Results 1 to 1 of 1

Thread: New version is disappointing

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2008

    New version is disappointing

    1) Player aging is not improved. With the difficulty level set at the lowest level (fan) and using fictional players, the average player age on my team is 27.4. The lowest average age of any team is 27.3. Two-thirds of my players got worse (lost attribute values) after one year of play.

    Pos Lost attr No Change Gained attr
    QB 2 1 0
    RB 4 0 0
    FB 0 0 2
    TE 1 0 2
    WR 5 1 1
    T 2 1 2
    G 4 0 1
    C 2 0 1
    DE 4 0 2
    DT 1 0 2
    LB 8 0 2
    CB 4 1 1
    S 2 0 3
    total 39 4 19
    percentage .63 .06 .31

    contrast this with a computer run team whose players average age was also 27.4.
    Pos Lost attr No Change Gained attr
    QB 0 0 3
    RB 0 0 1
    FB 0 0 1
    TE 0 0 1
    WR 1 0 5
    T 0 0 2
    G 0 0 4
    C 0 0 4
    DE 0 1 3
    DT 0 1 3
    LB 1 0 7
    CB 0 0 4
    S 0 0 4
    total 2 2 42
    percentage .04 .04 .92

    and finally, for a computer run team with the highest average age of 29.1.
    Lost attr No Change Gained attr
    total 5 23 19
    percentage .11 .49 .40

    With the THIRD YOUNGEST team in the league, the percentage of players who lost attribute value on my team was FIVE times that of the team with the OLDEST average age.

    It really takes away from the play of the game when you know that your players decline far more swiftly than they should and rarely improve. This is NOT an improved aging algorithm.

    A workaround is to go into commissioner mode at the end of the year and swap all of your players to computer run team. Go to the next year and swap the players back.

    Using my same team as above, but after trading them to a computer run team at the end of the year, the following are the aging results.

    Pos Lost attr No Change Gained attr
    QB 3 0 0
    RB 2 2 0
    FB 0 0 2
    TE 1 0 2
    WR 2 3 2
    T 2 0 3
    G 4 0 1
    C 2 0 1
    DE 1 3 2
    DT 1 0 2
    LB 5 2 3
    CB 1 2 3
    S 1 0 4
    total 25 12 25
    percentage .40 .20 .40

    Better but not as compelling a difference as noted before. After examining the players, the players on my team had overall higher ratings than those on the other compared teams. This leads one to speculate that higher rated players lose attributes faster than lower rated players. This is not realistic. The highest quality players tend to play at a high level longer than lower quality players.

    *** After some additional investigating, it appears that teams with the worst records receive greater increases in player-attribute values and teams with the best records receive more decreases in player-attribute values. So it appears that player-attribute increases are inversely proportional to how well the team does.

    2) Player output to the clipboard does not work correctly. Output all players at all positions (sorted by position) to the clipboard. Most of the kickers and all of the punters are not output. The old version output the players correctly.

    Output all players of a single team (sorted by position) to the clipboard. No punters are output. The old version output the players correctly.

    *** note: it was easiest to determine that all players were not output by sorting first. However, it does not matter whether the players are sorted or not. All players are not output to the clipboard.

    3) Computer teams can draft players and sign free agents while they have zero salary cap room and no money. The human player can not. How do I know this? I set a team to -1 billion in cash, gave them all my draft picks, traded them my players until they had no salary cap room, then ran the college draft. The team retained ALL of their players and added 14 draft picks -- and had cap room afterward.

    4) There is a bug in the system that I have not been able to recreate. At fan level with fictional players, after clicking on balance payrolls, every team had a negative salary cap room of over a billion dollars. Repeated invocations of "recalculating contracts" and "balancing payrolls" (under tools/advanced tools...) had no useful affect.

    Some of the problems that remain from earlier versions.

    1) Computer teams still return far too many punts and kickoffs for touchdowns.

    2) Too much time is run off the clock after a fourth down play that fails. The clock should stop on a change of possession.

    3) Sometimes too much time is run off the clock after an interception. 41 seconds for an interception returned for a touchdown is way too much time for such a play.

    4) Sometimes too much time is run off the clock after a fumble. 40 seconds for a fumble that results in a change of possession is way too much time for such a play.

    5) In simulation mode, the quarterback takes a knee too soon at the end of the game and there is no way to prevent the quarterback from taking a knee in simulation mode.
    Last edited by als; 10-24-2012 at 08:32 PM. Reason: Additional Information

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts