6.0e Bugs/Issues thread

[Northwood_DK]

<s>I still can’t get the playing time for quarterbacks to work in the regular season. Even with the playing time set to 1 (least) the starting QB will play all game.</s> SKYDOG EDIT: Not a bug. Working as per help file.

[Ben E Lou]

Deleted replies. Edited first post. We'll use this thread as they come in.

[captkirk685]

The attendance figures are really unrealistic, Colts only draw 47000 for a 12-4 team, playoff games not getting sold out...but thats just a few that I have noticed...other then that I really like this game

[Vinatieri for Prez]

I still static attendance numbers. You'll go 5 games with exactly 71,600 and then the last 3 games with exactly 72,400.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Individual single season records still show yards per carry with the decimal in the wrong place. I'm pretty sure this was in the bug list before.

[Ben E Lou]

Cosmetic/Clean-Up Issue

With the changes to the Adjustments screen, the text in the help file now contradicts the text on the screen with regard to "More" meaning the difference between the current value and always (on screen/incorrect) and "More" meaning a straight percentage more (help file/correct). I have tested and verified that the Help File version is the correct one by setting short passing to zero in all situations on the Basic screen, and adjusting it to "50% More." Such a game plan resulted in only 20 short passes for the season, which jibes with the Help File.

[twothree]

Cosmetic/Clean-Up Issue

The text in the help file contradicts the text on the screen for multiplayer global game options. The text on the screen states "Global Options (only the commissioner's settings are used)" and the help file correctly explains which settings the commissioner controls, and which are controlled by the individual users.

One fix would be to redesign the screen to separate the options into two boxed groups, one for those controlled by the commissioner and one for those not controlled by the commissioner. However, the quickest fix would probably be to remove the text in parentheses after Global Options and leave the screen alone. Or, replace the text "Global Options (only the commissioner's settings are used)" with something like Multiplayer Global Options (see the help file for an explanation)".

[devynd]

The attendance figures are really unrealistic,

That's for sure. I'm running a Pittsburgh team in a custom league and it's averaging 53,000 in a 70,000-seat stadium. Even with 70,000 seats, every game should be a sellout and there should be at least a 10-year waiting list for season tickets. (This case might be caused by the "level playing field", but I've seen it before with other Pittsburgh teams.) I suppose FOF wants to use attendance to add challenge to the game's financial model, but I wish it were more realistic. I also don't see a breakdown of attendance by seat type -- is there one? -- so I can't tell which prices to lower to create sellouts. (No team in my league is selling at greater than 81% of capacity.)

Some other things while I'm here. I just got the patch, so I don't know if any of these have changed (or if I'm just missing something), but I don't think so:

1. I don't see tiebreakers listed anywhere; I've had to check NFL.com for them. In my most recent season, I thought I had my division clinched with a week to go because even with a loss and a New York win, I'd have the same division record and a better conference record. I had forgotten that the second NFL tiebreaker is actually common games; I was reminded only when I lost, New York won, and I found myself eliminated from the playoffs altogether. (I kept my best player, my starting RG, inactive for the last game. He was healthy enough to play but still recovering from a separated shoulder. I would have played him had I realized that a loss could knock us out of the playoffs.)

2. I am unable to trade the rights to a player I have drafted but not yet signed. This hit me twice in the past season. First, a team drafted a player I wanted, and I was unable to even try to trade for him (not that that team would have traded him anyway). Then my first-round pick held out for more money, and I signed a replacement whose current estimate is a little better, so I no longer really need the guy I drafted but I can't trade his rights. (Also, is it now possible to make a trade involving only draft picks? I haven't tried it yet.)

3. I shopped a player around, and the team that showed 100 interest then refused to trade for him. I know that the Shop Player screen has a disclaimer, but if a team is unwilling to trade for a guy under any circumstances, then I don't see why it should indicate 100 interest in him when I shop him. I've shopped other players and received "no significant interest" from any GM, and although that has been strange sometimes, I can live with it. I can see a team with very low interest indicating 100 interest, because as the screen says, it's relative. But a team with no interest at all indicating 100 interest is strange to me. (I got revenge, though. At the start of training camp, I traded a backup RB with zero carries to the same team for their fifth-round pick. Although he was more highly rated than any of their other RBs, they cut him in the preseason, so I got their fifth-rounder for nothing.)

4. Not necessarily an issue, but weirdness. I have a DE (Walter Remington) who was pressed into service as a starter due to injuries; he started eight consecutive games after Week Seven and was tired from overuse. My regular starters became healthy at season's end and Remington was able to sit on the bench for the last game of the year; although he did play in the game, he was rested enough that he was no longer tired. Then my locker room report tells me that Remington is disgruntled about his playing time! He never was before, and now that my season is over I can't do anything about it, and he is going into free agency.

[beargrowlz]

43 seconds left in the half and the bad guys get a first down at their own 38. My coach calls a timeout.

Next play goes for 0 yards. The bad guys call a timeout.

Same thing drove me nuts in 6.0d.

[MizzouRah]

That's for sure. I'm running a Pittsburgh team in a custom league and it's averaging 53,000 in a 70,000-seat stadium. Even with 70,000 seats, every game should be a sellout and there should be at least a 10-year waiting list for season tickets. (This case might be caused by the "level playing field", but I've seen it before with other Pittsburgh teams.) I suppose FOF wants to use attendance to add challenge to the game's financial model, but I wish it were more realistic. I also don't see a breakdown of attendance by seat type -- is there one? -- so I can't tell which prices to lower to create sellouts. (No team in my league is selling at greater than 81% of capacity.)
At the bottom of the box score, it lists tickets sold by section for the game.

Some other things while I'm here. I just got the patch, so I don't know if any of these have changed (or if I'm just missing something), but I don't think so:

1. I don't see tiebreakers listed anywhere; I've had to check NFL.com for them. In my most recent season, I thought I had my division clinched with a week to go because even with a loss and a New York win, I'd have the same division record and a better conference record. I had forgotten that the second NFL tiebreaker is actually common games; I was reminded only when I lost, New York won, and I found myself eliminated from the playoffs altogether. (I kept my best player, my starting RG, inactive for the last game. He was healthy enough to play but still recovering from a separated shoulder. I would have played him had I realized that a loss could knock us out of the playoffs.)
They are not listed, but they follow the NFL rules.

2. I am unable to trade the rights to a player I have drafted but not yet signed. This hit me twice in the past season. First, a team drafted a player I wanted, and I was unable to even try to trade for him (not that that team would have traded him anyway). Then my first-round pick held out for more money, and I signed a replacement whose current estimate is a little better, so I no longer really need the guy I drafted but I can't trade his rights. (Also, is it now possible to make a trade involving only draft picks? I haven't tried it yet.)
Maybe I'm thinking hockey or something, because I know it can be done in the NHL, but I'm not so sure about the NFL.

Yes, you can trade draft picks only.

3. I shopped a player around, and the team that showed 100 interest then refused to trade for him. I know that the Shop Player screen has a disclaimer, but if a team is unwilling to trade for a guy under any circumstances, then I don't see why it should indicate 100 interest in him when I shop him. I've shopped other players and received "no significant interest" from any GM, and although that has been strange sometimes, I can live with it. I can see a team with very low interest indicating 100 interest, because as the screen says, it's relative. But a team with no interest at all indicating 100 interest is strange to me. (I got revenge, though. At the start of training camp, I traded a backup RB with zero carries to the same team for their fifth-round pick. Although he was more highly rated than any of their other RBs, they cut him in the preseason, so I got their fifth-rounder for nothing.)
I think it models football quite well, but I see what you are saying.

4. Not necessarily an issue, but weirdness. I have a DE (Walter Remington) who was pressed into service as a starter due to injuries; he started eight consecutive games after Week Seven and was tired from overuse. My regular starters became healthy at season's end and Remington was able to sit on the bench for the last game of the year; although he did play in the game, he was rested enough that he was no longer tired. Then my locker room report tells me that Remington is disgruntled about his playing time! He never was before, and now that my season is over I can't do anything about it, and he is going into free agency.
Is he a red flag player or have a bad attitude?

[beargrowlz]

Defense goes into 3-4 w/Goal line defense on aggressive pass and pass calls at end of game despite setting Goal line usage to "0" under aggresive pass and pass.



<TABLE cellSpacing=1 width="98%" bgColor=#ffcc00 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD align=left bgColor=#fef9da>Baltimore: Strong formation, strength is right. The defense is in a 34 with goal-line personnel and 2-deep bump-and-run coverage, expecting the pass. Cole is blitzing.
2-2-BAL39 (4Q: 01:38) Brock Harper pass fell incomplete, intended for WR Tony Hill. CB Louis Wright knocked the ball out of his grasp.

</TD></TR><TR><TD align=left bgColor=#fef9da>Baltimore: Pro formation, strength is left. The defense is in a 34 with goal-line personnel and 2-deep bump-and-run coverage, keying aggressively on the pass.
3-2-BAL39 (4Q: 01:29) Brock Harper pass fell incomplete, intended for WR Tony Hill. DE Tyrone Keys hurried the quarterback into a bad throw.

</TD></TR><TR><TD align=left bgColor=#fef9da>Baltimore: Single-Back formation with trips receivers, strength is right. The defense is in a 34 with goal-line personnel and 2-deep bump-and-run coverage, keying aggressively on the pass.
4-2-BAL39 (4Q: 01:16) Brock Harper scrambled for 3 yards. Tackled by CB Mario Clark.

</TD></TR><TR><TD align=left bgColor=#fef9da>Baltimore: Pro formation, strength is left. The defense is in a 34 with goal-line personnel and 2-deep bump-and-run coverage, keying aggressively on the pass. Cole, Ekern and Ambrose are blitzing.
1-10-BAL42 (4Q: 00:59) Brock Harper sacked by ILB Carl Ekern for a loss of 6 yards. Sack allowed by Tom Rafferty. The ball was fumbled and recovered by BAL Dan Alexander on the BAL36.

</TD></TR><TR><TD align=left bgColor=#fef9da>Baltimore: Weak formation, strength is left. The defense is in a 34 with goal-line personnel and 2-deep bump-and-run coverage, keying aggressively on the pass. Cole and Hamilton are blitzing.
2-16-BAL36 (4Q: 00:38) Brock Harper pass completed to WR Tony Hill for 19 yards. Tackled by CB Louis Wright, assisted by ILB Carl Ekern. Hill gained 11 yards after the catch.

</TD></TR><TR><TD align=left bgColor=#fef9da>Baltimore: Pro formation, strength is left. The defense is in a 34 with goal-line personnel and 2-deep bump-and-run coverage, expecting the pass. Cole is blitzing.
1-10-CHI45 (4Q: 00:19) Brock Harper pass completed to WR Darryl Phenix for 13 yards. Tackled by ILB Dick Ambrose, assisted by CB Mario Clark. The receiver ran his route right over the middle of the field.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


http://bearsruletheworld.com/junk/def-personnel.jpg

[MalcPow]

I don't have much data onhand, but just through playing I think I stumbled on a problem in the Team Summary screen. PRPct seems too high from my experience and PDPct seems very low (as in my team rating is lower somehow than every single one of my players' ratings). Individual stats don't seem to be glaringly off, but there may be a problem with the Team Summary screen calculations. Just something to look at.

[Sgran]

I detailed this in another thread, but I'll put it here so that it's on the bug thread. The CPU is not managing rosters properly in the future. Many teams are taking 20-30 players into training camp even with 20 million in cap space. I have my cap increase level turned down to get more action in free agency, but teams should adjust to that accordingly. The Lions have 21 players on their roster -- not even enough to hold a scrimmage.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

There still seems to be a bug with contracts signed mid season and the cap calculations. I know in the bug list, Jim said he "tried" to make it work out. It is improved now in terms of proper amounts being added back to the cap after you cut a vet. And it also is correct in figuring out the cap hit when you sign a guy midseason (in terms of the cap room you need to sign him). However, as soon as the guy is signed, the cap calculation is then incorrect again. Here's my example:

I have 90k in cap room (after cutting a vet, in which the bug on adding cap room back was fixed). I go to sign a rookie at minimum 320k salary in week 14. The game says I need 80k to sign him (after the mid season proration), which is also correct. And the game lets me sign him. However, after I sign him, instead of still having 10k cap space left over (and being able to swap him out later during the season with another rookie should an injury arise), once the guy is on my team, it now says I have NEGATIVE 230k cap room. So, it appears that after I signed the guy, the game nailed me for the entire 320k of his salary instead of the 80k it said it would. That would almost be ok if I then later cut the guy and I got the 320k back. But instead when I cut him, the game only gives me the 80k back, so that after the transaction, I'm actually still NEGATIVE 150k.

I guess I just don't understand why Jim is having problems with what seems to be a very easy mathematical calculation. I'm going to email support for a better idea of things.

[nilodor]

In the basic defense depth chart when using a 3-4 defense the backups for the WILB and WLB are switched. So if you have 2 WLB and 2 WILB the backup WILB will be wongly put in as the backup WLB and vice versa when you hit the recommend button.

[Fonzie]

I posted this elsewhere, but it probably better belongs here: in my SP career (in year 2030) I've got four teams with a stadium capacity of zero. All four teams currently have stadium renovations in progress (but a couple of other teams with renovations do not have zero capacity).

Another team renovated a stadium and now has a capacity of 14,400.

[Shard77]

Completion percentage into double coverage still seem much too high. I watch all my games on the viewer (In both of my leagues) and opposing QB's are completing well over 50% of their passes into double coverage. It's so skewed that when I see the message, "The QB is throwing into double coverage" I just assume it's going to be a completed pass.

[Shard77]

Posted this on the general forum, but figured I'd repeat it here:

Was looking at my attendance figures recently because they are down significantly from last season and noticed something strange: my attendance in every home game so far this season is 0 in the upper deck. Here are the details:

Section: Attendance/Capacity

Stadium: 36,700/55,000
Upper Deck: 0/12,900
End Zone: 7,400/9,300
Mezzanine: 4,700/5,400
Sideline Seats: 7,100/8,200
Club Seats: 10,600/11,700
Luxury Boxes: 6,900/7,500

This pattern is the same pre and post patch.

[gottimd]

Not sure if this was said already, but the HTML output for the Single Season Individual Records Rush Avg, the decimal I think is one too many places to the right. After 8 seasons, I don't think our single season record is .55 rushing yards avg..

[twothree]

Here is a very minor issue...

When two or more players are tied for 1st place in a category on the individual career records page, the player listed first in that category does not show on his individual player card that the record is tied. This is only happening when there are ties for 1st place in the career records or ties for 1st place in the career records when sorted by an individual team. If two or more players are tied for 2nd place or 3rd place (etc.) in individual career records then all players have the "(t)" on their player cards.

Examples: On the player's card who is listed first in Tackles it will show, "1st All-Time Tackles", but on the other players, who have the same tied 1st place record, it will show, "1st (t) All-Time Tackles". Or, on the player's card who is listed first in Tackles when looking at an individual team such as Denver (DEN) it will show, "1st DEN Tackles", but on the other players, who have the same tied 1st place record, it will show, "1st (t) DEN Tackles".

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Individual single season records still show yards per carry with the decimal in the wrong place. I'm pretty sure this was in the bug list before.

Interestingly, for the first season after the conversion the decimal point is in the right place. So, I guess it's not a bug in the game, but a bug in the conversion process. I'm guessing this can never be fixed so that particular list will forever be out of order with only the more recent seasons at the top. After a few seasons, we won't even be able to see those great numbers from past seasons.

[NoMyths]

As years in a career accumulate, the loading times for switching between player cards increases to a detrimental amount of time (around 2 seconds to load for each player screen after 90 years, for example). This doesn't affect the statistics screen on players' cards, though (where this kind of delay might be expected) -- just the main screen with attribute bars and such.

I started an alternate career recently and after months of those long load times (a season was taking hours and hours, and almost none of that time was spent on gameplanning) and the difference between a new and advanced career is dramatic. If there is a way to keep those load times low, it will help a lot for those of us who enjoy loooong careers.

[Anthony]

i noticed in the Individual Career Records report Matt Leinhart is listed as tops for QB Rating, and he only had 69.6. My own Eli Manning had 100+ for QB Rating. anyone else seeing this?

i look at the bigger picture in a season and not so much game by game. end of season is when i like to sit back and enjoy the "year in review". anyone have an explanation? i'm not about to look over every record/stat with a fine toothed comb, but career records is something i'm sure to view every season so i want to make sure it's as accurate as possible.

[Anthony]

here's what i'm talking about (Leinhart is towards the bottom). also, i missed 2 other categories where he was listed as the leader:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v247/HellAtlantic/Leinhart1.jpg

now here he is appearing in some categories he obviously didn't lead the league in:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v247/HellAtlantic/Leinhart2.jpg


hmmm, and now that i look at it - how come there aren't any qualifiers for RB Yards Per Carry?



looking at the league stats a little closer, doesn't it seem that everyone in my league was pretty friggin' accurate? and there are a ton of guys who seemed to play every game. more than i would think was usual. maybe that's the reason.

[beargrowlz]

Defensive Game Plan Adjustment Not Working Properly.

Team is up by 21 points. In the adjustment screen, the team's defense is "always" supposed to be in agg pass, "never" in everything else.

http://bearsruletheworld.com/bears-stuff/defadj.jpg


The defense will call agg. run sometimes. Which kind of stinks when you're trying to protect a 20 something point lead and know the other team is bombs away.

<TABLE cellSpacing=1 width="98%" bgColor=#ffcc00 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD align=left bgColor=#dfdfdf>San Francisco: Single-Back formation, strength is left. The defense is in a 34 and 1-deep, man-to-man coverage, keying aggressively on the run.
2-5-SFO38 (3Q: 00:29) Jeff Rutledge pass fell incomplete, intended for WR J.T. Smith. CB Mario Clark defended the pass. The defense looked very familiar with that play.</TD></TR><TR><TD align=left bgColor=#dfdfdf>San Francisco: I formation, strength is right. The defense is in a 34 and 1-deep, bump-and-run coverage, keying aggressively on the run.
3-5-SFO38 (3Q: 00:20) Jeff Rutledge pass completed to FB William Andrews for 4 yards. Tackled by CB Clarence Scott, assisted by OLB Robin Cole. San Francisco's Ozzie Newsome was hurt on the play. This appears to be a minor ribcage injury. He should be able to remain in the game.</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


Next Drive

<TABLE cellSpacing=1 width="98%" bgColor=#ffcc00 border=0><TBODY><TR><TD align=left bgColor=#dfdfdf>San Francisco: Single-Back formation with four receivers, strength is right. The defense is in a 34 with nickel personnel and 1-deep, man-to-man coverage, keying aggressively on the run.
1-10-CHI38 (4Q: 13:02) Jeff Rutledge pass completed to WR Steve Largent for 8 yards. Tackled by ILB Carl Ekern. Largent gained 4 yards after the catch.</TD></TR><TR><TD align=left bgColor=#dfdfdf>San Francisco: Pro formation, strength is right. The defense is in a 34 and 1-deep, man-to-man coverage, expecting the pass. Cole is blitzing.
2-2-CHI30 (4Q: 12:33) Jeff Rutledge pass was blocked at the line, intended for RB Wendell Tyler. DE Tyrone Keys blocked the pass.</TD></TR><TR><TD align=left bgColor=#dfdfdf>San Francisco: Strong formation, strength is right. The defense is in a 34 and 1-deep, man-to-man coverage, keying aggressively on the run.
3-2-CHI30 (4Q: 12:24) Jeff Rutledge pass completed to TE Ozzie Newsome for 2 yards. Tackled by CB Louis Wright.</TD></TR><TR><TD align=left bgColor=#dfdfdf>San Francisco: Single-Back formation with trips receivers, strength is left. The defense is in a 34 with nickel personnel and 2-deep man-to-man coverage, keying aggressively on the pass. Cole is blitzing.
1-10-CHI28 (4Q: 11:49) Jeff Rutledge pass completed to WR J.T. Smith for 21 yards. Tackled by S Gary Fencik. The receiver ran his route right over the middle of the field. Smith gained 1 yard after the catch.</TD></TR><TR><TD align=left bgColor=#dfdfdf>San Francisco: Strong formation, strength is right. The defense is in a 34 and weak-side man, otherwise cover-7 zone coverage, keying aggressively on the run.
1-7-CHI07 (4Q: 11:15) Jesse Caldwell ran inside the right tackle for 0 yards. Tackled by DT Howie Long, assisted by OLB Robin Cole. </TD></TR><TR><TD align=left bgColor=#dfdfdf>San Francisco: I formation, strength is right. The defense is in a 34 and 1-deep, man-to-man coverage, keying aggressively on the run.
2-7-CHI07 (4Q: 10:42) Jeff Rutledge pass completed to WR Steve Largent for 7 yards and a TOUCHDOWN! Chicago 24, San Francisco 9</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


Very frustrating. "Never" and "Always" shoulld mean "never" and "always" respectively.

[twothree]

here's what i'm talking about (Leinhart is towards the bottom). also, i missed 2 other categories where he was listed as the leader:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v247/HellAtlantic/Leinhart1.jpg

now here he is appearing in some categories he obviously didn't lead the league in:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v247/HellAtlantic/Leinhart2.jpg


hmmm, and now that i look at it - how come there aren't any qualifiers for RB Yards Per Carry?



looking at the league stats a little closer, doesn't it seem that everyone in my league was pretty friggin' accurate? and there are a ton of guys who seemed to play every game. more than i would think was usual. maybe that's the reason.

The obvious thing that jumps out to me is that Leinhart has the most pass attempts, 664, the next highest Bulger has 604. Was Bulger also listed? So, my guess is that a certain number of pass attempts are needed to qualify for the career QB rating category. The same goes for Yards per carry, there is probably a minimum number of carries required before you can qualify for that category. And, I would guess that is not a number of attempts per season, but a total number of attempts in the player's career.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

I think that might be it.

