FOF4c problems

Noble_Platypus · 10-15-2003, 06:48 PM

I thought Jim addressed these problems in the c patch but I guess not. I still have teams drafting a NT who run a 3-4 and then even though the guy was the #1 overall pick he rides the bench the length of that contract. Also, Teams are drafting players in the top 10 picks who are an average of 70-80%red bars and they are reserves. Veterans who dont even average 50% red are ahead of them. Sometimes its more like 30%.I know that being a first round pick doesnt always equate into automatically starting, but if that player is a blue chip player and your current roster has ass players at that postion then they should start.The same teams draft high every year, even though they are getting good players they dont play them, so it doesnt help. It really kills the challenge of the game. I am a big backer of FOF, but things like this really disappoint me and make me wish that much more that TPF is as good as it looks. The worst thing about all of this is I know there are no more patches or hope that any of these problems will be resolved.

Noble_Platypus · 10-15-2003, 08:46 PM

I guess I am the only one bothered by this

DolphinFan1 · 10-15-2003, 11:41 PM

Did you start a new career after patching? Just wondering. That may be it.

Dutch · 10-16-2003, 09:51 AM

Well, if TPF gets everything right even 1 year from now, I'll be impressed....

But anyway, since this is a new FOF 4c problem thread, let me remember the quirks I don't like/undersatand.

1. When I draft a FB who is rated 70 across the board, why does my veteran FB of 8 years and rated in the 40's across the board always get the nod by the scout? Didn't that same scout rate the rookie FB in the70's? I don't get it.

2. When Jim mentioned removing LT/RT designations (along with LG/RG and WLB/SLB/MLB and LDT/RDT and RDE/LDE ect.) I believe it's because it's the right thing to do with the current FOF engine. I constantly have WLB1 and WLB2 recommended by my scout to play WLB and SLB....I don't like that. When WLB1 is rated 50, WLB2 is rated 45, why is either of them recommended to play SLB by my scout when my scout rates my SLB at 50?

I understand that I can start whomever I want, whereever I want, whenever I want...but I want to understand why my scout thinks the way he/she does. If experience is a factor, why doesn't it reflect? Perhaps Game Experience should be a green bar added to each player along with Game Preperation.

Also, along the lines of additional feedback. I want to know why my players are being injured. If my guys are being injured because they are being out-physical'ed on the playing field, I want to know I need to have more strength and conditioning for that player. If it was a freak accident that couldn't be avoided, I want to know, so I don't worry my whole team is getting ready to take a trip to the OUT-torn ACL, be back in 48 weeks road.

Also, what recource is there if your players are badly out of shape and you only discover it in the pre-season or regular season? How about adding practices during game weeks. A game screen could be added that says you will practice on Tuesday? Wednesday? Thrusday? One, some, or all of the days? The practice is dedicated 75% to next weeks game situations, 25% to strength and condition? Or, my boys are out of shape, we need to spend 75% of the time doing sprints and running drills, and only 25% on next weeks matchups. How about when a team is so bad, the coach gives the dreaded, "We have to get back to the fundamentals" post-game speech. Or, maybe your team is simply exhausted from over training and they need to just do light workouts for the week. These things could be added to mid-week practices. Perhaps a post game report that says, you are having a lot of turnovers that could probably have been avoided if your players were not playing like they are still in the pre-season.

I think the plea's have been made many times but when you are buying a home it's, "Location, Location, Location". When you are a successful business, it's "Communication, Communication, Communication." And when you are growing sports simulation, it should be, "Feedback, Feedback, Feedback."

10-15-2003, 08:46 PM	#2
Noble_Platypus College Prospect Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: York, Pa	I guess I am the only one bothered by this __________________ We had the $240, we had to have the puddin'

10-15-2003, 11:41 PM	#3
DolphinFan1 College Benchwarmer Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Connecticut	Did you start a new career after patching? Just wondering. That may be it. __________________ GM of the Milwaukee Muscle Men of the ZFL. The 1st team in ZFL history to have a perfect losing season. I am on a quest to show that the Dolphins can win the Super Bowl. Or should I say Front Office Bowl, with FOF2K7. The revival of an old favorite, FOFC Wrestling Dynasty

10-16-2003, 09:51 AM	#4
Dutch "Dutch" Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Tampa, FL	Well, if TPF gets everything right even 1 year from now, I'll be impressed.... But anyway, since this is a new FOF 4c problem thread, let me remember the quirks I don't like/undersatand. 1. When I draft a FB who is rated 70 across the board, why does my veteran FB of 8 years and rated in the 40's across the board always get the nod by the scout? Didn't that same scout rate the rookie FB in the70's? I don't get it. 2. When Jim mentioned removing LT/RT designations (along with LG/RG and WLB/SLB/MLB and LDT/RDT and RDE/LDE ect.) I believe it's because it's the right thing to do with the current FOF engine. I constantly have WLB1 and WLB2 recommended by my scout to play WLB and SLB....I don't like that. When WLB1 is rated 50, WLB2 is rated 45, why is either of them recommended to play SLB by my scout when my scout rates my SLB at 50? I understand that I can start whomever I want, whereever I want, whenever I want...but I want to understand why my scout thinks the way he/she does. If experience is a factor, why doesn't it reflect? Perhaps Game Experience should be a green bar added to each player along with Game Preperation. Also, along the lines of additional feedback. I want to know why my players are being injured. If my guys are being injured because they are being out-physical'ed on the playing field, I want to know I need to have more strength and conditioning for that player. If it was a freak accident that couldn't be avoided, I want to know, so I don't worry my whole team is getting ready to take a trip to the OUT-torn ACL, be back in 48 weeks road. Also, what recource is there if your players are badly out of shape and you only discover it in the pre-season or regular season? How about adding practices during game weeks. A game screen could be added that says you will practice on Tuesday? Wednesday? Thrusday? One, some, or all of the days? The practice is dedicated 75% to next weeks game situations, 25% to strength and condition? Or, my boys are out of shape, we need to spend 75% of the time doing sprints and running drills, and only 25% on next weeks matchups. How about when a team is so bad, the coach gives the dreaded, "We have to get back to the fundamentals" post-game speech. Or, maybe your team is simply exhausted from over training and they need to just do light workouts for the week. These things could be added to mid-week practices. Perhaps a post game report that says, you are having a lot of turnovers that could probably have been avoided if your players were not playing like they are still in the pre-season. I think the plea's have been made many times but when you are buying a home it's, "Location, Location, Location". When you are a successful business, it's "Communication, Communication, Communication." And when you are growing sports simulation, it should be, "Feedback, Feedback, Feedback." Last edited by Dutch : 10-16-2003 at 09:56 AM.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)