What exactly is "Experience Reduction"?

[castorius]

What exactly are the effects of "experience reduction"? This comes up when you attempt to change a player's position. But what are the implications on the ratings? Does it show in the ratings?

Can you eventually regain/recover this "experience" that was reduced? And will we know when he has regained it?

If you get the prompt "will not lose any ratings, but will get an experience reduction hit", is it worthwhile to pursue this position change? Is it easy to regain the reduced experience? A ratings hit can often lead to a permanent stunt in development, but is experience reduction just as bad? or is it more of a temporary thing?

[Chubby]

i believe that is talking about the hit to cohesion you will take

[Fonzie]

Others can feel free to chime in here, but my impression is that by "experience reduction", the game is really just referring to a reduction in the player skill "red bars." Which, of course, can be rebuilt with playing time. So, I view this as a temporary change in most young players.

In my opinion, whether the position change is worthwhile or not depends on the significance of the experience reduction, your need for a player at that position, and whether the player will suffer a permanent ratings change.

[Fonzie]

Originally posted by Chubby
i believe that is talking about the hit to cohesion you will take

Dola-

Chubby's right, but only if the player in question had been a starter for a while.

Edit: forgot my dola!

[castorius]

Well I guess I'm trying to decide whether I should change Terrell Owens to a Split End or leave him as a Flanker, even though I'm gonna play him at Split End (opposite of my starting Flanker: Torry Holt). The prompt I got when I attempted to change Owens' position was "no effect on the ratings, but you'll get a small experience reduction hit". So should I just keep him as a Flanker and just play him at Split End or should I actually change his position to Split End and play him at Split End? Will he do better at Split End if I make him officially a Split End? Is it wiser to take a little loss now (experience reduction), that heals over time and then Terrell Owens could then become awesome at Split End, or should I just keep playing him off position even though he may be continually getting a small penalty every time?

Will Terrell Owens gain experience playing at Split End if I keep playing him there in the depth chart (even if I don't change his primary position to a Split End officially)?

The other dilemma is with Brian Urlacher, who simply was a talent I couldn't pass up on in the initial draft. I already had a great MLB in Keith Brookings. So I'm thinking of playing Urlacher at the Weakside Outside LB spot. Should I just keep playing him at WLB without changing his primary position? Will he ever improve at WLB so that he never takes a penalty in his ratings/experience if I keep playing him there on the depth chart? Or will I have to actually change his primary position for him to no longer take a long term penalty hit?

BTW, a WILB (Weak Inside LB) qualifies for a MLB right?

[castorius]

Basically the situation is as follows:

Terrell Owens as a Flanker playing Split End:
-very small penalty every time he plays
-advantage short term

Terrell Owens changing his position to a Split End playing as Split End:
-small penalty initially, but eventually recovers and then no longer gets a penalty hit while playing
-advantage long term

Is this how the system works in FOF2K4?

[Chubby]

don't switch TO, just play him at SE. if you hit "have scout suggest" it should put him in there anyways.

urlacher you may have to manually make sure he is starting each week. shouldnt affect his ability tho, the only time i make switches is if going from O to D or switching around OL

[Primal]

Good question, I'd like to know the logic behind this as well... It seems I always start 2 Left Guards (one at Right).

Does this have an effect on his performance? To me a guard is a guard.

[castorius]

Originally posted by Chubby
don't switch TO, just play him at SE. if you hit "have scout suggest" it should put him in there anyways.

urlacher you may have to manually make sure he is starting each week. shouldnt affect his ability tho, the only time i make switches is if going from O to D or switching around OL

The Recommend button actually made Owens the backup Flanker, much to my disappointment

My 3rd WR sucked (and that's putting it very lightly), but the Recommend actually made him my starting Split End.

So you don't think I should change Urlacher's official primary position, but I have to keep putting Urlacher as WLB on the depth chart before every game? Is that what you're saying?

Finally, I found it quite interesting that you mentioned that you do position switches for your O-Line. I mean, changing a Guard to a Tackle I could understand, but what about Left Guard playing Right Guard and vice versa? I figure Right Tackle to Left Tackle is somewhat of a significant change, but aren't both guard spots (left & right) not much different? I too have two Left Guards starting for me (one starting at LG, the other starting at RG).

[Chubby]

yeah, i would say ust play TO and Urlacher out of postion by putting them in the starting lineup yourself.

as for the OL thing, it's nothing that I have any basis for, just superstition/habit/personal preference. i rarely do any switches at all but if i do themits usually early on in their career

[Buzzbee]

I don't have a definitive answer, but I BELIEVE that playing a SE as FL or vice versa is relatively cosmetic. There may be some subtle difference as far as the AI is concerned, but with the randomness of results in FOF, I don't think playing TO as a SE will do you any harm. Over a career, there might be a slight difference in performance, but I don't think it would be very significant. Also, the experience drop will be somewhat negligible (I'm guessing maybe five points per category at most). As a result, I PERSONALLY wouldn't change TO.

