All Forums > Gridiron Dynasty Football > Gridiron Dynasty Beta > Thoughts on my season 3 of beta
5/29/2013 1:24 AM (edited)

Since I've now completed my first season with two different beta teams I thought I'd share some of my thoughts on the current state on the product. I purposely started a new thread because most of the other ones are littered with complaints with how this and that don't work, etc, and I wanted to toss out more constructive thoughts on the 3.0 game. I played this game originally back in 07-08. I'm not sure what version that was but I was OK at it back then. Very recently I got the urge to play again and here I am, so some of my thoughts might be blinded by the fact that i really haven't played in a long while and I might be totally wrong, like so far I've found 2.0 rather dull and I really like all the things I can do in 3.0

Anyway, the following is what I believe to be true. It may or may not be accurate and I'd love to here from other coaches about what they think as well.

1. Talent is king. I think this is fairly true with 2.0 as well but I've already taken down SIM teams with better talent in 2.0 just by game planning against the default plan, while in 3.0 I've tried this same method and got roasted by the SIM with better players. It was like I knew every thing they'd do, planned my defense accordingly and they just shoved their offense down my throat anyway. 

2. However, game planning/coaching is a close second. Regardless of these threads I've read about how defense doesn't matter, blitzing doesn't matter, etc... from what i have experienced I am going to go on the other side of the fence and say yes it does and yes you can stop the pass. (Not totally but you can stop the bleeding). I truly believe that decent game planning pushed my Bava team to the third round of the playoffs when they should have probably lost in the first round.

I have probably ran hundreds of test games while tweaking every setting imaginable. I found I got slightly better results out of my players by tweaking stamina settings up from the default (85 I think). I originally had the idea that if stamina didn't matter I'd just lower the settings and keep my starters in 24/7 but apparently their is something to it because trying that method ended up badly in test games.

I gave up less passing plays by totally eliminating blitzing from the formation settings and playbooks. I am guessing this is possibly keeping one more person in coverage rather than sending someone (usually a safety) to try and sack the quarterback who will more often than not get the pass off anyways. I'd still get sacks on the QB, mostly by a defensive lineman who probably just broke through the offensive line. unconventional formations seem to work better to. Trying to turn a 4-4 into a quasi-cover 2 with the formation settings worked better than a nickle package in some games.

I see a lot of people discussing the chuck and pray method but I didn't really have much success with that as increasing the medium pass frequency. in fact I toyed around with multiple pass length percentages. some times the short game worked well against teams some times the medium worked better. Never did setting the passing to all long and deep ever work for me.

However, their are some head scratching things going on with 3.0. First of all my freshman quarterback with decent ratings threw for over 7300 yards and 90 touchdowns to a crew of decent receivers. Aaron Rodgers he most certainly isn't. I think if the beta was totally full of human coaches game planning it probably wouldn't be so high. More often than not passes are getting completed to someone in triple coverage (you mean there isn't two other wide open guys if one man is triple teamed? ) or the receivers just break tackles all day like their Adrian Peterson or something. However, I've noticed a lot of DB's lacking in strength so maybe that is some of the reason. DB's with strength in the mid 20's to mid 30's with receivers up in the 40's and some at 50 in strength.

Then today I got my *** kicked by Rensselaer Tech and rightfully so. That team has better players and a more experienced coach with a good plan, which goes back to my original point about talent out weighing everything else at the end of the day. I tried for hours to try and game plan a solution defensively and offensively, simulating at least 100 games to figure out what worked and what didn't. I lost about 90-94 percent of the test games so I knew beforehand what the result would be, but the strange thing is in those test games i could run the same plan against RPT's same plan and the scores were all over the place. I'd have games were the score went from losing 17-19 to winning 80-48. If the test game is the same system as the one simming the real games than some of it feels like it's some random roll of the dice. I just simmed another game against Rensselaer Tech and won 91-63, followed by a loss of 21-0. The range of scoring is just really odd. 

The only conclusion I could come to about that would be that teams seem like they run on a lot of momentum. One team gets rolling and just rolls while the other withers away, but not always because I've seen a lot of high scoring back and forth Oregon Duck looking games and some 14-15 slugfest. However, the better talent usually wins the majority.

