I intend to release 0.4.3 with the only upcoming changes being to stabilize the updates, and in future releases intend to limit the scope to a minimal amount of features. This will hopefully allow a more frequent release schedule, as well as reduce the issues from one release to another.

That said, I wanted to get some ideas about what you see as the biggest issues that need focus for the 0.4.4. This is not really feature-focused, but more 'this aspect of the game needs to be improved.' Some ideas for suggestions are 'the running game needs to be better' or 'zone coverage is still bad' or 'punt returns need improving'. I intend to take the suggestions from this thread and make a poll to help drive what gets focus for 0.4.4, and intend to take one 'fix' to be in the next release.

Plays

More Offensive / Defensive plays to pick from.
Add feature that a minimum number of Offensive / Defensive plays must be chosen (or the Ai will). - I know you can get around this via rules, but it's a good start.
Remove the maximum number of Offensive / Defensive plays restriction.

Do away with coaches' playbooks all together. Give players access to all of the plays and as many plays as they want to use. And get rid of play knowledge.

Completely disagree with this.

Drafting a rookie/signing a free agent and they have the same knowledge of the Offense/Defence playbook as a 10 year vet on your team...?

And your trying to replicate/make a realistic pro football game..?

My 25p worth JDB.

Suggestions for 0.4.4 game engine in order of preference.

1.) Improve zone coverage.
2.) Punt returns
3.) Higher penalty for play overuse and have a minimum play selection or the AI will add random plays.
4.) Improve running game - there seems to be many teams switching to a pass only offense.
5.) More play selections for both offense and defense.

Other items to consider for future:

1.) Reduce the 3rd and long completion %. It seems like it is just as easy to get a first down on 3rd and 15 than it is on 3rd and 1.
2.) Slightly reduce the injuries that occur (especially to the running backs). This, with a fix to the run game should have more teams running more of a balanced offense.

I like it as it simulates chemistry to me but I think a rating other than intelligence should come in to play. For example use discipline to regulate the growth as well. I like to think of that rating as selfless and would build team chemistry as well. Or have it separate chemistry level regulated by that as well.

I have suggested this as well I the past. Open up the book, but perhaps have some coaches teach it better than others . I will add to create more plays but still a pipe dream.....

Personally I don't like the overuse penalty . ..or the way it works. I would like to go the route of using audibles. Once they show that look it's over. I will cause users to diversify thier book. As well as dropping in some screen passes.

It the blitz that's a killer not 4 deep getting abused. I am closer to only penalizing blitzes only but like I said I just don't like it.

I agree with everyone s suggestions here in this thread . This one points out some of the most obvious and workable fixes as we have be refining these for a long time now.

I would like to point out that more speed might help zone as well as being aware of the hash marks prior to snap

PR could be helped with less static blocking........ strength is overrated because blocks are held too long

I touched on play abuse earlier

Run blocking falls in to the same problem in the return game. More futility in blocking . .....more broken blocks or movement during the lock up..... as well as more broken tackles and dragging of players .

Change the run game in general. A big guy has to have some value being a workhorse. Not just using speed to get that ten yard clip. The differenciation needs to be there. Explosion is ok but small backs should get smashed in big sets....aka fatigue quicker from big hits. Thurman Thomas would do semi qb slides to avoid the big hits. That what made this small back a work horse.

Alot of this are anecdotal and are related to a base factor. Needing more strength and speed will change the game dramatically . Well, at least when the players spacial movements take place.

Having postion changes tied to weight is ok but using frame only ok . I would like them separate and more tied to height . As shorters player should gain and lose less weight than a taller players .

And whether a player can change thier weight drastically should be tied to a visible rating like the way volatility works or discipline cause that's more the way the physiology of the body works anyway. The system is pretty loose and short player are every where. They should fatigue quicker.... Iron head Heyward , at 5'11 260 had trouble with his weight all of his career and it was well know....Bettis on the other hand kept his under control and had a more lucrative career .

Besides my normal rambles....l I would suggest putting this in the main forum somewhere to get the feed back of the grander community . Definitely not downplaying anything here as we are on a different code and I feel all the comments are pretty accurate , but I would like to see what some other have in their heads.