An open letter to the "have nots"

[primelord]

I apologize in advance if I start to ramble in this post. I have been involved in or seen a number of conversations over the last day or so about the apparent growing divide between the "haves" and "have nots" in the FOF MP community. Obviously the most recent rounds of these conversations have been sparked by the fan popularity thread. However this has been a growing sentiment here for years now.

I don't think this should be a thread for debating what FOF should be or how it should work. Those are valid discussions and I recognize people's frustrations with those areas, but I think they are for another thread. I'd like this to be a discussion of working within what we do have and how the game does work. With each release, Jim continues to push the game closer towards a complete simulation of professional football. No matter how close he gets though, it will always be a computer game. Just like every other computer game in existence, there will always be flaws and there will always be optimal strategies. I believe for the "have nots" to close the gap they are going to have to accept that and work within the confines of what we have.

So these are a few of the regular complaints I have heard, that lead to this gap:

1. Time

Many people feel like they don't have the time to do thorough testing of the game that some others might. Those with the time and inclination therefor get an advantage over everyone else. This is obviously a valid point. There is an extensive list of real world things that are more important than our MP leagues. We all have constraints on our time. Some more than others.

My questions is, what strategy game exists that doesn't require some investment of time to get good at? Can we all agree that the more time you put into the game, in general the better you will be at it? There will always be some exceptions, but I think as general rule that holds pretty well.

To take it another step further, just like with every other game, FOF has people that play the game at an expert level. What game exists that doesn't require a significant investment of time in order to be competitive with experts of that game? It's a bit of an interesting dynamic here, in that you don't often run into games where you would regularly be matched up against the best in the world. That is what we have here though. It's likely that the best FOF players on the planet play in many of the leagues that we are a part of. It seems reasonable that you may need to invest some time with the game in order to hang with them.

2. Testing

It seems a lot of people don't feel like they should have to test their strategies out in order to be successful with them. I think this stems from most our beliefs that we know the game of football very well. Let's put aside the fact that a large percentage of us, myself included, likely don't know the game as well as we think we do. Again I ask what strategy game exists that doesn't require some sort of testing of your strategies to determine the best one? Now whether that testing takes the form of playing out multiple SP seasons or just game by game making adjustments in MP, it's really all testing at the end of the day.

I understand for some people, playing out a bunch of SP seasons and just pouring through the data is not an enjoyable way to spend their time. Yet do we think in any game where people play at a high level, those people didn't get there by continually testing and refining their strategy? How else can you honestly determine an optimal strategy without first putting it into practice.

3. General

I wasn't certain what to title the last “complaint” as it is a combination of little things I think. Many people feel that they are behind the learning curve when things like the fan popularity issue come to light. Issues like these are not generally obvious through standard game play and often either take some creative testing to discover, or are flat out discovered back accident. Some people like SkyDog are just naturally talented at discovering these type of things. They are able to think creatively about how things in the game may actually be working and they have the ability to work through extensive tests to root some of these things out.


By itself there is not an easy way to reconcile that difference. That is one of the areas that I myself struggle in. I am pretty good at dealing with straight forward information in front of me, but not nearly as good with having to “think outside of the box”. As we will see below though, I don't believe that is is as big of an issue as many think it is.


I am sure there are other things that led people to believe in the haves and have nots gap, but I think those are the main issues. So what is the solution for closing the gap? I would argue that the solution already exists. The “haves” in this community have gone above and beyond, in my opinion, in sharing the information they have discovered with the public. This strategy forum is filled with posts that will absolutely put you on the right path to success in MP leagues.


I have actually never been a big fan of all this open sharing of information. I am not saying I believe in a win at all costs stance, but I do think those that put the time and effort into developing their game deserve to reap the rewards of that effort. However I am quite clearly in the minority in that respect, and have been convinced by the others to share my small contributions when I have them as well. This is yet another unique situation to our community. In what other game is it essentially expected, that the experts you are competing against lay out their exact strategies for being successful? That is what we have here. The “haves” really doing their best to give everyone the information they need to be competitive in this game.


There may be some small advantages that people are keeping to themselves. If there are I am certainly not aware of them, but I think the possibility certainly exists. However I contend that everything you need to know to compete in the top FOF leagues, is right here in this forum. You don't have the time or patience to run a bunch of tests to learn how to beat this game? You don't have to. There are others doing that work for you and happily sharing that information. People like gstelmack are spending enormous amounts of time developing tools to help you deal with all of this information and level the playing field. If this gap exists I believe it is because people are refusing to take the help being offered to them.


So for those that believe they are in the have not group. What do you think needs to happen to close this gap?

[cuervo72]

I have actually never been a big fan of all this open sharing of information. I am not saying I believe in a win at all costs stance, but I do think those that put the time and effort into developing their game deserve to reap the rewards of that effort. However I am quite clearly in the minority in that respect, and have been convinced by the others to share my small contributions when I have them as well. This is yet another unique situation to our community. In what other game is it essentially expected, that the experts you are competing against lay out their exact strategies for being successful? That is what we have here. The “haves” really doing their best to give everyone the information they need to be competitive in this game.

Well, there are a couple benefits for both parties I think in this situation.

1. From the standpoint of the "haves" - competition. If you are someone who has figured this stuff out and have so significant an advantage over the rest of the league that you steamroll it year after year...where's the fun? Look at the lengths some go to in SP to try to give themselves a challenge. If you are in a MP league that is only a half a step up from SP, why bother? Heck, even as it stands now, you have owners who are in 5 different leagues but are STILL creating gimmick leagues (oh hi ECFL).

2. From the standpoint of the "nots". If you are in a league with someone who you know is a superior player - someone who is going to beat you down 90% of the time - how long are you going to subject yourself to that? Unless you're a sadist or driven enough to overcome that, you're not. You're going to find something else to do with your time. Unless you just go on auto-pilot and don't really care about competing. Typically you don't want owners like that though (unless you have problems finding 32 to begin with, but that's another discussion).

[primelord]

Well, there are a couple benefits for both parties I think in this situation.

1. From the standpoint of the "haves" - competition. If you are someone who has figured this stuff out and have so significant an advantage over the rest of the league that you steamroll it year after year...where's the fun? Look at the lengths some go to in SP to try to give themselves a challenge. If you are in a MP league that is only a half a step up from SP, why bother? Heck, even as it stands now, you have owners who are in 5 different leagues but are STILL creating gimmick leagues (oh hi ECFL).