Sorry for the long post.... I'll make up for it by posting no more threads till season 4 beta ends.

 

5/29/2013 6:02 AM
Very good post and I agree with much you say.  We are now in the 3rd season seeing HUGE talent gaps from team to team. With alot of one and done coaches coming and going we are getting a stark contrast of game matchups. Hense stark contrasts in game scores.  Its not until you get deep in the payoffs where you notice more football like scores. Probably because the talent is more evenly matched.

People are complaining of unrealistic scores. Well this has to do with unrealistic matchups.  The hooper world was very evenly matched the 1st season. Now me and a few other coaches have 3 seasons worth of d2 talent on our teams and just rolling. So, in a sense we the coaches are suffering from cause and effect of our own actions.  Most coaches are moving up. I have stayed put to learn everything. With the lack of committment from coaches staying put at the schools they start at we are getting incredibaly good teams vs very bad teams. It really does make sense for the scores to be getting more and more out of whack.  Heck, I am graduating ZERO starters and have won both National championships.  The first season I had to do some serious gameplanning. The 2nd was a bit easier. This season I am in AUTO Pilot mode.  And with all the human coaches losing in the 1 round of my bracket; I won't even need to look at my gameplan until the national quaters.

With the 3rd season winding down I will say that i have found a way to obliterate sims regardless of there talent.  This info will not help against human coaches because gameplanning will in fact foil your plan but for what its worth....The sim is has been planned to use a dime against GUN no matter what. You simply run wide on a sim with your best wr only every down.  People complained about that so Norbert Adjust the wr fatigue.  OK, No problem.  I took my 3 crappiest sim players and converted them to wr.  They play wr2,wr3, and wr4.  I took my 3 best wr's and funnle them in and out of the game at 95%.  To do this is very simple. Your best wr is wr #1 set at 95%.  wr2,3,and 4 are the crappy players(or future starters)set at "very tired" and  your 2nd and 3rd best wr's go into the 5 and 6 place wr slots also set 95%.  In your formation screen you need to make sure the wr 1 has 100% of the outside rushes.

SPOILER ALERT.  Human coaches can stop this regardless of your talent at OL and WR.  BUT SIMS CANNOT.  Have fun.



5/29/2013 11:29 AM
I seriously think that recruit generation may be the worst of the problem myself. I don't care how well you recruit, there should never be a reason that the talent gap produces scores that are unrealistic. Sometimes, the scores are both teams because the offense is so much better then the defense on both sides of the ball. Overall, I think there are far too many completely incompetent recruits on the defensive end. 
5/29/2013 12:24 PM
Posted by noah23 on 5/29/2013 11:29:00 AM (view original):
I seriously think that recruit generation may be the worst of the problem myself. I don't care how well you recruit, there should never be a reason that the talent gap produces scores that are unrealistic. Sometimes, the scores are both teams because the offense is so much better then the defense on both sides of the ball. Overall, I think there are far too many completely incompetent recruits on the defensive end. 
IMO recruiting is the only part of the game that is working so I wouldn't touch it til the engine is playable.  I have no sympathy for humans who get blown out, there's no reason for them to recruit crappy players.  
5/29/2013 1:18 PM
Its not about sympathy...its about having an actual realistic and thus fun game. I'm not saying to change recruiting, I'm talking solely about the spread of talent per league and making it less of a problem that way. 

Just go give you an idea...my records this season and last. 

18-1
15-2

8-5
6-7

13-3
6-7

15-2
12-3

10-4
8-5

13-2
5-8

So, I've gotten better the second year on all but one team. My only DII experience I'm 8-5 with a subpar team. So I'm not saying this for my own benefit. I want to see new people come on board and old back on board, and if there are tons of examples of teams losing 100-0 or games being played at 120-118 because of a lack of balance in recruit generation I see it as a problem. Its not important in these worlds as it won't stay after the beta ends, but if this engine as is is applied to the real game (which I only have one team Bridgewater in Dobie that is 33-7 since I took over) then from what I have seen recruit generation is very similar and thus may end up being the same. If something becomes too easy it becomes boring. Sure, have the right team win 99% of the time the better team should win if not 100% when its a big difference, but I'd rather it be 30-0 then 100-0. I want to stick around in this game, and right now the scores themselves would make me never buy another game if it were in the pay game. 
5/29/2013 1:38 PM
Posted by noah23 on 5/29/2013 1:18:00 PM (view original):
Its not about sympathy...its about having an actual realistic and thus fun game. I'm not saying to change recruiting, I'm talking solely about the spread of talent per league and making it less of a problem that way. 

Just go give you an idea...my records this season and last. 

18-1
15-2

8-5
6-7

13-3
6-7

15-2
12-3

10-4
8-5

13-2
5-8

So, I've gotten better the second year on all but one team. My only DII experience I'm 8-5 with a subpar team. So I'm not saying this for my own benefit. I want to see new people come on board and old back on board, and if there are tons of examples of teams losing 100-0 or games being played at 120-118 because of a lack of balance in recruit generation I see it as a problem. Its not important in these worlds as it won't stay after the beta ends, but if this engine as is is applied to the real game (which I only have one team Bridgewater in Dobie that is 33-7 since I took over) then from what I have seen recruit generation is very similar and thus may end up being the same. If something becomes too easy it becomes boring. Sure, have the right team win 99% of the time the better team should win if not 100% when its a big difference, but I'd rather it be 30-0 then 100-0. I want to stick around in this game, and right now the scores themselves would make me never buy another game if it were in the pay game. 
in 1.0 and 2.0 the scores were fine using the current recruiting system.  It's not recruiting that's broken, it's the engine.
5/29/2013 1:44 PM
Yet, you've continuously defended the engine time and time again. Saying that scores like that were justified by the talent on the team. If the scores are justified, then its a lack of recruit balance, if they are not justified, it is the fault of the engine. You can't have it both ways. I'm fine with either being fixed. Just seems that most on here, with you being the most vocal, were saying that they liked the fact that teams get beat every time and that with talent disparity as broad as was seen this season that these scores were justified. 
5/29/2013 2:02 PM
Posted by noah23 on 5/29/2013 1:44:00 PM (view original):
Yet, you've continuously defended the engine time and time again. Saying that scores like that were justified by the talent on the team. If the scores are justified, then its a lack of recruit balance, if they are not justified, it is the fault of the engine. You can't have it both ways. I'm fine with either being fixed. Just seems that most on here, with you being the most vocal, were saying that they liked the fact that teams get beat every time and that with talent disparity as broad as was seen this season that these scores were justified. 
I've been far more critical of the engine than you realize.  I have been against the basic mechanics of the engine pre beta.  

I do believe a lot of the scores are justified.  Passing is broken (and so is running though I don't think you're talking about that), but I have no problem with 100 point games.  They're not mutually exclusive.   
5/29/2013 2:17 PM
The 100 pt. game has nothing to do with recruiting. I have seen it in 2.0, but only a human coached team against a weak SIM. The engine right now is totally whacked. The only thing you can do is go all pass and hope for the best, but 1000 yards a game by any team is ridiculous. With Norbert leaving, I hope they haven't given up. I haven't heard anything new, so it isn't looking good.
5/29/2013 6:52 PM
Posted by vikesrule69 on 5/29/2013 2:17:00 PM (view original):
The 100 pt. game has nothing to do with recruiting. I have seen it in 2.0, but only a human coached team against a weak SIM. The engine right now is totally whacked. The only thing you can do is go all pass and hope for the best, but 1000 yards a game by any team is ridiculous. With Norbert leaving, I hope they haven't given up. I haven't heard anything new, so it isn't looking good.
I go all rush and hope for the best.  www.whatifsports.com/gdbeta/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx and www.whatifsports.com/gdbeta/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx

5/29/2013 7:23 PM
The rushing, quite frankly is an even more obvious fix.... Stamina does not mean anything. I'm not even sure its attempted to have been programmed in or not. There are far fewer teams having success with an all rush attack then there are with an all pass. Last season, it was the opposite and I was running all the time (tho not as much as Loras and a few other teams who were all rush) 

