7/3/2013 6:28 PM
Gridiron Dynasty - Football Sim Games - Boxscore - West Liberty State vs Concord This was a semi-final playoff game in Argento. Score looks more like a basketball game.
7/3/2013 7:16 PM

The final scores in the Bava DII semis were 104-90 and 133-64. I lost in the second round, although I apparently started 14 players on offense and 15 on defense, at least that's what it adds up to under the GS column on the Players Setting tab. I've concluded that if you name one player your "starter" but actually start another player, both get credit for being a starter. (Even with the knowledge that that phenomenon is occurring, I still can't explain some of the starter stats.) Obviously, the V3 engine is not working. Teams should not be averaging 100 points per game - even the best teams. Perhaps we can tweak the V3 engine and turn it into an arena league option.

Weirdly, I don't enjoy reading the play-by-play even though there's "more" information. I'm not sure the additional information is all that helpful (and, of course, sometimes it is nonsensical as well). But it's just not as easy to read. Also, I think the less descriptive (V2) play-by-play is more realistic (if you've ever seen actual play-by-play stats from actual football games). I would say that the V2 play-by-play more closely resembles the Hoops Dynasty play-by-play, which I have always believed was very good. When a basketball player drives for a layup, the play-by-play does not say which defensive player he drove past, and honestly, I never care.

I have never had the visceral reaction against V2 that others seem to have. I have had some success (one NC at Div I-AA level and some CCs) but I haven't had great success. I feel like that's about right for me. I don't know that I've ever learned to recruit all that well (or others invest more time than I do), but I've done well taking over teams that were already set up and realizing that potential. Sure, there have been some upsets, and maybe my NC run even enjoyed the benefit of a few upsets, but do we really want to play a game where you can predict with certainty the result before you play? Then what would be the point? Upsets happen in real life, but if you do a better job recruiting and get better players, you'll win - unless you really screw up coaching. Similarly, in this game, if you recruit well and get better players, you'll win much more than you'll lose - unless you can't game plan at all. While I might like the ability to run specific players in specialty formations, e.g., blocking tight ends on running plays versus receiving tight ends on pass plays, or whatever, I have never thought V2 was all that bad. And anyway, I'm not sure I have time to adequately micro-manage my way through all the possibilities of using different players in different circumstances, nor does the new engine give you all the info you'd need anyway. For instance, I might like pass-rushing specialists on pass plays, but I'm probably starting those DLs as my DEs anyway. The bottom line is that I have enjoyed playing GD in V2 version, and I'm not so sure I will enjoy V3 as much - even if the obvious, critical flaws get resolved.

7/3/2013 7:42 PM
+1

The majority of the teams that I have taken over have been rebuilds and I have had more wins than losses and my playoff apps.  I dont have many CCs, but i believe that is due to the fact that 90% of the teams that I take over have been run by Sims for at least 25 seasons.
7/3/2013 8:21 PM
Posted by gjd13 on 7/3/2013 7:16:00 PM (view original):

The final scores in the Bava DII semis were 104-90 and 133-64. I lost in the second round, although I apparently started 14 players on offense and 15 on defense, at least that's what it adds up to under the GS column on the Players Setting tab. I've concluded that if you name one player your "starter" but actually start another player, both get credit for being a starter. (Even with the knowledge that that phenomenon is occurring, I still can't explain some of the starter stats.) Obviously, the V3 engine is not working. Teams should not be averaging 100 points per game - even the best teams. Perhaps we can tweak the V3 engine and turn it into an arena league option.

Weirdly, I don't enjoy reading the play-by-play even though there's "more" information. I'm not sure the additional information is all that helpful (and, of course, sometimes it is nonsensical as well). But it's just not as easy to read. Also, I think the less descriptive (V2) play-by-play is more realistic (if you've ever seen actual play-by-play stats from actual football games). I would say that the V2 play-by-play more closely resembles the Hoops Dynasty play-by-play, which I have always believed was very good. When a basketball player drives for a layup, the play-by-play does not say which defensive player he drove past, and honestly, I never care.