[AlexB]

I've seen something similar, and my take is that in some categories the Arizona leader gets picked rather than the true leader, so maybe it's an look up / selection problem, with them being team #1 in FOF?

[gstelmack]

Issues with goal-line defense being called when it shouldn't plus getting negative numbers in the gameplanning screens are discussed in this thread:

http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=58837

[twothree]

When beginning a new multiplayer game, the text descriptions for the Yes/No buttons for the "Begin new game with level economic playing field" selection on the New Multi-Player Game Options screen are still backward. The descriptions were fixed in a previous patch when you begin a new single player game, but they still have not been fixed when starting a new multiplayer game.

I don't start a new multi-player game that often, who does? :) , and didn't notice that the descriptions still did not get swapped around.

[Ben E Lou]

This isn't a bug, but a gameplay/implementation issue: injuries/cutting/IR.

I just went into preseason with 3 MLBs: my starter, a 2nd-year guy who had been drafted in the 6th round, and an undrafted rookie free agent. Rookie free agent is looking better than 6th-round draftee, so I'd like to keep him. However, 2nd-year guy gets "lucky" and breaks his toe in the final preseason game. He's probable and should be fully healed in two weeks. However, I have to get down to 53 players. I want to keep the rookie and cut the 2nd-year guy, but I can't do an injury settlement because he's in the penultimate year of his contract, and I can't stick him on the IR because he's probable. I don't have room for 3 MLBs, so I'm going to have to cut the one I want to keep. I'm not certain what the germaine NFL rules are here, and I understand why Jim removed the ability to IR guys the minute they have a hangnail. However, this situation is very frustrating. I think I'd rather the game allow the IR in this type of situation, and just deal with the resulting MP weirdness.

[johnnyshaka]

<s>I've seen this several times...there are no blitzers listed yet my nickelback is credited with a hurry. Did he blitz or not?
Carolina: Single-Back formation with four receivers, strength is left. The defense is in a 34 with nickel personnel and 3-deep zone coverage, expecting the pass.
2-10-PHI31 (4Q: 07:24) Patrick Ramsey pass fell incomplete, intended for TE Willie Gardner. CB Sheldon Brown hurried the quarterback into a bad throw. The quarterback threw away from the double coverage.</s>

SKYDOG EDIT: I wouldn't call this a bug, just a little confusing. The nickel back replaces the WLB. You're in a 3-4 defense, where the WLB *always* rushes, so your nickel back becomes the fourth pass rusher.

[johnnyshaka]

<s>I've seen this several times...there are no blitzers listed yet my nickelback is credited with a hurry. Did he blitz or not?
Carolina: Single-Back formation with four receivers, strength is left. The defense is in a 34 with nickel personnel and 3-deep zone coverage, expecting the pass.
2-10-PHI31 (4Q: 07:24) Patrick Ramsey pass fell incomplete, intended for TE Willie Gardner. CB Sheldon Brown hurried the quarterback into a bad throw. The quarterback threw away from the double coverage.</s>

SKYDOG EDIT: I wouldn't call this a bug, just a little confusing. The nickel back replaces the WLB. You're in a 3-4 defense, where the WLB *always* rushes, so your nickel back becomes the fourth pass rusher.


Uhm...I'm looking at the "Depth Chart-Nickel" screen and the Weak-Side Linebacker is still listed...the Weak Inside Linebacker is the one who is replaced by the nickelback. Am I missing something?

[Ben E Lou]

Uhm...I'm looking at the "Depth Chart-Nickel" screen and the Weak-Side Linebacker is still listed...the Weak Inside Linebacker is the one who is replaced by the nickelback. Am I missing something?

Hmmmmm...that's odd then. I wonder if it's a bug of a different kind: that the WLB is being replaced. That would be my guess.

[johnnyshaka]

Here's another odd situation with regards to 3-4 blitzing:

Carolina: Five-Receiver Spread formation, strength is right. The defense is in a 34 with nickel personnel and 3-deep zone coverage, expecting the pass. Halley (SLB) and Crawford (WLB) are blitzing.
3-4-CAR26 (3Q: 06:41) Patrick Ramsey pass completed to TE Willie Gardner for 8 yards. Tackled by S Herman Norton. Gardner gained 9 yards after the catch.

If my WLB is *always* rushing then why is he listed as blitzing? My WLB is only listed as the backup SLB and my SLB is not listed anywhere else in the depth chart. So, I doubt it's a situation where my WLB is actually on the field as the SLB or the SILB.

Looking over this particular game log my WLB is listed as a blitzer several times. Again, if he is supposed to be always blitzing, why is he showing up some of the time and not all the time? Or not at all if he is essentially a 4th linemen and part of the regular pass rush?

EDIT: I'm not sure what to think now. I went through a couple of other game logs and noticed that my WLB was listed as a blitzer in several formations (goal line, base 3-4, and nickel) but he also registered sacks and hurries while not being listed as a blitzer, and again, in several formations.

[johnnyshaka]

Hmmmmm...that's odd then. I wonder if it's a bug of a different kind: that the WLB is being replaced. That would be my guess.

The exact same situation arose again later in the game...so, I don't think it's a one time thing.

[marcmoustache]

I have problems with the in game html reports in that the game often crashes when I try and run them, but only when I choose to export the box scores and game logs.

[marcmoustache]

Not necessarily a bug, but is anyone surprised at how often your safeties make tackles on run plays when the defense is in a coverage with the safeties playing deep?