2. From the standpoint of the "nots". If you are in a league with someone who you know is a superior player - someone who is going to beat you down 90% of the time - how long are you going to subject yourself to that? Unless you're a sadist or driven enough to overcome that, you're not. You're going to find something else to do with your time. Unless you just go on auto-pilot and don't really care about competing. Typically you don't want owners like that though (unless you have problems finding 32 to begin with, but that's another discussion).

Agreed. I have been converted and believe that the information share is by far the best thing for the community. It took me some time and a lot of discussions with SD and Quik to get there though.

[Draft Dodger]

I understand for some people, playing out a bunch of SP seasons and just pouring through the data is not an enjoyable way to spend their time. Yet do we think in any game where people play at a high level, those people didn't get there by continually testing and refining their strategy? How else can you honestly determine an optimal strategy without first putting it into practice.


hey, I'm all on board with running some tests to see how your new gameplan is going to work.

but, any game that requires you to run extensive test just to figure the fucking thing out is, quite frankly, doing it wrong. it's not a football sim - it's a football-themed puzzle.

I appreciate what FOF is - it can be a fun little game if you're either A) the type who will test the hell out of it to find out how everything works or B) the type of guy who can have fun at MP without winning. I happen to be the latter. There's a large group that falls in between those extremes, though, and those are the people I see expressing frustration or dropping out of FOF leagues completely.

[st.cronin]

hey, I'm all on board with running some tests to see how your new gameplan is going to work.

but, any game that requires you to run extensive test just to figure the fucking thing out is, quite frankly, doing it wrong. it's not a football sim - it's a football-themed puzzle.

I appreciate what FOF is - it can be a fun little game if you're either A) the type who will test the hell out of it to find out how everything works or B) the type of guy who can have fun at MP without winning. I happen to be the latter. There's a large group that falls in between those extremes, though, and those are the people I see expressing frustration or dropping out of FOF leagues completely.

:+1:

[ShaneTheMaster]

I don't think most people have a problem with people getting rewarded by putting more time and effort to figure certain things out. I think the main problem people have is that people are getting rewarded by information OUTSIDE OF THE GAME before the user is supposed to have the information. I think it is important to make that distinction.

[ShaneTheMaster]

hey, I'm all on board with running some tests to see how your new gameplan is going to work.

but, any game that requires you to run extensive test just to figure the fucking thing out is, quite frankly, doing it wrong. it's not a football sim - it's a football-themed puzzle.

I appreciate what FOF is - it can be a fun little game if you're either A) the type who will test the hell out of it to find out how everything works or B) the type of guy who can have fun at MP without winning. I happen to be the latter. There's a large group that falls in between those extremes, though, and those are the people I see expressing frustration or dropping out of FOF leagues completely.

I agree 100% with this.

[Eaglesfan27]

hey, I'm all on board with running some tests to see how your new gameplan is going to work.

but, any game that requires you to run extensive test just to figure the fucking thing out is, quite frankly, doing it wrong. it's not a football sim - it's a football-themed puzzle.

I appreciate what FOF is - it can be a fun little game if you're either A) the type who will test the hell out of it to find out how everything works or B) the type of guy who can have fun at MP without winning. I happen to be the latter. There's a large group that falls in between those extremes, though, and those are the people I see expressing frustration or dropping out of FOF leagues completely.

I agree 100%. I run many SP leagues for fun and to test things out. I'm not willing to create a bunch (or any) extreme rated player files just to figure out these mysteries. I do read all of the strategy threads on here though, and I'm convinced that people knew about this situation with popularity for a long time (at least several months) but never revealed it.

[primelord]

hey, I'm all on board with running some tests to see how your new gameplan is going to work.

but, any game that requires you to run extensive test just to figure the fucking thing out is, quite frankly, doing it wrong. it's not a football sim - it's a football-themed puzzle.

I disagree that extensive tests are required to figure the game out. Perhaps to figure out some of the smaller nuances, but to get a solid winning team together you do not need to have some extravagent game plan or super secret draft strategy. Most of the "converted" will tell you that once that stopped just throwing their hands up in the air and saying I can't do this, and started actually looking into it, there was not nearly as much to it as they thought.

Not to mention, the whole point here was that testing has alrerady been done for you. You don't want to test out offensive game plans? No problem. Ben has created an entire library of them for you. Sure you can squeeze a few more PPG out of some of those, but if you follow his recommendations on what type of personnel to use with them and you have actual talent on offense, you can win with any of those. You can win a championship with those unchanged.

Some of the finer things in the game may not be as clearly laid out, but there are also frankly not nearly as important.

[primelord]

I don't think most people have a problem with people getting rewarded by putting more time and effort to figure certain things out. I think the main problem people have is that people are getting rewarded by information OUTSIDE OF THE GAME before the user is supposed to have the information. I think it is important to make that distinction.

This is just flat out over stating the problem. The issue I am addressing has been around for long before the fan pop thread. I can assure you that, the "elite" have not been doing so well just because they knew that fan pop has meaning. Especially since the vast majority that did know, were not even accessing that info when they could.

[primelord]

I agree 100%. I run many SP leagues for fun and to test things out. I'm not willing to create a bunch (or any) extreme rated player files just to figure out these mysteries. I do read all of the strategy threads on here though, and I'm convinced that people knew about this situation with popularity for a long time (at least several months) but never revealed it.

You don't have to create extreme player files to figure these things out. It is being done for you. Again the fan pop issue is a) being blown massively out of propotion at this point and b) an incredibly small subset of what I am talking about here. It's not like the creation of that thread started all of this talk about unfair advantages in FOF. It's just the latest war cry.

[MalcPow]

I agree 100%. I run many SP leagues for fun and to test things out. I'm not willing to create a bunch (or any) extreme rated player files just to figure out these mysteries. I do read all of the strategy threads on here though, and I'm convinced that people knew about this situation with popularity for a long time (at least several months) but never revealed it.

