough to cover 6 positions?
ON the o line, explain to me how 12 Oline players is not enough?

if 2 -3 injuries on my o line/ dline/ or lbs is enough to create AI roster fruckery, WE HAVE A PROBLEM, Houston.
That's exactly what we have.

This is not user control.

In no way will I spend money on this trash.
Money equals control.

Get rid of the DCG, table it, and give me back my roster. Give roster control back to the User.

Ive been playing since 2018. I know what I'm doing. I definitely got F'd because the DCG is a DISASTER.

Give me back LAwson. He was a core player for me. How do I replace a player that would have been an 8-9 yr starter at Safety?
I don't.
Stuff people never play MFN again over #1: roster fruckery from the AI.

We're not fixing the roster problem, we're making it WORSE!

This is not ok.

THE DCG IS A DISASTER. The AI cut him, AND I WANT HIM BACK.
https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/player/29092?game_type_id=2&stat=defense

FIX IT PLEASE JDB.
It's beta, so fix it because in beta this should be a fixable situation.
Either testors are equipped to test, or we are not.
I'd like to get my tools back so I can get back to work, tyvm.

GIVE ME MY BEST ROOKIE BACK!
I refuse to pay or play a game where the AI has priority over the human.
MFN - beta wise - has really , really made a mistake that can not be fixed or worked with by the user.
Ive never had the AI take over my team and cut players until now.
All because I can not have more than 3 inactive dl and lbs combined.
I have 15 total, but i sure got Fd over by the engine.
Ive never been f'd over by the engine.
EVer.
Until now.
DCG has got to go away.
It absolutely is not a workable situation for the customer.

What a waste of a rebuild. Weeks of work tossed over because of injuries and an AI roster takeover.
This is sooo much worse than what we have.
Again - Ive never had the AI f me over until the DCG.
..and it's specifically because of injuries and not because of quantity of position.
I got the extra players, but i don't meet the DCG X factor - whatever the heck they are (ZERO explanation or wiki).
8 years in and this is the first time the AI ran me over.
Like a dog on a highway.

I don't like this.
i want my player back.
i WANT TO CONTINUE MY ROSTER PLAN, ABSENT AI INTERFERENCE AND ABSENT THE DCG.

GIVE ME BACK MY ROSTER CONTROL!!!

GIVE ME BACK MY ROSTER!!!!
GET RID OF THE DCG.

The biggest beta problem is how much control has been taken from the customer and given to the AI.
If I wanted to play roster only and let the engine control my roster, i'd play roster only.

I hate doing things twice, and doing the work only to have the result stolen from me is even worse.
Seriously - the AI just took DAYS of effort i put in to waste.
Not only were players stolen - BUT MY TIME WAS AS WELL.

DO NOT EVER STEAL MY TIME.
Time is the only thing no one ever can get back.
I can choose to give it, but no person, place, or thing should ever take it.

I can not explain how much I dislike the DCG.
DO NOT RELEASE THIS NIGHTMARE UPON THE ALPHA WORLD.

What a waste of time.
If the AI is going to control my roster anyway - regardless of my effort, then why am I even playing in the first place?
The DCG is THE most broken thing in MFN right now, and that really is a statement in consideration of all the other seriously broken things.

MFN took something that was not broken for players and totally broke it!

Let's review the point of this depth chart governance so we're all on the same page and it's actually fixing a real issue.

First, this does not change how computer-controlled teams manage their rosters — it's purely about human-controlled teams whose rosters don't have the players needed to properly field a lineup.

Back to the beginning: what problem are we trying to fix? Perhaps this isn’t the right solution, but it's worth revisiting.

The original problem came from players putting athletes into their depth charts who would be, in real life, absolutely unrealistic, yet in MFN gave them an advantage. I had initially hoped that this freedom would self-correct as the game engine properly simulated everything, but I’ve concluded there will always be something users can exploit. Rather than spend all development time chasing cat-and-mouse issues, I added the player position-change matrix to require that you place players in the positions they were initially created for. This rule is in effect across all leagues whose league owners have not disabled it.

The depth chart governance aims to prevent scenarios like cutting all your QBs and fielding a team without a real QB—piling up losses and tanking for the #1 draft pick because the computer won’t have a viable QB to field. Is that an overreach in trying to control the user experience? My main goal is to make this game feel like you’re playing against actual NFL teams. When someone does this kind of thing, it breaks the illusion. But, as I noted above, it may still be a cat-and-mouse game—people will always try to find workarounds. In the QB example, instead of not having a QB, they could sign the lowest-rated QB in free agency and essentially achieve the same effect. But at least they’d have an actual QB on the roster.

So, with all that in mind, am I losing the forest for the trees here? What do you all think?

Not to lose my last post but I did want to mention that I've added this control to the logic.

AI is absolute trash and it is mostly useless. It is being forced upon us by the billionaires who have invested TRILLIONS into this garbage. Stop playing along. In the not too distant future, those of you who used AI will be mocked relentlessly.

Overall, I prefer the challenge of managing a roster using players in their designated positions, which increases the importance of making good choices in the draft, same as RL NFL. It also is a benefit to those who know what to look for in the FA pool. I also would prefer the challenge of having to select a full 40 active offensive plays and 30 defensive plays, or the auto manager correcting any under or over selection.

Rules and current play selection method are creating overuse, and I would really prefer overuse and overuse penalty to be prevented and eliminated. Instead of overuse, the computer coach switches the play to another same type play (short pass for example) based on gameplan settings. Would also like to see the coaches have more importance and influence on the game, more of a simulation to RL NFL.

The current league with the fewest open, computer managed teams is the Ultimate Legends RO league, with 3 open teams. One of the reasons is that managing an RO team does not require gameplanning, or rules, or play selection. An RO team requires the least amount of time to play. I dont like RO, especially in its current form, but can appreciate why there are those who do and why it currently has the highest % of human owners, but not by much. The NFL League is close behind with only 4 computer owned teams, and the Continental is next with 6.

As in RL NFL, the General Manager and Head Coach roles are not handled by the same person. That is the direction I would like to see MFN headed. Not only should the HC determine the playbook, but the HC along with the Coordinators should control the gameplan and dynamics during a game. The team owner/manager could control the gameplay through the choice and hiring/firing of coaches. No rules. Coach tendencies instead. Like how aggressive on going for it on 4th down. Selection of plays being performance and results orientated, without overuse.

Trading was also a reason that some people preferred a league with no trading, as a bad trade, which is why there were things like trade committees in a few leagues, to review a trade that was complained about.

So, I would prefer a game that is more of a simulation to RL NFL team ownership/management than not, and one where exploits are reduced or eliminated, creating more of a level playing field for all MFN players. As it is now, the same few consistently win the LCs and division titles, myself included. The reason is that there is a small window of what works the best in MFN. Key player positions, especially on defense, and limited selection of plays. You either know what those are and do the same to compete, or you reduce you chance to win.

Wouldn't it just be easier to have the game engine send a message to the league administrator and let them handle it?
Fines, lost draft picks, and/or expulsion from said league as possible punishment should take care of the issue.
Or am I missing something?

League admins can't do fines or take draft picks away - nor should they; can be abused.

An example why it's needed is in a league I admin. Guy deactivated his QBs to tank; game engine puts in best player with QB stats - was a C. Lost one game, bizarrely won a second.

It's also needed as not everyone logs in every day. You've injuries, leading to players out et, then it's got to be handled.