 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Football Beta Testing » Football Beta Test Discussion » my best role players aren't
lancereisen
my best role players aren't
November 16, 2011 at 03:23AM View BBCode
showing up on the advanced depth charts in delta.
Admin
Of course, the positions allowed on each chart may be imperfect; I've made several adjustments already. Do you have a couple in particular for me to look at?
--Chris
November 16, 2011 at 04:55AM View BBCode
They are probably a victim of the new "logical position shift" requirements: even if a player has a Best Role of a particular position, if his natural position doesn't qualify for that depth chart you can't put him there. (Perhaps I should prevent these as even showing up as "best role" if you can't use them in that role.)Of course, the positions allowed on each chart may be imperfect; I've made several adjustments already. Do you have a couple in particular for me to look at?
--Chris
Admin
November 16, 2011 at 04:56AM View BBCode
(Maybe the solution here is to allow someone with a "best role" at a particular position onto a depth chart even if they don't otherwise qualify.)
RichNYC1
Could they also just change position offically at that point?
November 16, 2011 at 01:27PM View BBCode
Originally posted by Admin
(Maybe the solution here is to allow someone with a "best role" at a particular position onto a depth chart even if they don't otherwise qualify.)
Could they also just change position offically at that point?
nhat8121
seeing some dirt cheap FBs starting at T or G positions seem unnatural
prevent them from showing up as best role as you suggested would be ideal to me
November 16, 2011 at 03:57PM View BBCode
or maybe the way it is now is goodseeing some dirt cheap FBs starting at T or G positions seem unnatural
prevent them from showing up as best role as you suggested would be ideal to me
Admin
November 16, 2011 at 04:39PM View BBCode
It would be a way to train an unqualified player though... you'd have to position train him until the new position became his best role, THEN give him the required 9 starts. So it would take forever but it could be done.
Admin
November 16, 2011 at 04:42PM View BBCode
Also if I implement this, I may have players whose best role doesn't match their position change to that position in their senior year of college.
RichNYC1
[url=http://footballbeta.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=270151]Delroy Mullins[/url].
[Edited on 10/04/06 by RichNYC1]
November 16, 2011 at 08:08PM View BBCode
I have been one of the voices against using guys out of position, but this player is a great example of a guy who could be almost anything....[url=http://footballbeta.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=270151]Delroy Mullins[/url].
[Edited on 10/04/06 by RichNYC1]
KLKRTR
November 17, 2011 at 01:03AM View BBCode
Can we eliminate "best position" for players if they can't play at that position due to logic?
Admin
--Chris
November 17, 2011 at 04:08AM View BBCode
That's what I'm trying to decide, if I should eliminate it or let them play. Letting them play at that position would be the easier way to go, and I don't think there are so many players in this situation that it would be unbalancing.--Chris
KLKRTR
November 17, 2011 at 04:06PM View BBCode
I'm not so sure..I just waived a few RBs that would have made excellent tackles in the old system...but are just bad players (or ok fullbacks) now thanks to the change. And I think that's a good thing. My [url=http://footballbeta.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=270097]FB[/url] in Delta is rated 14 points higher for tackle than for his native RB position. Needless to say, I'm pretty sure that he is about half their size. Any way to put size limitations on each position (height/weight)? In other words, would allow somewhat logical position changes between LB and DE, or DE and DT, S and CB, etc, but would disallow my RB playing OT. A compromise of sorts, right?
RichNYC1
I think this nails it. Height and weight would very realistic deciding factor... You could have a 5´10 guy who weighs 260, who´s a great blocker, but he´s not a tackle... the same way you could have a 6´5, 220 LB guys that would be a better TE LB or SS than RB....
November 17, 2011 at 04:33PM View BBCode
Originally posted by KLKRTR
I'm not so sure..I just waived a few RBs that would have made excellent tackles in the old system...but are just bad players (or ok fullbacks) now thanks to the change. And I think that's a good thing. My [url=http://footballbeta.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=270097]FB[/url] in Delta is rated 14 points higher for tackle than for his native RB position. Needless to say, I'm pretty sure that he is about half their size. Any way to put size limitations on each position (height/weight)? In other words, would allow somewhat logical position changes between LB and DE, or DE and DT, S and CB, etc, but would disallow my RB playing OT. A compromise of sorts, right?
I think this nails it. Height and weight would very realistic deciding factor... You could have a 5´10 guy who weighs 260, who´s a great blocker, but he´s not a tackle... the same way you could have a 6´5, 220 LB guys that would be a better TE LB or SS than RB....
nhat8121
if he's that good at blocking, why is he labeled as RB in the first place at the Pro level? obviously he doesn't have the size. He should not be able to move over to OL.
