Questions (patch related)

[Solecismic]

I've been working on the patch for a few days now - getting pretty bogged down looking for reported bugs that I just can't find.

I'm pretty sure I can finish this tomorrow, but I'll need ViaTech's help updating the executable. Hopefully they can do this as soon as I'm ready.

I'd appreciate follow-ups to the following questions. I really don't want to release the patch until I've covered what's been reported.

It seems the out-of-position player problems can be traced to the use of a game plan that was made with the initial demo. I've put something in the game to detect those game plans.


1) Could the person who had the game log of an illegal shift penalty declined, AND the result was a first down please post that section of their game log. I fixed a problem where the result was, for instance 2nd-and-25 accepted versus 3rd-and-3 declined. But I didn't see where that would be the case if the result were a first down.


2) Someone reported that changing two players' numbers in succession led to both having the same number. I have tried this a few times, and haven't been able to recreate.


3) Someone reported that a punter won defensive player of the year with more than 100 tackles. I think he was using the bad game plan, but still, I don't see how that would affect defensive positions. Has anyone seen anything like this without using a bad game plan?


4) A few people have reported that good returners (like Dante Hall) do not have their 9/9 return ratings from the player file reflected in new games. Does this happen with Hall's counterpart in the file shipped with the game (Kevin Dylla)?


5) A few people have reported that TCY imported drafts crash the game. I have tried generated draft files, TCY draft files, all sorts of things. But they all keep working just fine. Could someone experiencing this post an .faf file that crashes the game? And tell me exactly where it came from (TCY export or otherwise)? And what message (especially addresses) appears when it crashes.


6) Some people have reported unusually low league rushing averages. Has anyone experienced this (3.5 ypc or below league-wide) without using the invalid game plan?


Thanks for your help.

[TLK]

bump.....

[mckerney]

Originally posted by Solecismic
2) Someone reported that changing two players' numbers in succession led to both having the same number. I have tried this a few times, and haven't been able to recreate.

Remember this happening to me, and just managed to recreate.

Just managed to recreate. It doesn't happen when changing the number of two players. What you do it you change the number of one player, then open the player card of another, clicking on the change number button but instead of changing the 2nd (works with multiple player though, so it could be 3rd or forth) you click cancel.

[Alf]

Originally posted by Solecismic
5) A few people have reported that TCY imported drafts crash the game. I have tried generated draft files, TCY draft files, all sorts of things. But they all keep working just fine. Could someone experiencing this post an .faf file that crashes the game? And tell me exactly where it came from (TCY export or otherwise)? And what message (especially addresses) appears when it crashes.


I generated a TCY 1.2a draft file (FOF5 format) and when iI clik on Import Draft, FOF2004 crashes immediately.

I will post/email this draft file later today from home.

[SnowMan]

6) Some people have reported unusually low league rushing averages. Has anyone experienced this (3.5 ypc or below league-wide) without using the invalid game plan?

Just finished the 2007 season, no imported game plans, and the league avg for Yards/Carry was 3.5. The teams were anywhere from 4.5 to 2.9, with only 3 teams being over 4 ypc, and 3 teams being under 3 ypc.

[Ben E Lou]

E-mailing two draft files now. Mine crashes immediately. Here's the "error signature"

AppName: frfoot2004.exe
AppVer: 5.0.0.0
ModName: frfoot2004.exe
ModVer: 5.0.0.0
Offset: 000d753d

Also, I haven't replaced the original file on my laptop. I just started a new game with the default file, and got 84/90, 84/95 as Kevin Dylla's return ratings.

[Samdari]

Originally posted by Solecismic
5) A few people have reported that TCY imported drafts crash the game. I have tried generated draft files, TCY draft files, all sorts of things. But they all keep working just fine. Could someone experiencing this post an .faf file that crashes the game? And tell me exactly where it came from (TCY export or otherwise)? And what message (especially addresses) appears when it crashes.


6) Some people have reported unusually low league rushing averages. Has anyone experienced this (3.5 ypc or below league-wide) without using the invalid game plan?

