New Sticky Note

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

The new user interface is in preview!

Want to check it out? Click here! (If you don't like it, you can still switch back)

League Forums

Main - Beta Chat

Re: Version 0.4.3 Release Candidate Discussion

By jdavidbakr - Site Admin
6/05/2018 8:55 am
setherick wrote:
I haven't watched the film on this epic disaster tho: https://beta87.myfootballnow.com/box/1886

At first glance, Portland used one defensive call all game against the 113. So much for teams getting penalized for overusing the blitz, eh?

I mean why game plan when you can just call the Nickle Weak Blitz and the 4-3 WLB MLB blitz all game? Lame.


I'd like to see a few more games before jumping to conclusions. I mentioned earlier in this thread that a new method I'm using to combat the blitz is that the QB has a probability (based on his experience rating) to not experience the adverse effects of pressure when facing a blitz, which means his pass won't be penalized and I'm even going so far as to remove the distance penalty.

On experience, btw: I know a lot has been said about being frustrated that it takes too long for players to get to 100% play knowledge and experience. I want to defend that for a moment ... yes, an NFL QB should be intimately familiar with every play he is running, but I'm not just trying to simulate that here. My goal is to try to avoid players hitting the hard cap of never being able to improve. I don't care what you're doing, whether it's piloting a 747 or selling cars or writing a football simulation or playing professional football, you can always have room to improve. The idea is that a 12-year vet -should- be more savvy than a 5-year vet, which should be more savvy than a rookie. It's intentionally a bar that cannot be met, and gives you some reason to pay attention to that when building your team.

Re: Version 0.4.3 Release Candidate Discussion

By mardn72
6/05/2018 9:17 am
I’ll add that I appreciate the play knowledge aspect a lot. I’ve always noticed the free agents I sign perform better after a full season with the team. I think that makes sense. I also appreciate that veterans that are slowing down can still play well due to their play knowledge. It feels realistic to me.

Re: Version 0.4.3 Release Candidate Discussion

By setherick
6/05/2018 2:54 pm
jdavidbakr wrote:
I want to defend that for a moment ... yes, an NFL QB should be intimately familiar with every play he is running, but I'm not just trying to simulate that here. My goal is to try to avoid players hitting the hard cap of never being able to improve.


I mean that's great and all, but you're missing the point. The point was and has been it takes players __too__ long to gain __meaningful__ experience. And this experience is gained linearly with plays run. And this experience does not appear to be tied to any attribute like INT in any __meaningful__ way. If this is what you want to simulate, why not have experience follow a classic e curve using INT and DI as modifiers. Then it would be more worthwhile to draft that 100 INT, 100 DI QB.
Last edited at 6/05/2018 6:56 pm

Re: Version 0.4.3 Release Candidate Discussion

By Ragnulf-le-maudit
6/06/2018 3:47 am
It's a sure touchdown !... Uh… no…
https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/8194#1486280
Edit : wrong link, the right one is Seth's post below :)

QB scramble
https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/8194#1486323

How did he knocked that ball down ?
https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/8194#1486336
Last edited at 6/06/2018 5:51 am

Re: Version 0.4.3 Release Candidate Discussion

By setherick
6/06/2018 5:23 am
This is the non-touchdown that is most irritating from that game: https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/8194#1486279

I even rotated over a WR to play running back to see if that made a difference in RB passing. It doesn't. But I'm sure this is just the fact that my QB has no experience with this play. I mean that perfectly explains why can't complete a 5 yard pass to the flat to a wide open RB at least once a game.

I'm just glad that this 100 Catch WR dropped this wide open short pass from a 100 Accuracy QB with 75 play knowledge: https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/8194#1486311
Last edited at 6/06/2018 5:30 am

Re: Version 0.4.3 Release Candidate Discussion

By Ragnulf-le-maudit
6/06/2018 5:53 am
setherick wrote:
This is the non-touchdown that is most irritating from that game: https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/8194#1486279

This is the one i wanted to show in my post ;)

I even rotated over a WR to play running back to see if that made a difference in RB passing. It doesn't. But I'm sure this is just the fact that my QB has no experience with this play. I mean that perfectly explains why can't complete a 5 yard pass to the flat to a wide open RB at least once a game.

I'm just glad that this 100 Catch WR dropped this wide open short pass from a 100 Accuracy QB with 75 play knowledge: https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/8194#1486311

I'm not that glad :D


Last edited at 6/06/2018 5:54 am

Re: Version 0.4.3 Release Candidate Discussion

By mardn72
6/06/2018 12:54 pm
Yeah, the number of swing passes/short dump off passes affected by adjustments/dives is really feeling annoying. It's not like my swing passes that are averaging 2 yard/catch are overpowered otherwise. I think the probability of that trigger needs to be more heavily tied to distance. It feels good at long distances right now, but too common at short ones.
Last edited at 6/06/2018 2:48 pm

Re: Version 0.4.3 Release Candidate Discussion

By setherick
6/06/2018 2:42 pm
mardn72 wrote:
Yeah, the number of swing passes/short dump off passes affected by adjustments/dives is really feeling annoying. It's not like my swing passes that are averaging 2 yard/catch are overpowered otherwise. I think it the probability of that trigger needs to be more heavily tied to distance. It feels good at long distances right now, but too common at short ones.


I'm convinced that there is a bug in the code that treats passes as thrown behind the LOS differently than passes thrown past the LOS. I've noticed on the HB Flare that the RB route works fine when the RB is past the LOS. I've also noticed on other wheel routes that if the QB waits until the RB is past the LOS that the pass is better. But if the pass is behind the LOS, the RB stops every time. If I really had to bet, I bet it's a divide by 0 error on the distance calculation trying to handle a negative distance from the LOS.

---

Looks like I'm wrong: https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/8194#1486357

That one is definitely behind the LOS.
Last edited at 6/06/2018 5:52 pm

Re: Version 0.4.3 Release Candidate Discussion

By lellow2011
6/07/2018 2:21 am
Is anyone else noticing the complete lack of hurries, and few sacks? There just doesn't seem to be very much pressure.

Re: Version 0.4.3 Release Candidate Discussion

By setherick
6/07/2018 4:32 am
lellow2011 wrote:
Is anyone else noticing the complete lack of hurries, and few sacks? There just doesn't seem to be very much pressure.


Yes and no. There are definitely fewer sacks and hurries, but in both leagues, the numbers aren't too far off what the NFL was last year: https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/sacks-per-game

I think it feels like there are a lot fewer because there had been so many in the past. Also, interior blocking a lot better so DTs can't just dominate 100 PB OL now. Also, pass blocking updates have fixed one of the biggest exploits -- the LG runs across the field for no reason leaving the gap that the WLB can blitz through exploit, so LB sacks fell immediately overnight.

I also think sacks will come up as folks adjust to the fact that they just can't play fast DEs with no skill.
Last edited at 6/07/2018 6:10 am