Can I make it so all teams can manipulate their stadiums as of year 1?

[TrickyD]

Can I make it so all teams can manipulate their stadiums as of year 1?

I realize it takes away a bit of the realism, but one of the things I enjoy most is putting together a money-maker stadium and having to wait 17 years to renovate the original stadium for Arizona (for example) keeps me from wanting to use them in a franchise.

Could someone please explain the process of going about this for me if it is indeed possible?

Thanks! Registered tonight and this is my first post, but I've lurked and used your site's rosters and Helmets for quite some time... Keep up the good work

[mckerney]

You cannot do this for all teams, and Arizona is one of the teams that you cannot. You can do this for any team that doesn't have a constuction plan in place by starting far enough in the future that teams with no renovation or construction plans in place will not be within the 15 year lease, but for teams like Arizona with a plan in place it is set to be completed X years after the league is started.

Also, to start in the future you will need HeavyReign's fictional league generator, though Jim advised against using it and you may not be able to find easily if you don't have it aleady.

[TrickyD]

Thanks a lot for the heads up mckerney, I definitely appreciate it.

I thought maybe it'd be something as simple as popping open a file and switching a couple numbers around, but I guess not.

Thanks again for the reply.

[Ben E Lou]

Also, to start in the future you will need HeavyReign's fictional league generator, though Jim advised against using it and you may not be able to find easily if you don't have it aleady.I'm not sure that "Jim advised against using it." I'd have to look up his posts, but I believe that a more accurate statement would be that "Jim reminded us that third-party utilities can potentially cause unusual results." He's playing in a multiplayer league that used HR's generator, so he obviously doesn't think it is THAT dangerous.

[Ben E Lou]

OK....I was able to find two comments he made regarding third-party utilities:\

Regarding perceived stats problem with 5.0c: I think the person reporting the problem was using a third-party utility to generate a random player file, and that's inevitably going to cause skewed statistics.http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/~fof/forums/showpost.php?p=387501&postcount=2





Regarding 5.0d comments:These studies are great to read, but if you're going to use a third-party utility to generate a new player file, needless to say, it completely invalidates the data.

Someone was making all sorts of noise rejecting 5.0c/d and scaring the townsfolk because the stats were off - but they were using a third-party utility as well.

Also, if you eliminate inflation, it makes cap management tougher on the AI because contracts have a certain level of inflation built in. The inflation controls are meant either for leagues or for people who really hate inflation, and don't mind that the NFL salary structure would probably collapse without it.

As SkyDog noted, there's no question less players are retained by the AI than a typical NFL team retains. And while there are quality free agents going unsigned, it's not a huge number. More than I'd like, but not a huge number. Preliminarily, the evidence suggests that 5.0d is not perfect by any means, but likely an improvement over 5.0b.http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/~fof/forums/showpost.php?p=391452&postcount=84

[KWhit]

He posted this over at IHOF a while ago:

Had I known we were starting the league with a utlity, I would have expressed concern. Probably a residual effect, then, and nothing to worry about. I thought someone had created a fictional import file.
http://www.fof-ihof.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=14912#14912

[Ben E Lou]

He posted this over at IHOF a while ago:


http://www.fof-ihof.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=14912#14912
Aha, then scratch that comment about him playing in a league that uses it. Obviously he wasn't aware of it. Still, his "residual-effect-and-probably-nothing-to-worry about" comment is prety much in line with my general comment about the potential for unusual results