I have never had the visceral reaction against V2 that others seem to have. I have had some success (one NC at Div I-AA level and some CCs) but I haven't had great success. I feel like that's about right for me. I don't know that I've ever learned to recruit all that well (or others invest more time than I do), but I've done well taking over teams that were already set up and realizing that potential. Sure, there have been some upsets, and maybe my NC run even enjoyed the benefit of a few upsets, but do we really want to play a game where you can predict with certainty the result before you play? Then what would be the point? Upsets happen in real life, but if you do a better job recruiting and get better players, you'll win - unless you really screw up coaching. Similarly, in this game, if you recruit well and get better players, you'll win much more than you'll lose - unless you can't game plan at all. While I might like the ability to run specific players in specialty formations, e.g., blocking tight ends on running plays versus receiving tight ends on pass plays, or whatever, I have never thought V2 was all that bad. And anyway, I'm not sure I have time to adequately micro-manage my way through all the possibilities of using different players in different circumstances, nor does the new engine give you all the info you'd need anyway. For instance, I might like pass-rushing specialists on pass plays, but I'm probably starting those DLs as my DEs anyway. The bottom line is that I have enjoyed playing GD in V2 version, and I'm not so sure I will enjoy V3 as much - even if the obvious, critical flaws get resolved.

The high scores are a result of talent not being THE deciding factor in play and game results.  The game has turned into a game of rock/paper/scissors with your gameplanning and inferior teams can put up huge numbers by taking advantage of gameplanning loopholes.  If talent was a bigger factor, talent would override these holes for the better team.  The losing team would still get cornholed, but at least it would be understandable and only one side would put up huge numbers.

7/3/2013 9:58 PM
Posted by slid64er on 7/3/2013 8:21:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gjd13 on 7/3/2013 7:16:00 PM (view original):

The final scores in the Bava DII semis were 104-90 and 133-64. I lost in the second round, although I apparently started 14 players on offense and 15 on defense, at least that's what it adds up to under the GS column on the Players Setting tab. I've concluded that if you name one player your "starter" but actually start another player, both get credit for being a starter. (Even with the knowledge that that phenomenon is occurring, I still can't explain some of the starter stats.) Obviously, the V3 engine is not working. Teams should not be averaging 100 points per game - even the best teams. Perhaps we can tweak the V3 engine and turn it into an arena league option.

Weirdly, I don't enjoy reading the play-by-play even though there's "more" information. I'm not sure the additional information is all that helpful (and, of course, sometimes it is nonsensical as well). But it's just not as easy to read. Also, I think the less descriptive (V2) play-by-play is more realistic (if you've ever seen actual play-by-play stats from actual football games). I would say that the V2 play-by-play more closely resembles the Hoops Dynasty play-by-play, which I have always believed was very good. When a basketball player drives for a layup, the play-by-play does not say which defensive player he drove past, and honestly, I never care.

I have never had the visceral reaction against V2 that others seem to have. I have had some success (one NC at Div I-AA level and some CCs) but I haven't had great success. I feel like that's about right for me. I don't know that I've ever learned to recruit all that well (or others invest more time than I do), but I've done well taking over teams that were already set up and realizing that potential. Sure, there have been some upsets, and maybe my NC run even enjoyed the benefit of a few upsets, but do we really want to play a game where you can predict with certainty the result before you play? Then what would be the point? Upsets happen in real life, but if you do a better job recruiting and get better players, you'll win - unless you really screw up coaching. Similarly, in this game, if you recruit well and get better players, you'll win much more than you'll lose - unless you can't game plan at all. While I might like the ability to run specific players in specialty formations, e.g., blocking tight ends on running plays versus receiving tight ends on pass plays, or whatever, I have never thought V2 was all that bad. And anyway, I'm not sure I have time to adequately micro-manage my way through all the possibilities of using different players in different circumstances, nor does the new engine give you all the info you'd need anyway. For instance, I might like pass-rushing specialists on pass plays, but I'm probably starting those DLs as my DEs anyway. The bottom line is that I have enjoyed playing GD in V2 version, and I'm not so sure I will enjoy V3 as much - even if the obvious, critical flaws get resolved.

The high scores are a result of talent not being THE deciding factor in play and game results.  The game has turned into a game of rock/paper/scissors with your gameplanning and inferior teams can put up huge numbers by taking advantage of gameplanning loopholes.  If talent was a bigger factor, talent would override these holes for the better team.  The losing team would still get cornholed, but at least it would be understandable and only one side would put up huge numbers.

More talented teams, even with the right coverage, will give up 100+ points and lose. That isn't a loophole, it is a broken engine.

