Week 4 Discussion

[Warhammer]

Call me an apologist if you want. I haven't seen anyone make an argument worth reading to this point. Seriously.

i'm not even talking about that, actually. hey, comeback code or not - the best team on the field doesn't always win the game. if that were the case in real life there'd be no need to have half the league play cuz in any given year only a handful of teams ever actually have a realistic shot at winning. comeback code or not i do see how it's necessary to kinda inject the randomness of Team A losing to Team B when on paper Team A had the better team. there'd be no need to play this game if the best team always won and there'd be a ton of blowouts without that comeback code.

i'm talking about some of the features of FOF that are looking to be more and more cosmetic than anything. just how much does chemistry really affect your team. yeah, one needs only to look at the Heroes for that answer, but seriously - is it enough to make a great team simply good. if you're a team rated "8" on a scale of 1-10 (10 being the score for a dominant team), does bad chemistry make your team perform like a "6" rated team. just what exactly is the penalty for bad chemistry. can good chemistry overcome a team with mediocre players? who knows.

the thing is, everything is blurred. you don't know where one feature stops and the next begins. what does that mean? how do i know what the reason my team (not my IFL teram, i'm talking about a team in general) isn't doing well. is it because i don't have enough good players? and if that's not the reason is it because i don't have good overall team chemistry? and if it's not that, is it because my coach isn't good enough? if so, which part about him is the reason? if he's bad on offense, then am i wasting money on my excellent rated offensive coordinator? if that isn't the reason, is it because my team hasn't played long enough and my cohesion is too low. if that's the case then why am i spending so much money on my team if all my good players will be negated simply because they haven't played long enough with each other? would Peyton Manning play like Ryan Leaf just cuz he moved to a different team (ok, he probably wouldn't pass for 49 TDs right off the bat, but he isn't gonna play like Eli Manning).

so the thing is, with Jim being so hush hush on things i don't know how much one area effects the other. and with him being so hush hush i don't know if i'm the reason the team is doing bad or if something isn't working properly. maybe team chemistry has *too* much of an effect on the team. again, Peyton Manning is still a top 5 QB even if you put him on another team, he makes people around him better - regardless of how long he's played with them. maybe coaches don't have enough of an influence on a team - maybe the game doesn't reflect the ability of a Parcells or Schottenheimer to come into a program and quickly make them respectable.

we don't know. we assume. and a lot of time the finger points somewhere other than Jim. i don't like that.

There is a flip side to this whole equation...

First, in regards to chemistry, we don't know how much of an impact it has in the actual NFL either. We know that there is an impact, but is it one game, two games, three games?

If he gave us the formulas for everything, next thing you know all teams wind up playing the same style as they find out what the best way to play is.

Still, having played FOF2k7, I can vouch that it is a much better game than 2k4. There is a learning curve to it, but you can do a lot more, and you have a lot more control over your team in 2k7 vs. 2k4.

[tarcone]

think Bess coming back soon will help with the possesion type plays..

44-rated Bess?

avoid drops 62
route running 69
courage 51
adjust to ball 88

I wish his 3rd down catching skills were better but this is pretty good

[kingfc22]

And we finally get a win. Was it ugly? Yes. Did we shut down inside the red zone? Yes.

But hell a win is a win and now we get to play Houston. We need to get the damn ball in the endzone if we want to start winning consistently.

Fogarty played very well despite his first pass being picked off.

[MrBigglesworth]

Call me an apologist if you want. I haven't seen anyone make an argument worth reading to this point. Seriously.

i'm not even talking about that, actually. hey, comeback code or not - the best team on the field doesn't always win the game. if that were the case in real life there'd be no need to have half the league play cuz in any given year only a handful of teams ever actually have a realistic shot at winning. comeback code or not i do see how it's necessary to kinda inject the randomness of Team A losing to Team B when on paper Team A had the better team. there'd be no need to play this game if the best team always won and there'd be a ton of blowouts without that comeback code.

i'm talking about some of the features of FOF that are looking to be more and more cosmetic than anything. just how much does chemistry really affect your team. yeah, one needs only to look at the Heroes for that answer, but seriously - is it enough to make a great team simply good. if you're a team rated "8" on a scale of 1-10 (10 being the score for a dominant team), does bad chemistry make your team perform like a "6" rated team. just what exactly is the penalty for bad chemistry. can good chemistry overcome a team with mediocre players? who knows.