Hmmm,

The first few times I tried to import a draft, it crashed. Today, I was able to import one successfully. I started a new career, and the same file I was able to import before crashed the game, both in the first and second years of drafting. I have emailed the .faf to support AT solecismic.com. I am using WinXP btw.

As for the rushing totals, most of the problems people are talking about have to do with the leaguewide rushing averages. Since we can only change our own, if the AI is using a flawed plan, then that could certainly account for what we are seeing.

Do you want any of the debugging information from the drashes sent to you?

[Ben E Lou]

Just renamed the NFL file to "players.fdt" Hall was rated 0 in punt returns, but 76/85 in kick returns.

[yabanci]

2) Someone reported that changing two players' numbers in succession led to both having the same number. I have tried this a few times, and haven't been able to recreate.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I reported this. I'll email you the screenshots and see if I can recreate it. Thanks for tackling all this (pardon pun).

[yabanci]

4) A few people have reported that good returners (like Dante Hall) do not have their 9/9 return ratings from the player file reflected in new games. Does this happen with Hall's counterpart in the file shipped with the game (Kevin Dylla)?


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I reported this too. A spot check of a career generated with the default file shows Dante Hall is rated as he should be and other guys like Philip Buchanon are good too. It looks like maybe they're just being generated incorrectly from the NFL player file.

[dacman]

Originally posted by Solecismic
6) Some people have reported unusually low league rushing averages. Has anyone experienced this (3.5 ypc or below league-wide) without using the invalid game plan?


My league-wide average has been 3.5 or 3.4 ypc for every year of my now 11-year career. I am using the scout recommended game plan and I have never even attempted to use the game plan import feature. I am using primelord's player file.

I'm wondering if the running/passing statistical anomalies are more a result of the player file rather than the game engine.

[wheels]

career rushing average is certainly under 4 ypc, most likely more like around 3.75. 11-year career. no modified gameplans or rosters. scouts and coaches control everything except signing players.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally posted by Solecismic
6) Some people have reported unusually low league rushing averages. Has anyone experienced this (3.5 ypc or below league-wide) without using the invalid game plan?


Thanks for your help.


I'll have to wait until I get home to get details on this. I am only 4 years into a career with the initial player file--so it may have more to do with that than anything. If the rushing averages are as low as I recall, would it help you if I emailed in the files?

[Eaglesfan27]

I initially posted about the illegal shift penalty being declined, and now I can't find a log where it resulted in a first down, but I have found several logs where it was declined where it shouldn't have been, such as the team ending up with a 3rd and 4 as opposed to a 2nd and 20 in my case. It sounds like you already fixed this. I will keep looking for the first down game log, but can't seem to find it now.

[primelord]

Originally posted by dacman
My league-wide average has been 3.5 or 3.4 ypc for every year of my now 11-year career. I am using the scout recommended game plan and I have never even attempted to use the game plan import feature. I am using primelord's player file.

I'm wondering if the running/passing statistical anomalies are more a result of the player file rather than the game engine.

It seems like that is a real possibility that it is in the player file and not the game engine. There have been some reports that using the fictional player file generator that HeavyReign created results in more normal looking league wide rushing averages.

[Solecismic]

Thanks for the draft files. I've received several, including one that's about 70 times the size of a normal draft file (I'm afraid to look at it).

Unfortunately, none of them are crashing. Could those of you who sent me files tell me what operating system you're using?

[John Galt]

Originally posted by Solecismic
Thanks for the draft files. I've received several, including one that's about 70 times the size of a normal draft file (I'm afraid to look at it).


LOL. I'm not realy sure why that made me laugh, but it did.

[WSUCougar]

Originally posted by Solecismic
Thanks for the draft files. I've received several, including one that's about 70 times the size of a normal draft file (I'm afraid to look at it).
Picture Jim opening it up, and with a dazzled look on his facing saying mystically:

"My god...it's full of stats."

[Ben E Lou]

I sent one. I'm using Windows XP.

[3ric]

Originally posted by Solecismic
Thanks for the draft files. I've received several, including one that's about 70 times the size of a normal draft file (I'm afraid to look at it).

Unfortunately, none of them are crashing. Could those of you who sent me files tell me what operating system you're using?

