I agree, for some reason we cut a CB we just signed.

1. MFN-1 is a test league. Think that needs to be remembered.

2. The issue arose because in a league I admin, someone found it funny to deactivate QBs - leading with a C taking snaps. Let's be honest, it's tanking. Equally, rosters of 54 WRs and 76 CBs aren't anywhere near realistic.

3. Do owners have responsibility over their roster composition? Absolutely.

Having that out of the way, the concept is correct but still being worked out. Started off overly aggressive,now being toned down - balancing was always going to be an issue and feedback from mfn-1 to JDB is only going to help things - feedback having caught some bugs.

IMO, the following things need to be present for it to work.

1. Any players cut should be lowest value - how to determine?
a. Player contract - no, this isn't a financial issue, it's roster composition.
b. Number in position - do you have an area over-represented? If so, candidate for cut. Needs to consider position matrix.
c. cuts should only be made where bringing in players to meet requirements takes team over the player limit.

2. Depth chart filling should always be from within first - needs to be careful to avoid for example, same player listed in starting role.

3. If as per position matrix, you've 11 players capable of playing WR where min required is say 4, that's an area engine should look at.

Example:
WR can be populated by RB, FB, TE, WR.
Only 1 player capable of playing WR active.
Engine needs to then see how many WRs you have - if enough, populate from that; if not, add from RB, FB, TE pool.

4. If not enough players capable of playing a role, then AI should sign players - any player. If they aren't particularly good, then that's on the owner for not sorting their roster out.

5. Injured players should only be considered if probable.

6. QB, P, K are highly specialist positions.

7. As a future advancement, I'd like to see a practice squad system, so when injuries occur then players can be brought up. There should be a player base given the increase in players entering the draft.

The practice squad option would give the owner more control - injuries take player out, nobody else on roster capable of filling role? Promote for a number of games. That would cover QB, P, K especially if PS rules mandated one of each present.

Can also alleviate need for engine to make the contract offers.

Thanks for that, Martin - well stated. The whole purpose of MFN-1 is to ferret out these issues before they hit the general leagues, and this is addressing something that is extremely complex and very hard for me to test all the possible combinations. So I want to echo that playing in MFN-1 can't be about building your team as much as it's about helping make the game better for everyone else.

If your cap gets messed up from all this let me know and I'll clear it, but please don't get too frustrated because being in MFN-1 is naturally going to be unstable. But I really do appreciate you all being here because ultimately it's going to make the game better!

>> Bleeding beta notice

The auto roster management cut 4 key starters unexpectedly at the end of pre season where I had already made the cuts to the roster to get it to the 53 total on that sim. I was able to get back 3 of the 4 which included my starting QB!, the 4th, my prize rookie OL was snatched up by Martin off waivers, I had asked everyone to give me one sim to correct the program mistake but I guess that post was not viewed by all or it was ignored. Either way, ok, but thought you should know David with regard to the auto roster management. There was no time or single sim to get any roster deviations corrected.

I am restructuring a roster on a team I just picked up in the GOSH league, which is currently finishing the draft today. I have 36 players currently contracted and am getting the box message "You must have a minimum of 45 players active and a maximum of 60 players active to prevent the AI from managing your roster." I have 28 pending contract offers, 10 cuts, and 5 more draft picks left in process. Am hoping that the auto-manager does not make any changes on the next sim.
https://enfl.myfootballnow.com/depth-chart

I get all that, but still wondering why both my roster and depth chart were messed with by the engine before yesterday's debacle. As far as I could tell, I was well within all the bounds. I haven't been given any confidence that the issues are being identified and addressed. At this point I'll be surprised if my roster and depth chart are the same in 24 hours, though there should be no reason to expect they won't be.

For when you do begin to focus on the game engine, the seemingly engineered upsets are a major point that needs to be addressed, and this game from yesterday is a prime example. If you don't dig deeply into such games and why all the "luck" is so shockingly one-sided so often, you will never be able to fix it.

Please continue to report MFN-1 making crazy updates. Trust me, I am investigating them, and the reports are extremely helpful and important.

For the GOSH league, nothing is changed on the engine there, it will behave in the same way that it has been.

This change is only in MFN-1. It's being tested. It's not been rolled out to other leagues.

The minimum, maximum message is the same as has always been.

am going to find out for sure what happens when the next sim runs, Ive had 2 major roster disasters in the last week, after not having any for 2 years or more with an average of 8 teams/leagues running at the same time. That was also pre-new version and UI, so that may have something to do with it. Could be brain detereoration, the guesses/options are limited. Overall, I dont think the 45 active is a good roster control, and this is for all leagues not just MFN1. Major roster mishaps are occuring much more frequently this past month, mostly at the end of season. The 45 active players and position filled control kicks in and ruins a roster as the auto manager is horrible at replacement with equal or better players and contracts.

Yet another CB cut today, and a rogue contract to a LG was rejected, so I'm just left down a player with no reason for the cut at all. At least that CB was inactive, but I certainly want him to potentially cover for injury.

Also, the numbers provided in the waiver claim box are not correct. I am not sure the extent to it, but the "remaining cap room" box is telling me I'll be way over cap when that is simply not the case.

I'm seeing this in my logs but I am not clear from the logs why it's happening - I'm adding more verbose information so I can see what exactly is happening in your situation.