I posted this in response to your post at WOOF about the timing of this revelation:

This is a fair point. I'll say that these observations and theories develop far more organically in practice than they appear in hindsight. I've targeted these kinds of players for our last two drafts, with motivation ranging from "there might be some benefit, so why not" in the first one (where I had no early round picks and no real grasp of the meaning) to "i'm pretty sure there's benefit" in our most recent draft. For me, the public availability of the program and the seemingly minor implications didn't pose a serious issue, but as the correlation has become increasingly more obvious to me it became more problematic. I'm still not sure if posting the information was the right thing to do, as it appears to have eroded some people's faith in the game's credibility more than is really warranted, but Ben and others encouraged the idea of putting this out there widely in discussions yesterday. I think they'll ultimately be proven right as people digest this information, but there have obviously been some frustrations associated with this.

I'm not sure that speaks to where you're coming from in this post or not. I still don't "know" a whole lot about what's really happening with this popularity correlation, but I feel like there's enough there to share it widely. I'm also not convinced that this is an angle anyone else has been pursuing in this league, and I don't consider my actions to be improper, especially in the contexts in which they were taken. The only motivation to putting this out there is to maintain competitive balance, and I can speak to the fact that those sentiments were felt most strongly by the owners in this league that stood to be brought under the most suspicion by its revelation. I hope that's helpful, I do think we're barking up the wrong tree if we're trying to find people who might have "done this." *shurg*

If we're having a witch hunt, I'm pretty sure I'm the only witch. I'm happy to defend my actions, as I can pretty honestly state that my confidence in this tell has evolved over time and did not materialize in full form immediately. It's important to me that this stuff is clear, I don't want these sorts of suspicions to spill over onto other people.

[Eaglesfan27]

MalcPow,

I saw your response and I'm not trying to have a witch hunt, but I'm quite certain that at least 3 people have used this to their benefit in the WOOF alone (that is the only league I looked at last night with old files.) You aren't the only one to have used this to your advantage. Also, if the benefit wasn't there, why wasn't this revealed months ago? I just don't think it is being overblown at all as several owners got steals in the 3rd, 4th, or later rounds with very high popularity that did not have the combines or bars to say they would be solid players, let alone studs. Anyway, I'm done commenting on this publicly, I just have to decide what I'm going to do about it, now.

[KWhit]

I put a lot of effort into understanding FOF2004 and had a pretty good grasp on how to be competitive. When we upgraded to 2007, I learned enough to do okay at that too. But with one of the last patches, everything in my gameplan went to shit. Many people were able to totally re-write record books with their passing game and throw 50-60 TDs with well over 100 passer rating. But my guy couldn't break 200 yards a game. I tried a few things that didn't work (things that should have at least improved things some - based on normal football strategy), but ultimately I didn't feel like busting my ass to try to figure the damn thing out again.

The 'solve the puzzle' aspect of the game isn't fun to me.

[KWhit]

Also, I imagine there are a lot of this kind of stuff out there that people like me don't know about. Another one will come out in a couple of months and some people will scoff and say it's no big deal - they knew about it a while ago, and others will get more disheartened with the game.

[primelord]

MalcPow,

I saw your response and I'm not trying to have a witch hunt, but I'm quite certain that at least 3 people have used this to their benefit in the WOOF alone (that is the only league I looked at last night with old files.) You aren't the only one to have used this to your advantage. Also, if the benefit wasn't there, why wasn't this revealed months ago? I just don't think it is being overblown at all as several owners got steals in the 3rd, 4th, or later rounds with very high popularity that did not have the combines or bars to say they would be solid players, let alone studs. Anyway, I'm done commenting on this publicly, I just have to decide what I'm going to do about it, now.

Seems like an awfully strong accusation to make against some awfully well respected FOFC members.

[Subby]

ef27 - I think your list shows the difficulty leagues would have with enforcing a rule. The problem with this "tell" is that it is not unilateral. It is quite possible for someone to focus just on combines and bar patterns and just by happenstance draft 5 or 6 high pop guys. So then you are at the point where you are making guys prove they *didn't* cheat.

edit: And when I say cheat I mean breaking an existing league rule. I don't think what malcpow did was cheating (at least in FOFL) because it wasn't against any established rules.

[st.cronin]

The 'solve the puzzle' aspect of the game isn't fun to me.

This. The counterargument "well its not really that much work" is completely irrelevant.

[Hammer]

MalcPow,

I saw your response and I'm not trying to have a witch hunt, but I'm quite certain that at least 3 people have used this to their benefit in the WOOF alone (that is the only league I looked at last night with old files.) You aren't the only one to have used this to your advantage. Also, if the benefit wasn't there, why wasn't this revealed months ago? I just don't think it is being overblown at all as several owners got steals in the 3rd, 4th, or later rounds with very high popularity that did not have the combines or bars to say they would be solid players, let alone studs. Anyway, I'm done commenting on this publicly, I just have to decide what I'm going to do about it, now.

Job well done I'd say. Get ahead of the game without breaking any rules. Well done to those concerned.

Now that its been established as worth sharing, Malc has been gentleman enough to share his findings.

If your going to do anything Eaglesfan, my suggestion is apologize.

[Yoda]

So what if people did realize the connection between popularity and the player being good and didn't tell anyone? Really? They figured it out, they are under no obligation to tell anyone. The sameway that people are under no obligation to tell everyone what they have figured out about game planning. Like hell I am going to publically post my game plans. There are guys that are racking up yardage with their QB, and I have a better QB and better WR's and yet I cannot duplicate their results, should they post here how they are acheiving their results (personally, I'd like to know, and I would like to know what the settings were for Grossman's LongPassing offense too)

I give BIG thanks to the guys that have posted what information they have on here and have helped me become a much better gm. RKG has helped me be a much better drafter. Sky and others have helped with me gameplanning. Well, offensive anyway, I still have no clue about how to defensive gameplan.

The only thing I've come up with on my own, that I've mentioned to a few people is that I think that Double Coverage doesn't do anything until the 4th quarter. I watched my games for over 6 months recording when a completion was made in DC and when the pass was thrown into DC and was incomplete. Actually, my QB's completion percentage was HIGHER throwing into DC than when not....until the 4th quarter. This was completely un-scientific, and I don't have the programming knowledge to write a parcer to jump through log files and check this out. The only thing that is seems to affect is the number of passes attempted to the person that's being DC'ed, and completion % in the 4th. But, that might also be a result of the TYPES of coverages.

Anyway, even if people knew about this months ago, they were under no obligation to share, I am just grateful they did.