the thing is, everything is blurred. you don't know where one feature stops and the next begins. what does that mean? how do i know what the reason my team (not my IFL teram, i'm talking about a team in general) isn't doing well. is it because i don't have enough good players? and if that's not the reason is it because i don't have good overall team chemistry? and if it's not that, is it because my coach isn't good enough? if so, which part about him is the reason? if he's bad on offense, then am i wasting money on my excellent rated offensive coordinator? if that isn't the reason, is it because my team hasn't played long enough and my cohesion is too low. if that's the case then why am i spending so much money on my team if all my good players will be negated simply because they haven't played long enough with each other? would Peyton Manning play like Ryan Leaf just cuz he moved to a different team (ok, he probably wouldn't pass for 49 TDs right off the bat, but he isn't gonna play like Eli Manning).

so the thing is, with Jim being so hush hush on things i don't know how much one area effects the other. and with him being so hush hush i don't know if i'm the reason the team is doing bad or if something isn't working properly. maybe team chemistry has *too* much of an effect on the team. again, Peyton Manning is still a top 5 QB even if you put him on another team, he makes people around him better - regardless of how long he's played with them. maybe coaches don't have enough of an influence on a team - maybe the game doesn't reflect the ability of a Parcells or Schottenheimer to come into a program and quickly make them respectable.

we don't know. we assume. and a lot of time the finger points somewhere other than Jim. i don't like that.

I wish FOF had a feature where if you made a roster move, there would be a pop-up that said, "your team will get 2% better by making this move, and will have a 5% greater chance of winning their next game". Then you wouldn't have to make any real decisions at all, just take the game's advice about what to do.

[Matt]

It is what it is.

It's just a game that is supposed to kill some time and add some excitement to the every day grind. Have fun. The game will never be perfect. Fuck around, and see what happens. You might just stumble across something that you might find useful.

[Kobeck]

gotta agree with Matt and Mr. Bigglesworth's sarcasm. We all realize we are playing football on a spreadsheet, at its most basic. If the formulas used on that spreadsheet were generally known then the winner would be the guy who remembered the most from calcalus and was about to plug in the maximum value onto that spreadsheet. If that spreadsheet manipluation was so obvious then the game would be of no value too me.


As an aside considering how bad this years Mules draft went I am a bit nervous about making the draft even harder - lol

[Kobeck]

I felt good about my gameplan even when Booker went down, so while bothered, I didn't think the game was completely lost. I did start getting nervous toward the end of the game however, but thought I had the game sealed the 2nd to last drive until Timm lost 2 yards on 2nd and two. Luckily my defense played great, got the ball back and allowed me to try again.

Regardless, it was a great game and you have a fantastic team, Kobeck. I was getting scared when looking over your roster knowing that it's still in development, especially the defense. It's still a long season though

Yeah Shanahan did not come back from his leg injury. Putting him on IR. If he would have retained some ST ability I would probably hold his spot open for him longer. Second Mule defender lost too injury in two years. Can't even remember the LBs name from last year, think he is a real estate agent in Louisiana now - lol

[MrBigglesworth]

I will say, however, that Jim's lack of explanation for many features does bother me. For example, I think it's ok to say, "Chemistry effects your team, it's up to you to figure out how much". I don't think it's ok to not say at all whether or not a rating is relevant to a situation.

[dberner30]

my frustration wasnt intended to start WWIII here...there is something missing in the game...actually a lot of somethings...i dont know about 2007 yet but so far like the offseason mechanics/draft...games are just starting in the other leagues and i have been working on the gameplanning...

here is what seems to happen from my observation of a crapload of MP seasons over too many leagues...

1. there is an old school Madden AI mechanism in here...the game just decides your not winning and you lose. the problem is that the game allows you to jump out to leads or march up and down the field awhile before it starts to take control of things and reverse course...some of the ways I have noticed it...

a. Check out the 1st half vs. 2nd half...seems like a team that is controlling the other loses control after the half...i have been on both sides of this one.

b. key penalties/turnovers at key points to either kill drives or extend drives depending on how the AI is trying to arrange things...