Regardless, Loopholes ... broken game, 100 point games ... broken game, stupid stats ... broken game, v3 ... broken game. No one from WIS talking ... broken game. I could go on, but who's listening???
7/3/2013 10:08 PM
Like I said, if talent were THE deciding factor in plays, that wouldn't happen.  But you're right, nobody has done anything since they made the first beta adjustment to running after season 1.  
7/4/2013 8:17 AM
Actually didnt they just do a passing adjustment about 2 weeks ago, thats when the topping on the cake arrived for me
7/4/2013 11:11 AM
Posted by starfinder77 on 7/4/2013 8:17:00 AM (view original):
Actually didnt they just do a passing adjustment about 2 weeks ago, thats when the topping on the cake arrived for me
No.
7/4/2013 11:56 AM
I disagree,  i've found ways to hold down some of the offenses in argento.  

Concord being a top passing team.  I just ran a sim where I won 40 - 20, 55-21, 45 - 3, 41-16, 55-17.

Thats running a fairly balanced offense, and a fully pass defense.  If anyone is in argento and would like to run some sims against each other to test some things, please let me know.

If you want to set up an offense I'll try to find a way to stop it.  

Not at all saying every offense is stopable, but I'm finding ways to stop the full out bomb offense pretty easy.
7/4/2013 2:14 PM
Posted by roycer on 7/4/2013 11:56:00 AM (view original):
I disagree,  i've found ways to hold down some of the offenses in argento.  

Concord being a top passing team.  I just ran a sim where I won 40 - 20, 55-21, 45 - 3, 41-16, 55-17.

Thats running a fairly balanced offense, and a fully pass defense.  If anyone is in argento and would like to run some sims against each other to test some things, please let me know.

If you want to set up an offense I'll try to find a way to stop it.  

Not at all saying every offense is stopable, but I'm finding ways to stop the full out bomb offense pretty easy.
Right now in 3.0 I think it can be done with manipulating the game planning aspect in the engine. Still doesn't give enough advantage to player match-ups and player rating advantages though.

The thing to try is set up a defense against an all pass offense that stops the offense. Then make the offense run an all run game plan against the all pass defense and see if the advantage flips. If it doesn't then the game planning is not working.
7/4/2013 2:40 PM
Posted by katzphang88 on 7/4/2013 2:14:00 PM (view original):
Posted by roycer on 7/4/2013 11:56:00 AM (view original):
I disagree,  i've found ways to hold down some of the offenses in argento.  

Concord being a top passing team.  I just ran a sim where I won 40 - 20, 55-21, 45 - 3, 41-16, 55-17.

Thats running a fairly balanced offense, and a fully pass defense.  If anyone is in argento and would like to run some sims against each other to test some things, please let me know.

If you want to set up an offense I'll try to find a way to stop it.  

Not at all saying every offense is stopable, but I'm finding ways to stop the full out bomb offense pretty easy.
Right now in 3.0 I think it can be done with manipulating the game planning aspect in the engine. Still doesn't give enough advantage to player match-ups and player rating advantages though.

The thing to try is set up a defense against an all pass offense that stops the offense. Then make the offense run an all run game plan against the all pass defense and see if the advantage flips. If it doesn't then the game planning is not working.
katz, I think you're right on both counts.  Results can be manipulated through game planning and talent doesn't matter near enough.
7/6/2013 7:08 PM
Posted by mr_mojo on 7/1/2013 3:51:00 PM (view original):
I just lost in the playoffs in Argento. The score was 73-28. My opponent had the ball for a total of 9 minutes. All 11 completions were to one guy for 823 yards. all he did was pass. I also didn't have a single turnover. This is my sign to call it done.
That's hilarious!  You were probably playing me.  I haven't logged in in gawd knows how long.  Hey what's the link for the beta teams anyhow.  I can't seem to find it.
7/6/2013 8:38 PM
Links to get to the Gridiron Dynasty BETA:

World Signup: www.whatifsports.com/gdbeta/Signup/

Office Page: www.whatifsports.com/gdbeta/Office/Default.aspx
7/7/2013 3:27 PM
Thanks Star!
7/7/2013 4:59 PM
Carpenter D1AA Championship: CSU 101, Fordham 60. Both QBs had over 9,000 yards passing on the season. No DB play at all in this game.
of 4

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.