[marcmoustache]

Another one, the solevision text very often says that "the receiver ran his route across the middle of the field" even when he goes out of bounds on a short route - why is this? is it telling me just that it was a crossing route that beat the zone?

[Fonzie]

Odd roster management by the AI:

In my SP career the two biggest free agents available are big-time defensive line talents who were released by their teams during weeks 15 and 16 last season. Both players had in the years prior signed HUGE deals, and thus they generated substantial cap hits when they were released. Both were starters, both were having great years prior to being released, and neither were especially over the hill (they were 6 and 8 year veterans at the time).

Neither team is currently in cap hell, so it isn't clear why such star players would need to be cut (maybe they faced cap problems last year - hard to tell). I can only assume that the AI faced some roster illegality problem and handled it badly. I just cannot see how cutting a DE with 15.5 sacks late in the season can ever be considered wise.

[Flasch186]

perhaps they played for the Bengals and robbed a liquor store?

[Shard77]

Not necessarily a bug, but is anyone surprised at how often your safeties make tackles on run plays when the defense is in a coverage with the safeties playing deep?

It's also not unheard of to see defensive lineman making tackles on run or pass plays that are 20 yards + downfield. Unless these guys are dropping into deep zone coverages and have Dwight Freeney-like speed, this seems unlikely.

[Shard77]

Dola

The Michael-Vick syndrome (No it has nothing to do with dog fighting ;)):

QB's routinely completely long bombs with defensive linemen chasing them or in their face. I can see this happening on occasion, but it seems to be the rule rather than the exception.

Seems like the code should somehow tie in a QB's scrambling ability to his ability to complete passes on the run.

[Guelph Spartan]

I posted this elsewhere, but it probably better belongs here: in my SP career (in year 2030) I've got four teams with a stadium capacity of zero. All four teams currently have stadium renovations in progress (but a couple of other teams with renovations do not have zero capacity).

Another team renovated a stadium and now has a capacity of 14,400.

I recently had the same thing happen to me. 15 Years into my current league I decided to switch teams, so I moved to Tampa Bay. I looked at their stadium rating, which was Very Good considering it was only 2 years old. Where I ran into problems was when I tried to set ticket prices and I couldn't because they had a capacity of ZERO.
That must be really odd... playing a professional football game in an empty stadium. Anyways, I'm screwed because I can either start over (but I'm rather attached to this league) or just gut out the fact that I will have no ticket revenue for the next 12 years until my stadium lease is up.

[AlexB]

I remember Jim saying that this did happen in previous versions - he thought he had fixed it, but if the career was started pre 6.0e then the latest version will not fix the error from an earlier version.

[MIJB#19]

In the Simulation Window, during week 2 of the playoffs (with results masking on), the recently played games and upcoming games are not listed. The wild card round game of a division rival and the upcoming conference semifinal game of my team are not listed. The game instead gives the "No Games Scheduled" message. I know games show up during the regular season and never noticed them missing before during the playoffs (probably because it's the first time in 6.0e that one of my teams made the playoffs.:D)

Edit: Yeah, with hide results on, it makes sense to not list upcoming games. It still would seem okay to list the games that have been played in the last sim and maybe change the misleading "no games scheduled" to something like "potential scheduled games hidden".

[gstelmack]

A relatively minor issue, but:

In the Player Report Window, the Transactions List does not have enough room for all team abbreviations. This guy is on "MVW":

http://www.gstelmack.com/MVWProblem.png

[OldSchool]

Completion percentage into double coverage still seem much too high. I watch all my games on the viewer (In both of my leagues) and opposing QB's are completing well over 50% of their passes into double coverage. It's so skewed that when I see the message, "The QB is throwing into double coverage" I just assume it's going to be a completed pass.

Haha, that's exactly what I think when I see that message also.

[gstelmack]

On the double-coverage thing, keep in mind that a key factor in double-coverage is getting the QB to throw to someone else. If he's throwing into double-coverage, it means that the receiver has beat the coverage, so it wouldn't surprise me that the QB completes a lot of passes he decides to throw. You should still be seeing the QB avoid the double-coverage a lot.

[Sgran]

On the double-coverage thing, keep in mind that a key factor in double-coverage is getting the QB to throw to someone else. If he's throwing into double-coverage, it means that the receiver has beat the coverage, so it wouldn't surprise me that the QB completes a lot of passes he decides to throw. You should still be seeing the QB avoid the double-coverage a lot.

It is a part that could be more detailed in the future. Stuff like "He never should have thrown that ball." and "He pump fakes, then checks down to the running back." or "He throws into double coverage. The receiver knocks the ball away to avoid an interception." Or best yet "he throws into double coverage. Terrell Owens slows down to avoid a big hit. The ball falls harmlessly incomplete."

[Vinatieri for Prez]

On the double-coverage thing, keep in mind that a key factor in double-coverage is getting the QB to throw to someone else. If he's throwing into double-coverage, it means that the receiver has beat the coverage, so it wouldn't surprise me that the QB completes a lot of passes he decides to throw. You should still be seeing the QB avoid the double-coverage a lot.

I've always thought this too. When you see he "avoids throwing into double coverage," then the defense has been successful. When he throws into it, then that's probably bads news if the QB is a good one. So, I am not sure what the confusion is about.

[QuikSand]

If he's throwing into double-coverage, it means that the receiver has beat the coverage...

Is there something from the game documentation or a Solecismic Q&A that tells us this?

[Antmeister]

I've always thought this too. When you see he "avoids throwing into double coverage," then the defense has been successful. When he throws into it, then that's probably bads news if the QB is a good one. So, I am not sure what the confusion is about.