WHOOPS! That's was my file Jim meant! I never saw it was as large as 9 MB... :eek:

(Sorry to clutter up your mailbox, Jim)

Funny thing is, it <b>was</b> generated by Jim's draft file generator. I have to check the csv to see what's wrong.

[3ric]

Dola.
The csv contains only the normal 945 rows, but it turns into a 9 MB monster of a file every time.

[Celeval]

Originally posted by Solecismic
Unfortunately, none of them are crashing. Could those of you who sent me files tell me what operating system you're using?

Didn't send a file, but crashing. Simmed two TCY seasons, both newly created dynasties, both from 1.2a all the way through. Two separate draft files, both crash.

Windows XP Professional

Error Signature:
AppName: frfoot2004.exe AppVer: 5.0.0.0 ModName: frfoot2004.exe
ModVer: 5.0.0.0 Offset: 000d753d


Edit: Sending Files

[3ric]

Originally posted by 3ric
Dola.
The csv contains only the normal 945 rows, but it turns into a 9 MB monster of a file every time.

Can someone else try it out? I don't know what's wrong.

1971_fof2k4.csv (http://hem.fyristorg.com/kristian9/1971_fof2k4.csv)

[Huckleberry]

When I try to open that file up in Excel, it's using semicolons instead of commas to separate fields. The only comma is between hometown and home state.

[Solecismic]

Looking at the faf file, it's semi-colon delimited, not comma-delimited. It seems to interpret strings as extremely long. I'm surprised that didn't crash the file generator.

[Huckleberry]

Jim -

Seeing as how we both made our 584th post in response to 3ric's file question, I would like to hereby request that I'm allowed to help with the beta testing and input into the next release of The College Years. I've got lots of great ideas that aren't worth posting about because people will take them as complaints. ;)

[Solecismic]

I'm not even thinking about TCY right now. After about five months without as much as a day off (including weekends), I'm thinking about a long vacation as soon as I finish the patch.

Jonathan Franzen's "Corrections" is waiting in the bookcase, as are dozens of other novels. The tabby is about to be evicted from my favorite reading chair.

[Huckleberry]

Kick that cat out. And enjoy the vacation, you deserve it.

I purchased FOF2004 this week and am loving it so far. This is my first non-TCY purchase from the FOF series.

[cuervo72]

Originally posted by Solecismic

Jonathan Franzen's "Corrections" is waiting in the bookcase, as are dozens of other novels. The tabby is about to be evicted from my favorite reading chair.

Bah, that's just homework for your next game's player file.

[3ric]

Originally posted by Solecismic
Looking at the faf file, it's semi-colon delimited, not comma-delimited. It seems to interpret strings as extremely long. I'm surprised that didn't crash the file generator.

Thanks, working on it now...

OK, I got a draft file in the correct size (117 KB) out of it (after correcting some errors) but it still crashed FOF2k4 after importing.

AppName: frfoot2004.exe AppVer: 5.0.0.0 ModName: frfoot2004.exe
ModVer: 5.0.0.0 Offset: 000d753d

[amdaily]

Originally posted by primelord
It seems like that is a real possibility that it is in the player file and not the game engine. There have been some reports that using the fictional player file generator that HeavyReign created results in more normal looking league wide rushing averages.

Didn't we conclude HR's generator ended up producing QB abnormalities after a few seasons?

Jim - In the inital patch thread you said you'd be looking at the high QB yard totals and high QB ratings. Any news on that front?

[Ben E Lou]

When I ran things with the HR rosters for a few years, it still produced abnormally high 4,000-yard passers.

[Calis]

I also ran into the TCY import causing a crash, but I just started a new dynasty and imported the same file and it worked fine. Then I loaded up another one and it crashed with the same file, odd stuff.

Originally posted by amdaily
Didn't we conclude HR's generator ended up producing QB abnormalities after a few seasons?

Is this true? If so I've missed the discussion on this.

I'm about 6 years into my dynasty with a HR utility created roster and I'm getting much more realistic stats than with the default rosters.

[Calis]

Oh nm, yeah it's still unrealistic but I think it's better than the default by quite a bit, from my experience.

I'm getting good rushing numbers so far, but still averaging a little over 10 4000+ yard passers a season.