[KWhit]

The only thing I've come up with on my own, that I've mentioned to a few people is that I think that Double Coverage doesn't do anything until the 4th quarter.

If that's actually true, I think my head will explode.

[primelord]

This. The counterargument "well its not really that much work" is completely irrelevant.

And that is fine. Then the issue for you is that FOF is just not your kind of game. I can respect that, but your in a different class of people than I was addressing here then.

[KWhit]

And that is fine. Then the issue for you is that FOF is just not your kind of game. I can respect that, but your in a different class of people than I was addressing here then.

I don't think that's true (the argument that it's not our kind of game because we don't enjoy trying to find the tells).

This has the feel of the 'cheese' that many online players use in console games like Madden. There are those of us that enjoy playing the game more like a sim where we use most of the plays in our playbook. And then there are the people who know that if you Play Action Rollout to the left on an X Fly pattern, you'll get a TD about 30% of the time. So they run that play nearly every down.

I am not accusing you guys of this, but when there are tells out there that allow some people to draft 75%-80% creepers (or more), it feels like cheese to those of us that don't / can't / or otherwise choose not to do this.

[Celeval]

I am not accusing you guys of this, but when there are tells out there that allow some people to draft 75%-80% creepers (or more), it feels like cheese to those of us that don't / can't / or otherwise choose not to do this.

This is a tough argument to defend, unless you're talking about this specific case - information gained from outside of the game.

Speaking only for myself, I draft typically just from the game interface (and my own notes). Sometimes I build up a spreadsheet, sometimes I use notepad/textpad. Yes, I put a lot of time into it, but I generally get good results, and hit more than I miss.

How is that cheese? It's playing the game as intended - FOF cheese, to me, would be consistantly changing the LB position to get better ratings (back when that was possible), or the funky contracts that some leagues had to deal with early in 2k7... but using the information that is given specifically to help draft players... to help draft players seems like it's the way to go.

[ace1914]

Personally, I don't mind some people doing what they do to get the "pick of the litter" often. For me I learn from what I see the vets do. If I saw something in a certain player and then I see him excel with another GM that I know is a FOF vet, I just keep it in mind for future drafts and I'm proud to say that I've gotten a lot better. I don't have a problem with it; seems like jealousy of someone else's experience with the game to me.

[KWhit]

This is a tough argument to defend, unless you're talking about this specific case - information gained from outside of the game.

Speaking only for myself, I draft typically just from the game interface (and my own notes). Sometimes I build up a spreadsheet, sometimes I use notepad/textpad. Yes, I put a lot of time into it, but I generally get good results, and hit more than I miss.

How is that cheese? It's playing the game as intended - FOF cheese, to me, would be consistantly changing the LB position to get better ratings (back when that was possible), or the funky contracts that some leagues had to deal with early in 2k7... but using the information that is given specifically to help draft players... to help draft players seems like it's the way to go.

No, I'm not just talking about this particular scenario but about all the non-intuitive tells that are out there (shared and unshared).

And it's not a perfect analogy which is why I said it feels like cheese, but the people who run the same play in Madden over and over are technically playing the game as intended also. They're not cracking the game open to look at hidden attributes or whatever, they have just experimented enough to know that there's a quirk in the game to be exploited - just like how it used to be a lot more beneficial in FOF to run to the outside than run to the inside. Just like how if you get a guy on your roster and his rating goes up, it means that he's likely to creep downward over time (I think that's what the tell was, anyway). Stuff like that feels like cheese to me.

[Eaglesfan27]

I do regret the wording of my post. I've been upset about several things today including this situation. I don't know anything about what others did. I only have my strong suspicions. I should not have posted those publically in the form of accusations.

[KWhit]

This is a tough argument to defend, unless you're talking about this specific case - information gained from outside of the game.

Speaking only for myself, I draft typically just from the game interface (and my own notes). Sometimes I build up a spreadsheet, sometimes I use notepad/textpad. Yes, I put a lot of time into it, but I generally get good results, and hit more than I miss.

How is that cheese? It's playing the game as intended - FOF cheese, to me, would be consistantly changing the LB position to get better ratings (back when that was possible), or the funky contracts that some leagues had to deal with early in 2k7... but using the information that is given specifically to help draft players... to help draft players seems like it's the way to go.

I forgot to address the point you made there at the end about the draft. I hate the whole masking mechanism of FOF. The fact that if you have the time, you can identify players who have a high combine attribute but don't have a high corresponding skill rating and use that to figure out if he's a likely creeper just feels like crap to me.

Even when I do have the time to try to do this level of analysis, it feels stupid, unfun and arbitrary. I might as well be going through and counting the letters of their last name, because if it's 4 or 7 letters long he's gonna be a creeper.

[st.cronin]

And that is fine. Then the issue for you is that FOF is just not your kind of game. I can respect that, but your in a different class of people than I was addressing here then.

Not entirely true. My feeling about fof is that it is half totally brilliant, half completely bassackwards, and the degree to which it is bassackwards pains me. I don't really care to argue about this, though, as its clear that the game is not going to be moving in a direction I approve of anytime soon.

[Ben E Lou]

I think KWhit does hit the nail on the head. And to some degree, he actually makes one of sprimelord's point, too.

My questions is, what strategy game exists that doesn't require some investment of time to get good at? Can we all agree that the more time you put into the game, in general the better you will be at it? There will always be some exceptions, but I think as general rule that holds pretty well.

To take it another step further, just like with every other game, FOF has people that play the game at an expert level. What game exists that doesn't require a significant investment of time in order to be competitive with experts of that game?

FOF (and any other sim we play) is a computer strategy/tactical game. (It's also a football simulation, yes.) But there's a common denominator around people who are very good at every computer strategy/tactial game that I've ever played. Be it Civilization, Empire Earth, FOF, Age Of Empires, Zeus, SimCity, or whatever else, the guys who play a lot and learn all of the "advanced" strategies are the ones who excel at various areas of the game.