In regard to the LB dilemma, that may be a little trickier. Weight (NOT height) plays a factor in how well players switch positions. A MLB will have a higher "optimum range" than an OLB. For example, the "optimum" range for MLB's might be 240 lbs. - 260 lbs. while the "optimum" range for an OLB might be 220 lbs. - 245 lbs. (these are just examples - I don't know specific ranges).

As a result, a 220 lb OLB may not transfer very well to a MLB position. Likewise a 260 lb MLB may take a decent hit when transferring to OLB.

Note: Weight only matters when TRANSFERRING a player to a new position. If you see a 210 lb stud MLB in the draft, his weight will have NO bearing on his performance. It would only come into play if you tried to change his position. If that 210 lb stud MLB has sorry run stopping skills, but excellent pass cover skills, he might be a candidate to switch to SS (he might have to be an OLB to switch to SS, I can't remember if MLB's are allowed to).

To address your specific Urlacher question, I'm really not sure. Just as with Terrell Owens, I don't think there would be a big dropoff in simply playing Urlacher as an OLB while officially leaving him as an MLB. If you need to to it to make sure you have the required players at MLB/OLB then it may make sense.

Lastly, in regard to "regaining" that experience, yes players who change positions will regain that experience. It is just like any other player who has room to develop. In Urlacher's case you would probably see him go from all red to mostly red with some green. For example if he is rated 75/75 in run stopping, you might see that change to 70/75 (70 being the "red" rating and 75 being the "green" rating).


Hope this was helpful.

If you want more specifics regarding position changes I would recommend either pinging or private messaging QuikSand. I know from experience that he is very knowledgeable when it comes to position changes and has a very good gut feel for players who will transition well. I would classify him as the resident position change expert.

[Buzzbee]

Originally posted by castorius

Finally, I found it quite interesting that you mentioned that you do position switches for your O-Line. I mean, changing a Guard to a Tackle I could understand, but what about Left Guard playing Right Guard and vice versa? I figure Right Tackle to Left Tackle is somewhat of a significant change, but aren't both guard spots (left & right) not much different? I too have two Left Guards starting for me (one starting at LG, the other starting at RG).

I'm not positive, and I'm too lazy to look it up, but I think I remember Jim making a comment about the Tackle position and changing positions. If I remember correctly, and understood correctly (which is a BIG if) playing a LT as a RT is the only position where playing a player out of position makes a big difference. I think this meant RG vs. LG - FL vs. SE - MLB vs. OLB - FS vs. SS. I don't think it applies to making an OL play in the WR slot (don't think you can do it anyway).


I can't remember the reasoning Jim used, but I believe he did say LT played as RT would result in lesser performance. Not sure if it goes the other way (playing RT as LT).

[korme]

Originally posted by castorius
BTW, a WILB (Weak Inside LB) qualifies for a MLB right?

Every ILB is an MLB

[Buzzbee]

Triple Dola:

Ok, so I'm not too lazy. Here is the quote:

Originally posted by Solecismic
This brings up another question... many people have told me FOF4 can be a bit tedious, though it obviously has more function than past versions.

From reading email and a lot of forum posts, I think it's because of the split between positions. Some NFL teams are really anal about this, and their LDE would never play RDE unless there was an emergency, or an intervening training camp. Other teams may switch if it's third down.

The penalty for making a switch like that in FOF4 is very slight, except when it comes to offensive tackles, because most teams want their top tackle at LT.

So, my question is "was the split the reason you didn't embrace FOF4, and if so, should it be eliminated, or is there a better way to handle it, given that every position does have subtle differences?"

And here is the link to the thread:

Link to old thread

NOTE: This is in regard to FOF4, but I am assuming that it still applies to FOF24k, or is at least relevant.

[castorius]

Originally posted by Buzzbee
I'm not positive, and I'm too lazy to look it up, but I think I remember Jim making a comment about the Tackle position and changing positions. If I remember correctly, and understood correctly (which is a BIG if) playing a LT as a RT is the only position where playing a player out of position makes a big difference. I think this meant RG vs. LG - FL vs. SE - MLB vs. OLB - FS vs. SS. I don't think it applies to making an OL play in the WR slot (don't think you can do it anyway).


I can't remember the reasoning Jim used, but I believe he did say LT played as RT would result in lesser performance. Not sure if it goes the other way (playing RT as LT).

Thanks for the insight Buzzbee, and don't worry I'm as lazy as they come

I believe it is the RT trying to switch to LT where there is a huge effect. I could totally understand that because of the explanation Jim used in the quote in your most recent post (see I'm too lazy to explain it ).

I'll just play them off position like I intended on doing initially.

Thanks for the feedback guys, and if anybody has anything more to add, I'm all ears.