Just misunderstood what was said.

[thrym]

bump...

sticky anyone?

:)

[primelord]

Originally posted by Ronnie Dobbs2
Isn't HR's generator based off of the talent levels of the initial rosters? So if those initial rosters gave too much passing, wouldn't HRs as well?

Well they are based off of the splits that are described in the player generator, but I thought someone said looking at the default player file that the talent was actually a little higher than what was described.

[Solecismic]

I found the import bug. It's XP-only (maybe NT as well, didn't check). This is the second XP-only bug I've found (the first was in beta, and almost cost me my sanity). I'm going to have to start developing on XP in the future, as it seems to be more fragile than Windows Me, even (which I currently develop on for exactly that reason).

[Jon]

Originally posted by Solecismic
I found the import bug. It's XP-only (maybe NT as well, didn't check). This is the second XP-only bug I've found (the first was in beta, and almost cost me my sanity). I'm going to have to start developing on XP in the future, as it seems to be more fragile than Windows Me, even (which I currently develop on for exactly that reason).

If you develop on XP, please make sure it's okay on Windows 98, for those of us too cheap to update to the newer version. FBCB was developed on XP and runs very slowly on Windows 98 to the point of being unplayable.

[wbonnell]

Originally posted by Solecismic
I found the import bug. It's XP-only (maybe NT as well, didn't check). This is the second XP-only bug I've found (the first was in beta, and almost cost me my sanity). I'm going to have to start developing on XP in the future, as it seems to be more fragile than Windows Me, even (which I currently develop on for exactly that reason).

I find it interesting that you say that. The software groups/companies that I've worked for have always used the NT line for application development. Obviously, the perception is that the NT kernel is much more stable, and, anecdotally, I've found this to be true. Now that 9x and NT have merged, this should be a non-issue: there's no longer any reason to use an older OS.

However, since the applications that we build typically deploy to various OSes (usually some unix flavor), we maintain test environments for each one. I'm not sure what kind of budget you have, but it would be a good idea to have test machines (or disk partitions) for all supported OSes. Of couse, being an old cubicle programmer at CA, you don't have to be told that!

[Gallifrey]

XP manages resources differently. If you configure your drive for NTFS, it takes the system even farther away from the '98 environment.
It is different enough that developing using XP is advised. You will see drivers developed just for XP etc.

[petrochile]

Originally posted by Solecismic

Jonathan Franzen's "Corrections" is waiting in the bookcase, as are dozens of other novels. The tabby is about to be evicted from my favorite reading chair.

I just got done reading this book a few weeks ago. It is an enjoybale book, and Franzen is a talented writer, and no doubt it is interesting and a relaxing read. The characters are memorable, which is always a good thing. I hope you enjoy it.

[HeavyReign]

Originally posted by Jon
If you develop on XP, please make sure it's okay on Windows 98, for those of us too cheap to update to the newer version. FBCB was developed on XP and runs very slowly on Windows 98 to the point of being unplayable.

That is more of a combination of the memory usage of the game and programming language used. I wouldn't expect Jim to encounter a similar issue.


Didn't we conclude HR's generator ended up producing QB abnormalities after a few seasons?

As far as the fictional league generator, if you notice anything that needs to be tweaked just let me know. Just give me as much information about any issues as you can and I'll take a look. It is fairly easy to tweak things in the generator.

[Solecismic]

Originally posted by wbonnell
I find it interesting that you say that. The software groups/companies that I've worked for have always used the NT line for application development. Obviously, the perception is that the NT kernel is much more stable, and, anecdotally, I've found this to be true.




I heard that conventional wisdom in the workplace many a time. And I never understood it. Shouldn't we be developing on the weakest system possible?

I made that point to a team lead a while back, and his answer was that customers always upgraded to the latest system. But that was in the business world, and I'm not even sure that's true any more.

Yes, I have two other computers (NT 2000 and XP) available for compatibility checks. I always run the game to check basics, but didn't think to test the draft import.

I've been wondering why, though, the background image looks like crap on XP and NT? Why are all those black lines there when the older system (Me) does a very good job stretching the bitmap properly to fit the game size?