When I used to play a lot of Empire Earth MP, I had to completely change my strategy to keep up. Tactically, I knew very well how to counter this unit with that one. But strategically, I was focusing too much on building my economy and not attacking early. It was either change my strategy, or keep getting my butt kicked by the guys who knew how to put 3 soldiers in my base within 5 1/2 minutes and disrupt my economy. :p So I figured out how to put 2 soldiers in their base within 4 minutes, before they got their econ going well enough to churn out units. ;)

At any rate, the stuff that KWhit mentions like guys dropping a point or two when they show up on your roster are little tactical things in FOF that make a difference. (Yes, that one is still in there, by the way.) People who play FOF a lot notice this sort of stuff. And there are a whole bunch of "little things"--tactics you can use that which can add up. I know a lot of the little things because I play a lot. I make some boneheaded big-picture strategy decisions at times, though, and struggle there. Some guys (Quik comes to mind immediately) know a lot of the tactics AND pwn in big-picture strategy as well, which is why you rarely see a QS-owned team that isn't in the playoffs.

I think a lot of people joined FOF MP leagues with radically different expectations, and that has created tension over the years. I expected to play a computer strategy and tactics game with football as the backdrop against human owners. Others expected to use implement football strategy. If FOF were the "perfect" simulation, there would be no difference between either approach. But there's no such thing as the "perfect" simulation. So as a result, the people who are playing a strategy and tactics game will over time learn the little things and the big-picture things that may not make a difference in football, but do make a difference in this computer game that we're playing. I don't think that one approach is necessarily "better" than the other. The object here is to have fun. Whatever is fun for you, go for it. However, when people get into a multiplayer environment with people who approach the game very differently, that's when these tensions seem to boil to the surface more.

I would hazard a guess that if KWhit were playing in a league with 31 other humans who didn't do the little tactical stuff, it wouldn't be as irritating. But when you get in a league and you know that guys are testing game plans or comparing combine correlations to bars or learning bar signatures or overlaying pre and post interview screen shots or whatever ever tactics give an edge, it is naturally frustrating. I don't really have a great solution, but I'm just trying to frame what I think is the tension here.

[Ben E Lou]

One other little thing: because of the timing of Rick's post, people are understandably equating "learning more about the computer game" to "using interrogator to look at popularity." While that's completely understandable given the timing, the bigger-picture points he makes are much more important. I hope they don't get lost in the fog of the latest "hot button" FOF issue.

[st.cronin]

Ben, I think that's close. But really its that the tactics are obscure, and not connected to the way I want to play. Guys dropping a point when they show up on your roster, for example: afaik (been a long time since I played), the only way to check that is with a utility. You can't pull up the players card and see his ratings history. Since that ratings history is important, this is very annoying (to me).

[cuervo72]

I think a lot of people joined FOF MP leagues with radically different expectations, and that has created tension over the years. I expected to play a computer strategy and tactics game with football as the backdrop against human owners. Others expected to use implement football strategy. If FOF were the "perfect" simulation, there would be no difference between either approach. But there's no such thing as the "perfect" simulation. So as a result, the people who are playing a strategy and tactics game will over time learn the little things and the big-picture things that may not make a difference in football, but do make a difference in this computer game that we're playing. I don't think that one approach is necessarily "better" than the other. The object here is to have fun. Whatever is fun for you, go for it. However, when people get into a multiplayer environment with people who approach the game very differently, that's when these tensions seem to boil to the surface more.

I would hazard a guess that if KWhit were playing in a league with 31 other humans who didn't do the little tactical stuff, it wouldn't be as irritating. But when you get in a league and you know that guys are testing game plans or comparing combine correlations to bars or learning bar signatures or overlaying pre and post interview screen shots or whatever ever tactics give an edge, it is naturally frustrating. I don't really have a great solution, but I'm just trying to frame what I think is the tension here.

Yep. In a league like IHOF, I think you have a number of owners in one camp, some in another, and a few in between. Initially, this wasn't a problem. But as time goes on, the two groups grow apart. Owners clash, some to the point where they leave. It's happened in FOFL too. I don't see the two camps reconciling. At least not with the game we have now. Save some shuffling of ownership/league landscapes, I'm not sure what the solution is.



(You know, it's too bad you can't import/export teams, I'd suggest some league franchise swaps. Er, though I guess in many cases with the overlap in league ownerships...)

[drakeborn]

I am relatively new to FOF MP, though I've extensively played other MP games for well over a decade. I long ago came to grips with the fact that generally, time invested largely correlates to continued success in MP games. But I find this to be generally true in most endeavors.

That being said, I have never felt I was required to invest the time in order to understand the basics of FOF. I was able to pick it up, play it in SP and eventually MP, and be satisfied with my gradual improvement at my own pace.

I am certainly disappointed that a third-party program and a little knowldge gives an advantage in FOF, but it isn't as if this program is tough to use. I can either choose to use it and even the odds a bit or choose not to and still enjoy the game regardless. I am, however, in favor of this information being shared. I much prefer winning or losing when I know the battle comes down to skill, experience, and luck rather than outside advantages.

[Ben E Lou]

Ben, I think that's close. But really its that the tactics are obscure, and not connected to the way I want to play. Guys dropping a point when they show up on your roster, for example: afaik (been a long time since I played), the only way to check that is with a utility. You can't pull up the players card and see his ratings history. Since that ratings history is important, this is very annoying (to me).Well again, I go back to that last section of my post: if you were playing in a SP environment or against 31 other people who don't check that, it doesn't really matter, because no one has a perceived (or true) "leg up" on the competition. However, the tension between "not connected to the way I want to play" and "crap, the other guys in my league are playing this way and winning" is going to be there.

[ace1914]

One other little thing: because of the timing of Rick's post, people are understandably equating "learning more about the computer game" to "using interrogator to look at popularity." While that's completely understandable given the timing, the bigger-picture points he makes are much more important. I hope they don't get lost in the fog of the latest "hot button" FOF issue.

I would assume that this is in response to my post.

1. I have not confused anything. I am aware of the Interrogator app as well as the others and applied their usefulness without much help. So to clarify, no I am not mistaking the two. The applications that Gstelmack and others have added are so intricately intertwined within the FOF community, you can't just arbitrarily separate the two and act as if it is a separate entity(learning the game/using the associated apps).

2. The topic is bigger than this one issue. The situation is pretty general and can be applied to almost any case involving a competitive/unfair advantage. Whether it be sports or business or any other applicable model you use.


I understand everyone here is a huge FOF vet around here, you guys are a close knit community and I respect that, but please don't use the "the newb doesn't know what's going on" approach. Its a bit demeaning.