I agree with this. There definitely needs to be more of an explanation for the double coverage. Because if it is completed, is it because the QB doesn't see the coverage but yet has an amazingly accurate arm, did the receiver actually beat the coverage by his route running, does the coverage consist of a LB and a safety trying to cover a wide receiver, or did the receiver basically have a height advantage over his defenders and outjumped them.

The Solevision is still fairly new, so I know it still has room for growth, but it would be neat if the double coverage description could be fleshed out just a little more. Otherwise I actually prefer to watch Solevision than read the game logs now since I have a way better idea of how my players are performing.

[QuikSand]

I didn't find this with a short search, but my impression of how double coverge worked has always been:

-Through your defensive setups, you can (at least try to) assign double coverage to a certain receiver in various weights

-Presumably, the specific receiver being double covered will have a harder time getting open for the pass

-When a certain receiver is a designed target of a pass play but is double covered, it triggers a "dice roll" for the QB -- whose rating for "read defense" is employed for exactly this purpose (I think this is the only purpose for the "read defense" rating)

-If the QB fails this "read defense" test, he will force the ball to the heavily covered receiver anyway, presumably with a lower likelihood of success

-If the QB succeeds this "read defense" test, he will throw to another receiver, possibly get some advantage for doing so (a better chance of success, since the defense is focused on the double-covered guy -- that's just my speculation, not backed up by anything in the documentation), and this will be noted in the Solevision/gamelog details


This runs completely contrary to the "me too" stuff above... which is why I inquire whether the impression people have above is drawn from something other than just their guesses of how this works. If QBs are indeed completing a too-high share of passes going into double coverage (I have no idea is this is true), then either the model I'm describing above is incorrect, or it isn't being implemented very well.

[marcmoustache]

I think there's a danger in thinking in absolutes. You need to keep in mind the ability for a player to "make a play". e.g. the D is in 4-3 4 deep zone, the offense is in I form running a sweep, maybe, just maybe, the DE makes a play, beats his blocker, and tackles the RB for a loss.

However, the % caught in double coverage seems a bit too high.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

I didn't find this with a short search, but my impression of how double coverge worked has always been:

-Through your defensive setups, you can (at least try to) assign double coverage to a certain receiver in various weights

-Presumably, the specific receiver being double covered will have a harder time getting open for the pass

-When a certain receiver is a designed target of a pass play but is double covered, it triggers a "dice roll" for the QB -- whose rating for "read defense" is employed for exactly this purpose (I think this is the only purpose for the "read defense" rating)

-If the QB fails this "read defense" test, he will force the ball to the heavily covered receiver anyway, presumably with a lower likelihood of success

-If the QB succeeds this "read defense" test, he will throw to another receiver, possibly get some advantage for doing so (a better chance of success, since the defense is focused on the double-covered guy -- that's just my speculation, not backed up by anything in the documentation), and this will be noted in the Solevision/gamelog details


This runs completely contrary to the "me too" stuff above... which is why I inquire whether the impression people have above is drawn from something other than just their guesses of how this works. If QBs are indeed completing a too-high share of passes going into double coverage (I have no idea is this is true), then either the model I'm describing above is incorrect, or it isn't being implemented very well.


There is at least maybe one correction to your implementation. Some coverage automatically involves double coverage I think, regardless of whether you specifically assign ir in the pass coverage screen. I get this from this line in the help file regarding double coverage:

In double-coverage, a safety (usually the free safety first) automatically joins one of the cornerbacks. This doesn't mean there won't be double coverage elsewhere, just that it's automatic in this case.

With respect to the read defense rating, the help file is pretty specific about it:

QBs are rated . . . .and their ability to read the opposing defense, which determines how effective they are avoiding double-coverage to throw to a secondary receiver.

So, you seem to be bang on with this.

We have to assume that read defense has to be a useful rating (otherwise, why have it). Thus, it has to be a negative to throw into double coverage. There's no other way around it. But, it is only one of many modifiers. As I pointed out, if you have a great QB, throwing into double coverage does not necessarily mean an automatic incompletion or interception, or even an unlikely incompletion. If the pass is a short one, or the WR is good, or the DBs are not very good, or its a run agressive defense, etc. all go into the calculation that would still make a completion fairly likely.

So what's my point?

1) throwing into double coverage should reduce the chances of completing a pass

2) it's only one of many factors (and could be pretty minor if lined up against many other opposing ratings)

3) I still think the double coverage is successful if it forces the QB to read it and throw it elsewhere -- because that's the main point of double coverage.

So those raising this issue need to do more digging before I feel the game is out of whack on this subject; we need to know who is throwing it, who is catching it, what's the coverage, who the DBs are, etc.

[QuikSand]

Thansk for the follow up, V4P, I wasn't able to locate that nugget in the help file (shockingly) but I was pretty sure soemthing like that was there.

As for knowing all those details about what is happening on the play, my suspicion is we're going to be left very much in the dark there.

[Ben E Lou]

Still seeing the occasional case of an AI team getting into severe cap issues that causes it to mass-dump players. I'm well into a career started with 6.0e, and in 2022 FA1, Washington just cut down to 4 players, including releasing six guys with current ratings of 52 or higher, and several very recent draftees with 50+ future potential. Current cap is $186.3M, and this series of cuts has them at $106.5M in lost cap room this year, $42.61M in lost cap next year, and only $39.37M this year to spread among the 49 players they need to sign.

