I am not the one losing 5 ees, I am just trying to get you to open your eyes. Losing 5 ees, getting the resources in session 2 and not being able to have shot at decency is not a good game. If everyone paid ees the same way I would not say it's not working as intended. But we all know when we talk Ees

If I did not know some already aren't training (practicing) players to improve them normally, I would say it's working accordingly. But a player not being developed properly won't transfer and won't go ee, game the game and profit, even when it's something illogical. That's all I am saying. No complaints cause I won't get 4 ees no more and am practicing my players properly.

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/15/2018 12:14:00 PM (view original):
The game is designed to give more people a shot at winning. Whether or not that's a good thing is for you to decide. You had a LOT of success over the last several seasons. Odds are you'll have a LOT of success in the future. You just may have to tolerate a down season or two a long the way to that future success. That's the game design.

This.

But I do agree, and shoe won't like it, that users trying to retard() development to prevent EE is "dumbing down the game" or "manipulating outcomes" that he hated about mully's suggestion. .

And, yes, you constantly complain.

People can use their practice minutes however they like. It’s a gameplay choice. As long as there are logical consequences attached, I don’t care what people do with it. Sometimes it might make sense to try to keep a sophomore down in the likely staying category, or off the board altogether, but the cost is that he’s not as good as he could be as a junior. Whatever.

All we do is make choices.

Posted by zorzii on 3/16/2018 8:41:00 PM (view original):
I am not the one losing 5 ees, I am just trying to get you to open your eyes. Losing 5 ees, getting the resources in session 2 and not being able to have shot at decency is not a good game. If everyone paid ees the same way I would not say it's not working as intended. But we all know when we talk Ees

If I did not know some already aren't training (practicing) players to improve them normally, I would say it's working accordingly. But a player not being developed properly won't transfer and won't go ee, game the game and profit, even when it's something illogical. That's all I am saying. No complaints cause I won't get 4 ees no more and am practicing my players properly.

It is a good game, and my eyes are open. You lose 5 EEs when you make a decision to have more than 4 EE candidates on your team. That’s a gameplay choice. If you don’t like the possibility that you could lose them all, and have to deal with the headache of replacing them, then don’t recruit them exclusively. Recruit some other types of players. Plan. Have balanced classes. Have replacements ready on your roster in case of emergency. The only style of play that requires a full roster is FB/press, and you don’t need EE type players to make that work. You can run anything else with a top 8, always redshirt a guy, and have various backups picking up garbage minutes, hiding on your bench until their IQ is high enough to make them useful to contribute. There are endless possibilities. You can do more than just load your roster with EE talent.

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/17/2018 6:35:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 3/16/2018 8:59:00 PM (view original):
People can use their practice minutes however they like. It’s a gameplay choice. As long as there are logical consequences attached, I don’t care what people do with it. Sometimes it might make sense to try to keep a sophomore down in the likely staying category, or off the board altogether, but the cost is that he’s not as good as he could be as a junior. Whatever.

All we do is make choices.

Not "gaming the system" or "dumbing down the game"?

Honestly, when you're doing something to retard() player development, it's not an intended game play choice.

Nonsense. If the game developers did not intend for people to make choices about how and when players developed, they would not have implemented a practice plan.

Anyway, that’s not the sort of thing I mean when I use the phrase “dumbing down”. I’m talking about efforts to make the game simpler for mass consumption.

Posted by shoe3 on 3/17/2018 7:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/17/2018 6:35:00 PM (view original):

Posted by shoe3 on 3/16/2018 8:59:00 PM (view original):
People can use their practice minutes however they like. It’s a gameplay choice. As long as there are logical consequences attached, I don’t care what people do with it. Sometimes it might make sense to try to keep a sophomore down in the likely staying category, or off the board altogether, but the cost is that he’s not as good as he could be as a junior. Whatever.

All we do is make choices.

Not "gaming the system" or "dumbing down the game"?

Honestly, when you're doing something to retard() player development, it's not an intended game play choice.

Nonsense. If the game developers did not intend for people to make choices about how and when players developed, they would not have implemented a practice plan.

Anyway, that’s not the sort of thing I mean when I use the phrase “dumbing down”. I’m talking about efforts to make the game simpler for mass consumption.

It's totally logical and realistic to have players develop in some areas before others. Putting 20 minutes in SH to avoid getting drafted is "gaming the system" but practicing PASS or COND before LP or PER is fine in my opinion and in many cases the better option.

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/17/2018 8:29:00 PM (view original):
My point is simple.

The developers did not think "I'll put 60 minutes into red PER and 0 into green LP to keep this guy in school" as a viable strategy.

If anyone disagrees with that simple assertion, I might have drop the R word.

I’m pretty sure the developers don’t care, and neither do I. The point of the game is not to max players out as fast as possible. The point is to win games. If a coach determines that putting 60 on a red perimeter and zero on a green LP will help win games, go for it. In the same fashion, if wiz wants to schedule terrible terrible terrible sims in non conference to help him with some preference or another, go for it. If some other coach wants to set all his players to +2 regardless of perimeter ability, because he wants to be very good on the perimeter preference, 2 thumbs up here. As long as there is a rational risk and/or cost that goes along with the “reward” the coach is seeking, there is no gameplay problem.

Posted by MikeT23 on 3/17/2018 10:00:00 PM (view original):
Ok. You have chosen to dig in your heels and be wrong.

Good enough.

I’m not biting on your obtuse false choice. You’re framing this discussion as though it’s either the developers *intention* for people to employ absurd practice plans to avoid EEs, or it’s a glitch. It’s neither. It’s an open ended gameplay choice, like just about everything else.