[Ben E Lou]

Actually, it isn't at all. There were several other posts before yours that referenced the issue du jour. Sorry if you took it that way. It wasn't intended at all.

[Celeval]

Ben, I think that's close. But really its that the tactics are obscure, and not connected to the way I want to play. Guys dropping a point when they show up on your roster, for example: afaik (been a long time since I played), the only way to check that is with a utility. You can't pull up the players card and see his ratings history. Since that ratings history is important, this is very annoying (to me).

...or take notes, or load old versions of the savefile, or whatever. :) ChangeTracker is useful and all, but not everyone uses it. Or, for that matter, uses that particular tell (I'll pay attention to creeps over time - particularly in the pre- and post- training camp, but not when the move to your roster).

[WelshWizard]

I am actually amazed that this has been getting as much reaction as it has. This is just a game after all, it happens to be a game I love. If someone has spent the time to figure things out to gain an advantage over someone that i also had the opportunity to find out for myself but am too stupid to figure it out. So be it, that is life. People are going to be better than you at something. There are GMs in leagues that i play in that i respect due to their achievements and love playing them to see if i can beat them. I very rarely do but it makes me want to take another shot at them. Now have these guys found info that i have not that has helped them beat me? Maybe so but if i wanted to and as i said earlier had the brains to even figure it out it is there for me to find it too. That being said i do not think that this whole popularity thing is the reason these guys are beating me. They gameplan better than me, they draft better than me and deserve to be beating me.

No matter when people discovered this it has now been made public, this is a community that shares an awful lot in my opinion and they have no need to.

[Celeval]

They're not cracking the game open to look at hidden attributes or whatever, they have just experimented enough to know that there's a quirk in the game to be exploited - just like how it used to be a lot more beneficial in FOF to run to the outside than run to the inside.

Can't that same argument be made about actual football, though? My feeling is that cheese = unrealistic play. Always go on 4th down? Always throw long? Cheese. Run to the outside 100% of the time? Cheese. Run outside 60% of the time? I don't know.

The fact that if you have the time, you can identify players who have a high combine attribute but don't have a high corresponding skill rating and use that to figure out if he's a likely creeper just feels like crap to me.

I understand that on some level, but at the same time... is that so different from a small-school cornerback who has shown some potential, but not been a star, turning in a 4.27 40? All of a sudden people say: "Hm, he hasn't proven that he has these skills against big-name competition, but maybe there's potential there that can be brought out that the tapes/scouts aren't seeing."

A creeper doesn't increase in talent. All a creeper is, from my point of view, at least, is a guy whose actual talent is better than his scouted ratings show. The combines are meant to expose those sort of players - it's not just window dressing; or we wouldn't have anything other than the ratings bars to see.

I didn't want this post to sound harsh, and maybe it did (I'm pretty tired), so this is as good a place as any to say this - KWhit, I'm honestly unhappy you're leaving IHOF. I've enjoyed going up against you since the start, and while I'm sure I'll enjoy getting whupped by Cringer just as well, there'll be something missing having someone else in Conyers.

[ace1914]

Actually, it isn't at all. There were several other posts before yours that referenced the issue du jour. Sorry if you took it that way. It wasn't intended at all.

Understood and that's my fault. No harm, no foul.

But, in all, I think WW has already said exactly how I feel. The info is there and its not as if they are using "up, down, up, down, left, right, b, a, start."

[KWhit]

I didn't want this post to sound harsh, and maybe it did (I'm pretty tired), so this is as good a place as any to say this - KWhit, I'm honestly unhappy you're leaving IHOF. I've enjoyed going up against you since the start, and while I'm sure I'll enjoy getting whupped by Cringer just as well, there'll be something missing having someone else in Conyers.

Thanks, Kevin. I didn't take your posts as being harsh. It's just a difference in perception. You can handle the abstraction to the level that it doesn't kill immersiveness (oh yes, I did just go there!), and I can't.

And I'm pretty upset about my decision to leave IHOF as well. That was a big part of my life since 2003 (as lame as that is).

But it is clearly the right decision for me.

I still have my IHOF coffee mug that I drink out of every day, and my T-shirt, and my fake Condors helmet.

Wow, that makes me sound like a loser. :)

[drakeborn]

I am actually amazed that this has been getting as much reaction as it has. This is just a game after all, it happens to be a game I love.

People react strongly over things they love. ;)

[KWhit]

Actually, that's very true. I wouldn't be posting in this thread if I didn't give a shit.

[Chubby]

+1 to Rick's post.

[Celeval]

You can handle the abstraction to the level that it doesn't kill immersiveness

It's a gift.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

I forgot to address the point you made there at the end about the draft. I hate the whole masking mechanism of FOF. The fact that if you have the time, you can identify players who have a high combine attribute but don't have a high corresponding skill rating and use that to figure out if he's a likely creeper just feels like crap to me.

Even when I do have the time to try to do this level of analysis, it feels stupid, unfun and arbitrary. I might as well be going through and counting the letters of their last name, because if it's 4 or 7 letters long he's gonna be a creeper.

How else do you do it then if not masking? Doesn't the draft just become either totally obvious or totally random then, and even more un-fun?

[Dutch]

Thanks, Kevin. I didn't take your posts as being harsh. It's just a difference in perception. You can handle the abstraction to the level that it doesn't kill immersiveness (oh yes, I did just go there!), and I can't.

And I'm pretty upset about my decision to leave IHOF as well. That was a big part of my life since 2003 (as lame as that is).

But it is clearly the right decision for me.

I still have my IHOF coffee mug that I drink out of every day, and my T-shirt, and my fake Condors helmet.

Wow, that makes me sound like a loser. :)

To 6 billion people, you are. But to us....well, you are also, but at least we understand because we are the same. :)

[Vinatieri for Prez]

The world works on those who either have more raw skill/intelligence, or put in more time, succeeding more than those who do not. FOF MP is no different. To think otherwise is somewhat naive I think.

I mean otherwise, what the hell is the point in playing a competitive game (computer or otherwise) if not to work at it and get good at it and get better than your opponent?

But like in real life, so goes for FOF. For some, their level of work ethic and skill level is beyond the reach of others. You can practice more than Tiger Woods, but you won't beat him. You could have more skill than Tedy Bruschi . . . hell yeah, shout out to TB . . . . but he outworked many a guy with more NFL talent than him (not college talent though since he was a beastly sack machine at DE at Arizona).