[cuervo72]

Originally posted by Solecismic
I heard that conventional wisdom in the workplace many a time. And I never understood it. Shouldn't we be developing on the weakest system possible?

I made that point to a team lead a while back, and his answer was that customers always upgraded to the latest system. But that was in the business world, and I'm not even sure that's true any more.


Well, here at work I'm on Windows 2000, and it was just a year ago that we migrated because they wanted to wait until the OS was out for a while to make sure it was stable enough (?). Oh, and we have to do our web development with Netscape 4.x in mind, as that's still the predominant browser here (that's Gov't for ya).

At home I'm still running Windows 98 on a 266MHz processor with I think 64MB RAM. So no, we don't all upgrade to the latest system. :)

[wheels]

Originally posted by Solecismic
I heard that conventional wisdom in the workplace many a time. And I never understood it. Shouldn't we be developing on the weakest system possible?

I made that point to a team lead a while back, and his answer was that customers always upgraded to the latest system. But that was in the business world, and I'm not even sure that's true any more.

Yes, I have two other computers (NT 2000 and XP) available for compatibility checks. I always run the game to check basics, but didn't think to test the draft import.

I've been wondering why, though, the background image looks like crap on XP and NT? Why are all those black lines there when the older system (Me) does a very good job stretching the bitmap properly to fit the game size?

now that would be a bug fix of the highest priority.:D

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by HeavyReign
As far as the fictional league generator, if you notice anything that needs to be tweaked just let me know. Just give me as much information about any issues as you can and I'll take a look. It is fairly easy to tweak things in the generator. HR:

My experience in running for some time with your rosters was that things were fine in the first few seasons, but eventually (10+ seasons) things still got out of whack.

--Ben

[CraigSca]

Originally posted by SkyDog
HR:

My experience in running for some time with your rosters was that things were fine in the first few seasons, but eventually (10+ seasons) things still got out of whack.

--Ben

That would have nothing to do with HeavyReign's utility, that would point the finger at incoming draftees.

[Solecismic]

I'm thinking the problem has to do with changes I made to the engine to emphasize wide receivers.

The balance in the initial player file is fine. The FOF 2004 player file is much smaller than the FOF4 player file because it doesn't contain free agents who presumably play at the 0 level. I need to update the instructions.

[Ben E Lou]

I just realized that HR did an update to his utility. I'm re-running those tests, just in case.

[Bonegavel]

Originally posted by Solecismic
Thanks for the draft files. I've received several, including one that's about 70 times the size of a normal draft file (I'm afraid to look at it).

Unfortunately, none of them are crashing. Could those of you who sent me files tell me what operating system you're using?

Windows XP Pro.

[Ben E Lou]

Jim:

There's another small bug that I haven't seen anywhere. There is a rounding problem. For example, in the test universe I'm running, there wer 10,299 completions for 111,134 yards. Yards per completion is listed at 10.7, when it is actually 10.79.

The same holds true for league yards per carry.

[Bonegavel]

Originally posted by Solecismic
I found the import bug. It's XP-only (maybe NT as well, didn't check). This is the second XP-only bug I've found (the first was in beta, and almost cost me my sanity). I'm going to have to start developing on XP in the future, as it seems to be more fragile than Windows Me, even (which I currently develop on for exactly that reason).

I found discrepancies developing with Visual C++ 6.0 between 98/NT (similar code bases to ME / XP). Simple things like setting up PENS and working with FONTS would work differently in the 2 depending on placements.

Win98 seemed to be more forgiving with where I would place items, which may be good or bad.

The main problem I remember having was in OnDraw() with an item in a for() loop. I placed the item in there by accident, but Win98 didn't care. The minute I ran it on NT the thing farted and died. I moved the item where it belonged outside the loop and both were happy.

I tend to think (hope, is more like it) that the NT base is more "fragile" because it forces better code. My example had the 98 box reproducing the same thing each iteration of the loop which was a waste of resources... NT said no.

I may be off base, but I was a bit worried when I found out you were developing on ME due to my experience above.

[HeavyReign]

Originally posted by CraigSca
That would have nothing to do with HeavyReign's utility, that would point the finger at incoming draftees.

