New Sticky Note

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

League Forums

Main - League News/General Discussion

Re: 2030 Season

By lellow2011
12/08/2016 3:21 pm
The majority of the -2s to +1s seems to be minor movements in weight, for some reason that gets calculated into overall and small movements in veterans seems to show up on their progress but large changes in weight do not show up on the progress chart from what I have observed.
Last edited at 12/08/2016 3:21 pm

Re: 2030 Season

By raymattison21
12/08/2016 3:42 pm
lellow2011 wrote:
WarEagle wrote:
Typical crappy camp for me.

Rookies:
1.06 DE Sawyer -2 (vol 50)
1.13 CB Huggard -8 (vol 74)
1.22 CB Patrick -2 (vol 34)
1.31 TE Porter +2 (vol 92) (may switch to OL eventually)
4.31 QB Spadafora -2 (vol 32)
5.31 WR Hines +4 (vol 72)
6.31 C Villarreal -1(vol 78)
7.31 FS Palmer +4 (vol 88)


Entire 60-Man Roster:
2 players +4
1 player +2
5 players +1
17 players 0
18 players -1
11 players -2
6 players -3 or more

That's 52 out of 60 players who didn't improve at all.

With a HC rated 97 and OC/DC both rated at 92, I would have expected some actual positive progress to be made in TC.

What does it take to actually have a good camp?

Is TC progress just as random as everything else?

It's almost funny. I know I said that I always expect to have a poor TC, but each time I still find myself actually looking forward to it thinking "maybe this is the year I have a good camp"! Nope.

In all the many, many, many TCs my teams have gone through, I've had 2 that were good.



I'm pretty sure which way a player will progress is totally random

Rookies:
1-12: SS-#56 Louis Palmer (60/98)(+7/0)(82 vol.)
-- strip ball went up, everything else stayed at max
2-11: WLB-#59 Christopher Triche (42/89)(+7/+7)(92 vol.)
-- Everything went up, he now shows max potential in everything relevant LB attribute except run defense and strip ball
3-05: LG-##77 Don Bryant (48/88)(+5/+1)(84 vol.)
-- Pass blocking probably won't max out, his run blocking improved a bit though
My other 2 rookies were both Free Agent signings, they aren't very good but will probably make the final 53

Entire 53-Man Roster: Including rookies
1 Player : -3
7 Players: -2
16 Players: -1
16 Players: 0
9 Players: +1
1 Player: +2
1 Player: +3
1 Player +4
1 Player +7

Coaches:
HC: 96
OC: 95
DC: 93
QB: 84
RB: 79
OL: 83
WR: 73
TE: 75
DL: 85
LB: 79
DB: 76
K/P: 83

Oldest Coach: 46
Oldest Position Coach: 39



As much as camps went....I still think GB got better players, Not to knock either owner...but what do I know...anyway. To me they are all between A + and B + players . ....you can ask for much more. Except the boom ..

Re: 2030 Season

By jdavidbakr - Site Admin
12/08/2016 4:17 pm
Your coaching staff influences the movement of the "current" values - the better your coaching staff scores, the faster your players will reach their potential. Volatility influences the movement of the "future" values. The smaller the gap between current and future, the less movement there will be for each value. Older players will begin to decline in various skills. Most players should see minimal movement of the future values, but the higher the volatility a player has the more their future will move. Volatility is exponential in nature, so the difference between a 50 volatility and a 60 volatility is twice the difference between a 40 and a 50.

You should expect of the high volatility to eventually have an even number of rises and falls. War Eagle's example summed out to a net gain of 1, it is unfortunate that the higher draft picks happened to be drops and the low ones happened to be increases. I assure you that I am not intentionally increasing the odds of a high-rated player busting or a low-rated player booming, but the odds should indeed be 50/50 across the entire spectrum of players.

Re: 2030 Season

By WarEagle
12/08/2016 8:22 pm
So coaches have no impact at all in determining if a player is going to improve or not?

That's typically a pretty important aspect of a coach's job.

So player A would have his potential rise 20 points if he was on a team with all 100 rated coaches OR a team with all 50 rated coaches, and player B would have had his potential drop 20 points also regardless of which one of those teams he was on?

Is that a correct description of the MFN universe regarding this topic?

Re: 2030 Season

By WarEagle
12/09/2016 9:19 am
Just realized I begin the season against NJ.

Not sure I'll be able to tell anything about my team/strategies in this one.

Tough team.

Re: 2030 Season

By Tecra031
12/09/2016 9:37 am
It is only pre-season 1 - I usually play mostly backups are rookies to gain experience during this one

Re: 2030 Season

By JCSwishMan33
12/09/2016 9:43 am
The few rookies I got regressed a little during TC.

But this'll be the first season I play with a full roster of guys that match my cooked-up scheme, so I get to see how that goes.

Also going to be trying to expand my playbook some during the pre-season... Get my guys some familiarity with plays further down in the book.

Should be fun.

Re: 2030 Season

By jdavidbakr - Site Admin
12/09/2016 9:52 am
WarEagle wrote:
So coaches have no impact at all in determining if a player is going to improve or not?

That's typically a pretty important aspect of a coach's job.


A player has an innate potential - the coach determines how quickly he reaches his potential. He doesn't change a player's potential. If coaches could change a player's potential, there would be no need for a draft.

Coaches also improve game-day performance as of version 0.4 based on their attributes.

Re: 2030 Season

By JCSwishMan33
12/09/2016 9:57 am
jdavidbakr wrote:
A player has an innate potential - the coach determines how quickly he reaches his potential. He doesn't change a player's potential. If coaches could change a player's potential, there would be no need for a draft.


But the player's 'innate potential' can itself be changed, via injury / performance... And how much that may (or may not) change is based on Volatility, correct?

Re: 2030 Season

By jdavidbakr - Site Admin
12/09/2016 10:00 am
JCSwishMan33 wrote:
jdavidbakr wrote:
A player has an innate potential - the coach determines how quickly he reaches his potential. He doesn't change a player's potential. If coaches could change a player's potential, there would be no need for a draft.


But the player's 'innate potential' can itself be changed, via injury / performance... And how much that may (or may not) change is based on Volatility, correct?


Yes, it's driven by volatility. I chose not to have injury impact their innate potential just because I know it can be terribly frustrating to finally get your stud player only to have him injured and lose his skills. Essentially volatility represents a difficulty in determining whether a player has the innate potential or not.