He can play at FB and KRB, that's more than enough to me.
I dont know any NFL player switching from RB to OL, so.
Also, dont really wanna see teams with 2 Ts, 2 Gs, and 7 FBs lol. Doesn't seem realistic...
November 17, 2011 at 05:10PM View BBCode
why does it have to be so complicated with factoring in height/weight, etc?if he's that good at blocking, why is he labeled as RB in the first place at the Pro level? obviously he doesn't have the size. He should not be able to move over to OL.
He can play at FB and KRB, that's more than enough to me.
I dont know any NFL player switching from RB to OL, so.
Also, dont really wanna see teams with 2 Ts, 2 Gs, and 7 FBs lol. Doesn't seem realistic...
KLKRTR
Doesn't have to be an individual player's height/weight--just looking at averages of the two for positions. And the blocking numbers are relative to other running backs--not to o-linemen.
November 17, 2011 at 05:30PM View BBCode
Originally posted by nhat8121
why does it have to be so complicated with factoring in height/weight, etc?
if he's that good at blocking, why is he labeled as RB in the first place at the Pro level? obviously he doesn't have the size. He should not be able to move over to OL.
He can play at FB and KRB, that's more than enough to me.
I dont know any NFL player switching from RB to OL, so.
Also, dont really wanna see teams with 2 Ts, 2 Gs, and 7 FBs lol. Doesn't seem realistic...
Doesn't have to be an individual player's height/weight--just looking at averages of the two for positions. And the blocking numbers are relative to other running backs--not to o-linemen.
redcped
But in no depth chart can I actually assign them to play G or T.
So by not using depth charts, I get the best blockers in there. If I use the depth charts, I can't play them there.
It's got to be one way or the other.
November 17, 2011 at 06:20PM View BBCode
What is confusing right now is in Beta Single, I picked up a few undrafted FB with great blocking skills and the default depth chart is putting two of them at Guard.But in no depth chart can I actually assign them to play G or T.
So by not using depth charts, I get the best blockers in there. If I use the depth charts, I can't play them there.
It's got to be one way or the other.
Admin
--Chris
November 18, 2011 at 02:39AM View BBCode
I'll check the routine that puts them in without a depth chart.--Chris
Admin
I'm going to log in as you and screw with your depth charts for a moment.
--Chris
November 18, 2011 at 02:45AM View BBCode
Originally posted by redcped
What is confusing right now is in Beta Single, I picked up a few undrafted FB with great blocking skills and the default depth chart is putting two of them at Guard.
But in no depth chart can I actually assign them to play G or T.
So by not using depth charts, I get the best blockers in there. If I use the depth charts, I can't play them there.
It's got to be one way or the other.
I'm going to log in as you and screw with your depth charts for a moment.
--Chris
Admin
--Chris
November 18, 2011 at 02:49AM View BBCode
I don't see any FB's at G for you in Beta Single, did you waive them?--Chris
Admin
--Chris
November 18, 2011 at 03:06AM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
I see one, looks like he got injured, I'm going to uninjure him for testing.
--Chris
redcped
Well that is odd. It was showing the two FB as starting guards on the roster and basic depth chart.
Now it doesn't.
November 18, 2011 at 05:48AM View BBCode
Originally posted by Admin
Nope, I still can't duplicate your results.
--Chris
Well that is odd. It was showing the two FB as starting guards on the roster and basic depth chart.
Now it doesn't.
Admin
--Chris
November 18, 2011 at 06:04AM View BBCode
Crud. I have an idea of what could cause this but I need to see it happening before I can test it.--Chris
Admin
--Chris
November 18, 2011 at 07:08AM View BBCode
I've set the restrictions so your Best Role is also taken into account. If your Best Role matches the role, position, or depth parent and qualifies for the minimum rating he is eligible for the chart. Not ideal, but most Best Roles are position appropriate so this should go into effect rarely.--Chris
blakjakshalak
They are now visible as their best role depth chart and can be slotted there.
November 18, 2011 at 01:23PM View BBCode
I have several players that fall into this catagory. I had not looked at my team until last night. I picked up a HB who has a best role of RT and a couple of safeties who have best role DT. I couldn't see them on my depth chart either.They are now visible as their best role depth chart and can be slotted there.
redcped
It is odd that I cannot put them at LT or just in the T depth chart, though.
All of the T on my roster have best position of RT, but only the native T can be slotted at LT while the FB who are best position RT can only play RT.
November 18, 2011 at 02:03PM View BBCode
Yes, now I can slot two of the FB at RT.It is odd that I cannot put them at LT or just in the T depth chart, though.
All of the T on my roster have best position of RT, but only the native T can be slotted at LT while the FB who are best position RT can only play RT.
Pages: 1 2