Right. I wonder how many players from the original file are actually in the game at that point and how many of them are still making an impact.

[Gallifrey]

Originally posted by Bonegavel

I tend to think (hope, is more like it) that the NT base is more "fragile" because it forces better code. My example had the 98 box reproducing the same thing each iteration of the loop which was a waste of resources... NT said no.

[/B]

Your right on.

[Solecismic]

From what I've seen, it's really six of one, half a dozen of the other. NT is better with variables, but it's also more "proper". Earlier versions of NT (not sure if this is still the case) always initialized everything to 0, which made for nasty surprises when first running on '95.

I chose Me because people complained about it the most, said it was the bastard child of the Windows series. But XP is catching up.

[RPI-Fan]

Jim:

It appears there _may_ be some issues with Hall of Fame selection critera.

<a href="http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/%7Efof/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17178">See this thread</a>.

Thanks,
~kyle

[Darkiller]

I just can't wait to begin my first serious FOF2004 career as early as the patch comes out :-))

[cartman]

The same arguments for the different flavors of Windows can be made for the different flavors of Unix. Solaris is pretty forgiving, HPUX not as much. But if the code isn't solid on AIX, then it just doesn't even try to run. It's the hardest UNIX platform to write for, but the programs that are written well are solid.

That being said, I agree with Jim's decision to write the software on the worst possible platform. If it runs well there, then it's slicker than snot on a slide on the better platforms.

[Primal]

Originally posted by Darkiller
I just can't wait to begin my first serious FOF2004 career as early as the patch comes out :-))

I hope its still before the weekend...

[Cringer]

Originally posted by Primal
I hope its still before the weekend...

it IS the weekend :confused:

[SnowMan]

Still Friday in Jim's neck of the woods.

[Cringer]

Originally posted by SnowMan
Still Friday in Jim's neck of the woods.

But when work is over on friday, the weekend begins :D

But i believe he started this thread saying he hoped to have it done tomorrow,and that was from this morning right? So thats when i'm expecting it. But hoping for it late tonight in the wee hours of the morning.......:)

[aej]

Originally posted by Solecismic
I found the import bug. It's XP-only (maybe NT as well, didn't check).

I'm on Win98Lite, and using the same 2003 TCY draft I've had one crash, one successful import and then 3 more crashes. The last one gave the following report:

FRFOOT2004 caused an invalid page fault in
module FRFOOT2004.EXE at 0167:004d753d.
Registers:
EAX=0408fcfc CS=0167 EIP=004d753d EFLGS=00010286
EBX=00000001 SS=016f ESP=01010e48 EBP=010110a0
ECX=001ed3e0 DS=016f ESI=0073db58 FS=1207
EDX=024b7a68 ES=016f EDI=024b7a68 GS=0000
Bytes at CS:EIP:
83 7c 08 14 31 74 0f 8b 8d 70 fe ff ff 83 c1 01
Stack dump:
0073db58 024b7a68 01010e74 bff7a10e bff7a567 8160b000 00000040 0000026a 00000000 00000008 bff713e2 00000167 bff7ce64 bff741f7 81655860 bff7dafa

[Wolvendancer]

I am also finding inflated passing numbers, with a League YPCarry around 3.5 in Season 12. I use a run-heavy gameplan, did not draft, and use the standard player file.

[Capital]

In the past, when a patch for FOF was released, was a restart required? The only reason I ask is that I just got back from vacation and now want to start over. I want to play it today, but I hear that a patch may be released shortly. Is there any reason to wait for the patch and not play the game?

[DolphinFan1]

Capital, sometimes it was required sometimes not. Depending on what the patch was for. Not sure until Jim releases it.

[Darkiller]

I'm holding until it's released. The sooner the better and Jim said it would be this WE.

[amdaily]

This patch shouldn't require a restart. Jim said in another thead he wouldn't be adding in a requested tweak because it would require a restart.

[Capital]

Thanks, as I was looking for past history. Based upon what I have seen in my limited few seasons before vacation, the game seems very solid without too many/if any showstoppers.

[Capital]

Thanks, as I was looking for past history. Based upon what I have seen in my limited few seasons before vacation, the game seems very solid without too many/if any showstoppers.