With that, sometimes, even in FOF, you catch lightning in a bottle (aka sweet dice rolls) and it don't matter what the FOF mathematical genius/tester does, you will just mow him down.

If it comes down that somebody does not like this survival of the fittest situation in FOF MP, then MP (or playing in a veteran league) probably just isn't for them.

[Ben E Lou]

Well again, I go back to that last section of my post: if you were playing in a SP environment or against 31 other people who don't check that, it doesn't really matter, because no one has a perceived (or true) "leg up" on the competition. However, the tension between "not connected to the way I want to play" and "crap, the other guys in my league are playing this way and winning" is going to be there.

Overheard recently...I have felt since i joined {leaguename}, and later {leaguename2}, that there are many things you all know that i don't.....

and i don't want to know. but i don't want you to know either...That's precisely what I was trying to say. A post in the other thread reminded me of a specific example of this from back in the FOF2K1 days: redliners. For those who were around then, I'm pretty sure that FOF2K1 was the first in the series to introduce the concept of booms and masking. In FOF2K1, there was a simple "tell" for a player who was a possible boom: he had virtually or all red bars as a rookie, with little/no green. See a 33/34 WR out there in the 7th round? Draft him--now! Everyone who read the boards knew about it. And I don't recall anyone at all complaining about it--certainly not with the passion and frustration that today's more-sophisticated tells in the bars cause.

[KWhit]

The world works on those who either have more raw skill/intelligence, or put in more time, succeeding more than those who do not. FOF MP is no different. To think otherwise is somewhat naive I think.

I mean otherwise, what the hell is the point in playing a competitive game (computer or otherwise) if not to work at it and get good at it and get better than your opponent?

But like in real life, so goes for FOF. For some, their level of work ethic and skill level is beyond the reach of others. You can practice more than Tiger Woods, but you won't beat him. You could have more skill than Tedy Bruschi . . . hell yeah, shout out to TB . . . . but he outworked many a guy with more NFL talent than him (not college talent though since he was a beastly sack machine at DE at Arizona).

With that, sometimes, even in FOF, you catch lightning in a bottle (aka sweet dice rolls) and it don't matter what the FOF mathematical genius/tester does, you will just mow him down.

If it comes down that somebody does not like this survival of the fittest situation in FOF MP, then MP (or playing in a veteran league) probably just isn't for them.


I think you kind of miss my point if your response is basically "you deserve to lose if you don't want to spend the time to get better at the game."

But that's fine. I've made my peace with walking away from FOF. I was just trying to describe my thoughts to the board because the question was asked.

[Subby]

I think you kind of miss my point if your response is basically "you deserve to lose if you don't want to spend the time to get better at the game."

But that's fine. I've made my peace with walking away from FOF. I was just trying to describe my thoughts to the board because the question was asked.
You deserve to lose because no one as fucking handsome as you are should ever win anything that is the rightful province of dorks and mathletes!

[KWhit]

You deserve to lose because no one as fucking handsome as you are should ever win anything that is the rightful province of dorks and mathletes!

I'm KWhit and I approve this message.

[cuervo72]

The world works on those who either have more raw skill/intelligence, or put in more time, succeeding more than those who do not. FOF MP is no different. To think otherwise is somewhat naive I think.

Eh, yes and no. I like playing poker now and then (and don't play as often as I'd like). While I do look to improve my game, I'd much rather play with a group of casual players in my neighborhood than play regularly against the likes of Ivey, Helmuth, Negreanu, Nguyen, Ferguson, Greenstein, etc.

[Celeval]

And I don't recall anyone at all complaining about it--certainly not with the passion and frustration that today's more-sophisticated tells in the bars cause.

No multiplayer. This is the danger with a MP game - and it was talked about then - that you're no longer looking for an advantage over the computer, but over fellow players. That puts a whole different spin on strategy.

[Ben E Lou]

No multiplayer. This is the danger with a MP game - and it was talked about then - that you're no longer looking for an advantage over the computer, but over fellow players. That puts a whole different spin on strategy.Bingo.

[Daimyo]

Researching the game and using in-game info to your advantage seems perfectly fine to me. Some people have more time than others and why shouldn't they get an advantage. That doing so is a defacto requirement for staying ahead in the game is a serious flaw in the game, but no one should feel guilty about doing so.

Using information not available in-game is completely different and IMO clear and blatant cheating. The player file contains all sorts of hidden information you could use to your advantage and it isn't hard to crack at all. Using that info to your advantage to gain an edge, no matter how large or small the edge, is despicable.

[Ben E Lou]

The player file contains all sorts of hidden information you could use to your advantage and it isn't hard to crack at all. Is this still true for FOF2K7? I was under the impression that significant changes were made in this area with this version...

[MalcPow]

Researching the game and using in-game info to your advantage seems perfectly fine to me. Some people have more time than others and why shouldn't they get an advantage. That doing so is a defacto requirement for staying ahead in the game is a serious flaw in the game, but no one should feel guilty about doing so.

Using information not available in-game is completely different and IMO clear and blatant cheating. The player file contains all sorts of hidden information you could use to your advantage and it isn't hard to crack at all. Using that info to your advantage to gain an edge, no matter how large or small the edge, is despicable.

I don't think you're the only one that feels this way. I know I didn't bat an eye doing it. A lot of the information I use to play the game is delivered via the great third party utilities that have been created, and I don't really separate them from the game itself at this point. I currently think the edge to be gained here is significant enough to matter, but it was mostly just curiosity and a fascination with exploring a new angle that has had me messing with this stuff of late.

I appreciate your openness here though. My only response is probably, "Fuck you too." It's not particularly bothersome (really, no hard feelings), but since it's pretty easy to type and click I might as well respond. Others have more or less implied the same, I don't have a problem with that. I play because it's interesting to me, and it's going to be less so if people I'm playing with (speaking more generally, I know we don't share any leagues anymore) throw a lot implicit asterisks onto whatever success my teams have. So if you feel the way Daimyo does and are in a league with me, please, by all means, raise this as an issue in the proper forums and let's deal with it. I'd really prefer a vote banning me from certain places than waste time rolling my eyes at posts like this over the coming seasons if it's a widespread sentiment in a particular league. This will probably sound like a defensive over-reaction to 95% of the people reading here, that's fine too. I'm just hoping to deal with a few pockets of strong negative feelings that clearly exist, and I'd rather resolve them quickly, even if that means a bit more mess than drawn out alternatives.