[Dutch]

Still seeing the occasional case of an AI team getting into severe cap issues that causes it to mass-dump players. I'm well into a career started with 6.0e, and in 2022 FA1, Washington just cut down to 4 players, including releasing six guys with current ratings of 52 or higher, and several very recent draftees with 50+ future potential. Current cap is $186.3M, and this series of cuts has them at $106.5M in lost cap room this year, $42.61M in lost cap next year, and only $39.37M this year to spread among the 49 players they need to sign.

Yeah, I'm regularly winning FOF titles in the 2020's due to a lack of competative teams to face.

The difference of AI "team talent" between 2006 and 2026 is uninspiring to say the least.

[gstelmack]

Still seeing the occasional case of an AI team getting into severe cap issues that causes it to mass-dump players. I'm well into a career started with 6.0e, and in 2022 FA1, Washington just cut down to 4 players, including releasing six guys with current ratings of 52 or higher, and several very recent draftees with 50+ future potential. Current cap is $186.3M, and this series of cuts has them at $106.5M in lost cap room this year, $42.61M in lost cap next year, and only $39.37M this year to spread among the 49 players they need to sign.

The part where they seem to be getting into bad cap trouble is two-fold:

1) Signing guys to big longterm contracts, then re-signing them the following season to another big longterm contract, killing them on bonus cap hit.

2) Signing guys, then IMMEDIATELY cutting them. I mean in the same stage without actually playing a game. Sometimes doing it more than once. And watching 6 teams do it in the same stage is high comedy.

Any other specifics anyone has seen?

[gstelmack]

Anyone else notice that "Recommend" on the gameplanning screens never seems to change anything on defense during the playoffs in an MP game, unless it is resetting to defaults stuff that you manually adjusted? Looks like it's gameplanning for your final regular season opponent.

[Shard77]

Anyone else notice that "Recommend" on the gameplanning screens never seems to change anything on defense during the playoffs in an MP game, unless it is resetting to defaults stuff that you manually adjusted? Looks like it's gameplanning for your final regular season opponent.


Yes, I've noticed this as well. Didn't know if it was something Jim did intentionally....figuring he'd want teams to have to manually game plan during the playoffs.

[gstelmack]

If I have the "Hide Results on Overview Screens" option checked, I do not get favorites or odds on the "Simulate Games" screen. I understand not showing the records here for games that have been simmed in case someone is simming and then watching Solevision. However, I would love to see the favorites and odds on this screen for games that not been simmed yet. No reason to hide those ever.

[QuikSand]

Here's another odd situation with regards to 3-4 blitzing:

Carolina: Five-Receiver Spread formation, strength is right. The defense is in a 34 with nickel personnel and 3-deep zone coverage, expecting the pass. Halley (SLB) and Crawford (WLB) are blitzing.
3-4-CAR26 (3Q: 06:41) Patrick Ramsey pass completed to TE Willie Gardner for 8 yards. Tackled by S Herman Norton. Gardner gained 9 yards after the catch.

If my WLB is *always* rushing then why is he listed as blitzing? My WLB is only listed as the backup SLB and my SLB is not listed anywhere else in the depth chart. So, I doubt it's a situation where my WLB is actually on the field as the SLB or the SILB.

Looking over this particular game log my WLB is listed as a blitzer several times. Again, if he is supposed to be always blitzing, why is he showing up some of the time and not all the time? Or not at all if he is essentially a 4th linemen and part of the regular pass rush?

EDIT: I'm not sure what to think now. I went through a couple of other game logs and noticed that my WLB was listed as a blitzer in several formations (goal line, base 3-4, and nickel) but he also registered sacks and hurries while not being listed as a blitzer, and again, in several formations.


Just to follow up on this... from some more recent attention and testing, it is quite clear that (at least) in the 3-4 formation, when the nickel package is used, the nickel back is essentially being assigned the WLB's always-rush role, rather than (essentially) that of the WILB, as we might have expected. This leads to very bizarre outcomes, and leaves us without any good idea how to manage or use personnel -- we have no choice but to put either a CB or S into essentially a DE role, which is absurd, of course. The assignment of other roles in the defense may also be messed up (it's less clear to me what's what) but at a minimim, this is a serious bug -- not just a reporting issue.

[stevew]

Does version 6E still require that your team have 2 healthy "safetets?" Just a minor issue I noticed in 6d w/ spelling. :)

[johnnyshaka]

Just to follow up on this... from some more recent attention and testing, it is quite clear that (at least) in the 3-4 formation, when the nickel package is used, the nickel back is essentially being assigned the WLB's always-rush role, rather than (essentially) that of the WILB, as we might have expected. This leads to very bizarre outcomes, and leaves us without any good idea how to manage or use personnel -- we have no choice but to put either a CB or S into essentially a DE role, which is absurd, of course. The assignment of other roles in the defense may also be messed up (it's less clear to me what's what) but at a minimim, this is a serious bug -- not just a reporting issue.

I just finished going through your "Minwage" thread and alarm bells went off when I saw you mention that you were using 3-4 as the base defense for a blitz-heavy defense. Without being able to define players' roles correctly using 3-4 I'm finding it utterly useless and wouldn't even waste my time testing with it.

Needless to say, I dumped the 3-4 a long time ago but not before spending two high draft picks on LBs in my MP league that could've been better served elsewhere had I tested this stuff prior to the draft.

We all know what happens to those who assume...

[Vinatieri for Prez]

I could be wrong about whether the NFL computes punting stats this way, but in FOF, a blocked punt counts as a punt for the punter. So, if he he punts his first for 40 yards and his second gets blocked, his stats show 2 punts for 40 yards and an average of only 20. I don't think this is right.

Edit: Never mind. Net average calculation involves "total punts" which is "net punts" plus blocked punts. So, FOF has it right.