Again, please show me how on any given saturday there are 4-5 games where both teams score 100 points. 
5/29/2013 8:27 PM
Posted by noah23 on 5/29/2013 7:23:00 PM (view original):
The rushing, quite frankly is an even more obvious fix.... Stamina does not mean anything. I'm not even sure its attempted to have been programmed in or not. There are far fewer teams having success with an all rush attack then there are with an all pass. Last season, it was the opposite and I was running all the time (tho not as much as Loras and a few other teams who were all rush) 

Again, please show me how on any given saturday there are 4-5 games where both teams score 100 points. 
its not every saturday you see 40 d3 coaches all get d2 jobs in the same year either. Relax noah. It will all work out.
5/30/2013 10:20 PM
Posted by tigerpark135 on 5/29/2013 8:27:00 PM (view original):
Posted by noah23 on 5/29/2013 7:23:00 PM (view original):
The rushing, quite frankly is an even more obvious fix.... Stamina does not mean anything. I'm not even sure its attempted to have been programmed in or not. There are far fewer teams having success with an all rush attack then there are with an all pass. Last season, it was the opposite and I was running all the time (tho not as much as Loras and a few other teams who were all rush) 

Again, please show me how on any given saturday there are 4-5 games where both teams score 100 points. 
its not every saturday you see 40 d3 coaches all get d2 jobs in the same year either. Relax noah. It will all work out.
My only issue, is that there are multiple, with one main proponent...that says these scores are ok. I'm making it clear that its a game-breaker for me. I'm not stressed at all about it as its the beta and I'm not paying for it. I don't even think 220 points in a game is possible with even 11 offensive lineman playing defense. The offense would not be able to keep running that long without playing all 100 players in the game, and yes I realize that real teams take their foot off the gas, but even spurrier, who is known for never taking his foot off the gas, doesn't beat scrub teams by 100 points. 
6/4/2013 5:56 PM
Back to some of secret agent's points.  I agree somewhat, but I will say I have had a lot of success with blitzes.  Against some teams, the blitz absolutely kills me, and I give up a lot of passing yards.  Against other teams, the blitz devastates their passing game.  I mixed up my blitz percentage throughout the season and what I found was against teams that liked to run a high percentage of plays Long and Medium, my blitz shut them down and forced not only a lot of sacks, but a lot of INTs.  When the other offense ran a lot of Short and Very Short routes, I got killed when I blitzed.  I played one game at 0% blitz and my pass defense got shredded.  With no pressure, the QB had all day to throw.  My DL is pretty good, so I did get 2 sacks in that game, but for the most part, the lack of QB pressure resulted in a high percentage of completions and a lot of yards given up.
6/8/2013 1:24 AM

I'll have to give that a try, crcummings if I get that far, but I think I might just be walking away from this game though. There is a real MF of a coach who, for lacking of better words to describe this, is attacking every single one of my recruits in Bava, and I don't see how players who are green for you can so easily turn red in one single cycle. Every coach now has the same exact rep and loyalty so everything should be even on that front. The only thing this other coach has against me is he won a national championship in season 3. Two more wins than my team... and I know if I were going to try and knock a human team off a recruit it usually takes about 3 to 5 CV's.

Here is how this transpired and why I say it is an intended targeting. I had a WR green for me that is 50 miles from me. Next cycle the same WR is red and had gone to the other coach. So i decided  that this player was worth battling for and I didn't just walk away from the WR, I tossed out some CV's and got back on the recruit's considering list. NEXT cycle 8 of my green targets are red and or yellow and the only team being considered outside of me is the other team. I'm just appalled that someone, who already won a national title, would be so offended  and obviously angry that I wanted to battle for the ONE recruit I had green in the beginning that he would launch an all out assault on every recruit I had green.

Anyway, this sort of vengeful, childish practice should not be allowed in the game, and I'm not sure I want to play a game in that type of enviroment. There is no need for it. Battle for a player or two is fine, and I know no recruit is yours till signing day, but to purposely target all of my recruits, even my running back targets when this other team runs nothing but a shotgun, long bomb offense is just plain hateful. I'm not even sure how he found all the players that were considering my team to begin with.

of 2
All Forums > Gridiron Dynasty Football > Gridiron Dynasty Beta > Thoughts on my season 3 of beta

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.