[Antmeister]

Is there some kind of hidden backstory between you and Daimyo that I don't know about? Because my interpretation of what Daimyo posted was that if someone was purposely digging into stuff outside of the game to gain an advantage, then the person should be banned. Since you were using a utiliity that accidentally showed that data, I didn't think he was referring to you, but now I just don't know.

[Subby]

Using information not available in-game is completely different and IMO clear and blatant cheating. The player file contains all sorts of hidden information you could use to your advantage and it isn't hard to crack at all. Using that info to your advantage to gain an edge, no matter how large or small the edge, is despicable.
Just so we are clear - MalcPow didn't crack anything. He used a widely available utility (interrogator) that showed information for draftees. Hell, FOFL uses interrogator to populate the web site. The site has displayed personality data for all rookies prior their arrival on rosters for a long time.

MalcPow is anything but a cheater.

[st.cronin]

I do not play in any mp fof leagues, but I would peg using a "tell" that is not public knowledge and can only be found using a 3rd party utility as ethically gray. Its not something I would feel comfortable doing. IMO

[MrIllini]

I do not play in any mp fof leagues, but I would peg using a "tell" that is not public knowledge and can only be found using a 3rd party utility as ethically gray. Its not something I would feel comfortable doing. IMO

Or it's just smart. *shurg*

[primelord]

Just so we are clear - MalcPow didn't crack anything. He used a widely available utility (interrogator) that showed information for draftees. Hell, FOFL uses interrogator to populate the web site. The site has displayed personality data for all rookies prior their arrival on rosters for a long time.

MalcPow is anything but a cheater.

+1

[cuervo72]

I do not play in any mp fof leagues, but I would peg using a "tell" that is not public knowledge and can only be found using a 3rd party utility as ethically gray. Its not something I would feel comfortable doing. IMO

In my early FOBL days, I realized I really needed to get up-to-speed w.r.t. player evaluations, as I basically had no clue and hadn't played OOTP before. So, I set out to write a number of perl scripts that would parse BOSI csv reports and calculate what the past performance was for guys with certain component ratings. I'd then "reassemble" those component stats to estimate future performance.

BOSI was a third party tool, as was the collection of scripts I wrote. The data that I gathered using them was available both in-game and in the html, though how I analyzed and repackaged it was certainly not common. It *definitely* helped me competitively. I made no bones about what I was doing, and didn't catch any flak for it either.

[st.cronin]

In my early FOBL days, I realized I really needed to get up-to-speed w.r.t. player evaluations, as I basically had no clue and hadn't played OOTP before. So, I set out to write a number of perl scripts that would parse BOSI csv reports and calculate what the past performance was for guys with certain component ratings. I'd then "reassemble" those component stats to estimate future performance.

BOSI was a third party tool, as was the collection of scripts I wrote. The data that I gathered using them was available both in-game and in the html, though how I analyzed and repackaged it was certainly not common. It *definitely* helped me competitively. I made no bones about what I was doing, and didn't catch any flak for it either.

If you mean that other people knew what you were doing, then its not the same thing, and I wouldn't categorize it the same way.

[gstelmack]

There is a difference between using a third-party utility that provides game data in a different format for easier processing, and a third-party utility that provides data not normally available from the game. This is where that bug in Interrogator is causing all the fits. I don't think anyone disagrees with using third-party utilities that process the data or present it in different formats, it's the showing data the game did not intend to that confuses everything.

It's a bit more confusing here, as the game does not show popularity on the player report window until the guy signs his first contract, but the data is available on the team roster screen under the personality tab between the time he gets drafted and when he signs the contract.

[WelshWizard]

I do not play in any mp fof leagues, but I would peg using a "tell" that is not public knowledge and can only be found using a 3rd party utility as ethically gray. Its not something I would feel comfortable doing. IMO

It is public knowledge when the Utility is there for all to use if they so wish. I would never have found this tell in a million years. Good for the guy that found it and shared it.

[MIJB#19]

primelord is one of the "haves"!? Last I checked he was the first to post a winless season in a 14-season league. ;)

[Vinatieri for Prez]

I think you kind of miss my point if your response is basically "you deserve to lose if you don't want to spend the time to get better at the game."

But that's fine. I've made my peace with walking away from FOF. I was just trying to describe my thoughts to the board because the question was asked.

No, that is not what I am saying. It's more like "you will have a hard time winning in a veteran MP league if you don't have as good analytical/statistics skills as others or the time to devote to learning the game's nuances." I think there's a difference in there than just pure semantics.

[Dutch]

primelord is one of the "haves"!? Last I checked he was the first to post a winless season in a 14-season league. ;)

It's a lot easier to be smart if you have the 1.1 pick at some point in your career. :)

[mmbogle55]

Here's a league struggling to get owners.

We are all "have-nots", so it's perfect for someone who wants a "beginner" league or someone who wants 5-peat;)

The only thing we're good at in this league is trash-talking each other.

So any have-nots who wish to participate in a lg and not get overwhelmed.....

inquire within....

Red Zone Football (http://www.rzfootball.com/)

[JeffW]

Ben, I think that's close. But really its that the tactics are obscure, and not connected to the way I want to play. Guys dropping a point when they show up on your roster, for example: afaik (been a long time since I played), the only way to check that is with a utility. You can't pull up the players card and see his ratings history. Since that ratings history is important, this is very annoying (to me).

This is a severe failing in the game interface. Ratings movement is critical to player evaluation, and yet it's not tracked within the game.

[Sgran]

I think many problems could be solved through co-ownership. Frustrated have-nots should take on a mentor as a co-owner. The mentor would help crunch the data and point out the glitches. Personally, I've had to drop out of all my MP leagues but one, because I've been travelling so much. It would also help drafts go along faster.

[Warhammer]

I really think a lot of issues could be solved with a "practice field". Essentially, you would be able to take your team, develop game plans, and simulate games against yourself. You would be able to see how your team plays against itself. This would allow for easy testing of your team to see how they play in a variety of situations.