Maybe ... but hear me out. I built out a game plan that would call a lot of long passes so that I could throw the underneath routes. I thought that short routes weren't penalized. Maybe I choose the wrong deep passing plays though. I might have picked ones where the under route was a medium pass.

If that's the issue, then I'm back to calling plays like I normally would. :)

Also, to be fair, I have no problem with long pass offenses getting destroyed. I tried the under route game as a test, and it failed pretty miserably in Rivals. In USFL, I had more of a traditional game plan, but still more long passes than normal (and rules).

I was more concerned with how short long passes were distance wise.

Long pass plays won't look for the short route until the QB decided that the long pass isn't open, but he will first wait for the primary receiver to complete his route to the decision point. Ultimately a long pass play should primarily attempt the long pass, with the short pass as the last resort.

This is inconsistently applied. The 212 TE Out and the 113 Weak Ins and Outs both target the TE as the primary receiver more than they target any of the long routes. Those are just the two I can think of off the top of my head; there are others.

Personally, I like a game plan that is mostly short passes and runs, so it doesn't bother me. I was just trying some things based on what I knew of the distance penalties.

4.4 went way overboard, same as 4.3 did, ito of gameplay balance. If you keep trying to please a small segment of the players in this game, you are going to lose others. Here are copies/paste of messages that I received from a 2 yr player that has quit the game as a result of 4.4. This was an owner that was a pleasure to have in a league, he posted in the GG threads, and was always actively working on his roster & game.



Am hoping I dont get more messages like this one, Ive already had a couple of others who are frustrated and considering leaving the game, which is why I posted this. if the total number of players on this game is any kind of priority, I would keep a close eye on how many are dropping out. I wont be dropping out, even though I also do not like the new version as it stands. I choose to adapt my gameplan to it the best that I can, but not everyone else has the same attitude and willingness to do so. In many cases, the "plusses" of 4.4 are not outweighing the "negatives".

I'm confused. Did the person that quit think that 0.4.3 was close to being a simulation? Because I know when I think of simulation, I think 10,000 yards and 119 TDs in one season: https://private75.myfootballnow.com/player/5231

Or I think of 700+ yards per game, which is what I was putting up in MFN-19.

I get why people are upset. Their game plans don't work anymore. But, let's be real for a minute, their game plans (and mine too) were set up for video game play and not simulation play.

Plus 0.4.3 was an unstable mess. It was full of nerfs to prevent huge stat outbursts, and we all found ways around those anyway.

I know that people on the forums are really convinced that 0.4.4 is what brought the nerf cannon, but really, all it did was correct for some long standing issues with the game. The main one being downfield coverage (and I'm still seeing DBs get beaten a lot).

So while I'm tired of defending it, I also can't stand people that conflate rumor from actual fact. So let's lay out the actual facts of 0.4.4:

1) Ray and I IN FACT did NOT write the code. NOR did we pay JDB to **** with players that we don't like. All we did was report bugs, break down film, and give suggestions about how to fix it. If someone doesn't like it, MFN-1 is FREE TO JOIN like any other league.

And my Denver team is OPEN NOW for someone to take because I'm sick AF of listening to all the whiners out there that haven't broken down a single play of game film since they joined MFN. And I'm definitely sick AF listening to the complaints about JDB as a developer without anyone stepping up to help the game along.

Finally, FACT there are FEW people that play this game that understand code, testing, and football well enough to actual break down a game film and find the specific problem with the code without actually reading it and then offer a suggestion that moves MFN closer to IRL football.

2) FACT in 0.4.3 downfield coverage was broken, badly. That's what led to the statistical outbursts above, and FACT 0.4.4 fixed that issue. No more DBs watching a streaking WR run right past; no more LBs standing and watching an RB hit the edge and take off for a 60 yard gain.

3) FACT 0.4.4 changed the accuracy and catching algorithms, and FACT these impact more than just hook and curl routes. They made these routes more viable, but the changes also made alternate routes more viable as well.

4) FACT games in 0.4.4 look much closer to NFL games than 0.4.3, which resembled some crazy hybrid of Madden and Strat-o-matic. Big plays, especially when two vets go at it, are few, far between, and game breaking. Offensive strategy matter more as you have to sustain drives in order to score as you can't rely on getting 1 or 2 big plays per drive anymore (I **** at this currently -- I need to figure out why my third down strategy has failed me).

But let's not just dwell on the positive. There are also a few facts about 0.4.4 that are not great.

1) FACT there is a bug in OL blocking that is contributing to sacks on medium passing plays especially. If that bug is fixed, QBs will have an easier time finding open receivers down the field and won't have to rely on check downs.

2) FACT RBs run routes too fast, and so for that matter, do TEs on check down routes. Right now, there is not a concept of a block and release for check down routes. That's causing QBs to check down too quickly to RBs and TEs.

3) QB decision clocks are off on SOME short, SOME medium, and ALMOST ALL long passing plays. In IRL, on a long pass, the QB throws to a spot and let's the WR run under it unless that QB is Patrick Mahomes or Ben Roethlisberger. Those guys just throw a 60 yard dart and be done with it. MFN QBs are waiting too long to throw those long *****, which means that aren't willing to gamble more. Also, on some of the short plays QBs are throwing the ball too quickly still, but this is so indeterminable that I don't think it's an actual bug but rather something else.

No, really, those are the only three things I can think of that are holding teams back from developing higher performing offenses. Fixing an OL bug, which I think should be easy enough, and adding a block and release concept to TEs and RBs so that QBs have an additional second for downfield passes.

That's it.

If those two things are fixed and enhanced, this is probably the most complete football sim out there. ...and it's still free.

I want to take a moment to give a public 'thank you' to Seth and Ray and everyone else who has provided valuable feedback through the development of the game. I probably don't say that enough, but I am extremely grateful for the candid conversations we are able to have in the beta forums. The game would not be at the point it is today were in not for the community feedback.

Thank you!

And a great big thank you for your continued work on the game

In theory of course , but if custom qb progressions were enabled .....and you made the shorter route the primary option would the qb decide to throw it quicker?

I see this a way of taking less sacks...Same with qbs running...their not very elusive at all right now .

The other problem is that right now this isn't working as designed. QBs don't gamble on downfield routes even if they are 50/50 ***** because they continue to wait too long into the receiver's route to make a decision or need the WR to be wide open.

This means that the underneath receivers are getting to their spots so quickly they become the primary target regardless.

Don't get me wrong, I don't actually mind this. (Well, I mind that QBs don't occasionally take shots downfield, but I have an idea how to change that in the other thread.) But it does mean that I've started treating long passes as short passes.