2. The playcalling stinks...it is a game made by a nimrod who doesnt understand football not a game made by a football guy that makes games...my advice is for FOF to pull its head out and just ask for some input from football people....i only point you to late 1st half and late game activity to spell this one out...

3. I like turnovers especially when they make sense...FOF struggles with this one...it uses turnovers in the catch up AI...they just dont make sense there...when teams are in control they are more cautious with the ball...they are more cautious in special teams...in FOF world it is flipped upside down...

NOW back to the game activity....

and just because you are resident smart ass and commish doesnt make you smarter Jeff. im looking for some real input on this question...what impacts the penalties...is it coaching...is it players...is there a hidden rating...do i need to track the offenders and cut their ass because I have way too damn many of them and they seem contrived at key times to take games out of my hands...i want control back...what part of the game handles the penalty zone...

[Cringer]

I'm on the toilet right now.

That's all I can really add to this.

[sovstar]

Somebody who started this thread has an avatar!

[Trivia Bytes]

:thnx:

[Hell Atlantic]

I wish FOF had a feature where if you made a roster move, there would be a pop-up that said, "your team will get 2% better by making this move, and will have a 5% greater chance of winning their next game". Then you wouldn't have to make any real decisions at all, just take the game's advice about what to do.

when you hold a 10 pound dumbell in your left hand, then hold a 50 pound dumbell in your right, it's logical to assume your right side will dip more since you have more weight on one side. or when you take yellow and see that the more blue you add to it the more green you get.

cause and effect.

that's all i'm talking about here. when you do something, it's nice to see or know what the end result was. but you don't get that with FOF. you don't know what exactly happens when you tweak a knob a little to the left instead of a little to the right. all we do with FOF is poke around in the dark and hope we eventually stick our cock in a pussy. all it is is just poking around and if something good happens we assume it's cuz of what we did, and that may or may not be the case cuz we have little knowledge of just how interrelated (or not) everything is. what better, good chemistry or good cohesion? obviously both is ideal, but which one matters more, which one has the bigger effect. we don't know. we assume. and Jim keeps his mouth shut on a lot of stuff under the guise of not wanting to let the cat out of the bag, but if you ask me i think he's the Wizard of Oz and doesn't want us to peak behind the curtain out of fear of everyone seeing just how insufficient and lacking FOF really is.

i don't need to know the answer to the mystery that is FOF. i just need to know when i do something or when i see a rating it has some bearing on the game. does is matter when i set something to 83% instead of 78%? is the game that sensitive that every minute increment of a percentage point is enough to alter what happens on the field? we'll never know, a lot of people are content to drink grape juice and fool themselves into thinking it's wine.

[sovstar]

6-17-1

[MrBigglesworth]

when you hold a 10 pound dumbell in your left hand, then hold a 50 pound dumbell in your right, it's logical to assume your right side will dip more since you have more weight on one side. or when you take yellow and see that the more blue you add to it the more green you get.

cause and effect.

that's all i'm talking about here. when you do something, it's nice to see or know what the end result was. but you don't get that with FOF. you don't know what exactly happens when you tweak a knob a little to the left instead of a little to the right. all we do with FOF is poke around in the dark and hope we eventually stick our cock in a pussy. all it is is just poking around and if something good happens we assume it's cuz of what we did, and that may or may not be the case cuz we have little knowledge of just how interrelated (or not) everything is. what better, good chemistry or good cohesion? obviously both is ideal, but which one matters more, which one has the bigger effect. we don't know. we assume. and Jim keeps his mouth shut on a lot of stuff under the guise of not wanting to let the cat out of the bag, but if you ask me i think he's the Wizard of Oz and doesn't want us to peak behind the curtain out of fear of everyone seeing just how insufficient and lacking FOF really is.

i don't need to know the answer to the mystery that is FOF. i just need to know when i do something or when i see a rating it has some bearing on the game. does is matter when i set something to 83% instead of 78%? is the game that sensitive that every minute increment of a percentage point is enough to alter what happens on the field? we'll never know, a lot of people are content to drink grape juice and fool themselves into thinking it's wine.

When the Saints' season ended, did Sean Payton get a pop-up message saying that the success of the team this season over last was due to the better chemistry, even though they lost cohesion?