FOF 6.3 Released
 

Uh, wow.

Any idea what the passing/game planning changes mean?

I sort of wish this would have been released earlier in the day, so I could have come home to read lots of discussion. I'm interested in seeing how this all unfolds...

I'm glad I could update the game again this year. I would have liked to create a full new version, but was unable to put the full plan into place.

The engine changes will, I'm sure, be very different for you at first. I did a huge amount of studying of play results in the NFL over the past two years and concluded I needed to rebalance how the engine resolves passing plays. The NFL official game logs have a lot more data than in the past.

I'm finding extreme game plans generate fewer wild numbers. Without even trying to limit extreme game plans. That's encouraging. Though I know our veteran game planners will soon adjust in ways I can't even imagine.

I won't detail the changes. It would require explaining too much about how the game uses ratings. And there are too many changes to explain in full. I rewrote about 500 lines of code here. Usually that's more than I would like to do for an update, but I thought it was necessary.

Again, I'm glad I can keep the game fresh and hope I can remain in this business for at least another decade.

You're tellin me! Much more than anticipated and sounds fun. This game engine change has rekindled my desire to break out the testing macros!!!!!

Thank you Jim, you haven't forgotten us... sniff...

And the Nickle/Dime substitutions... Glorious, even though I'd been thoroughly abusing that I'm glad I have to worry about depth again.

Awesome, just awesome.

Man...some good-looking stuff here. Ones that intrigue me at first glance...

• Tweaks to the contract valuation algorithm (can't really explain tweaks without detailing the algorithms, which would give too much away). hmmmm...nerfing of the one-year deal? I realize Jim shouldn't give too much detail, but maybe a comment about what used to work that won't work as well?

• Several rather large changes in the play-resolution engine, particularly to the passing game. Again, I'm not going to provide details, but this will have a significant impact on game-planning. I'm aware there will be complaints at first, because there will be a learning curve and it might appear that game-planning has less impact than in the past. But I think once you're used to these changes, it will make for a more enjoyable experience as you'll have to better tailor your plan to your talent. This is probably the biggest change in the engine in five years. If this works as advertised, I'll be thrilled. I've been using the same game plan in every single MP league for probably 2 years real-time.
• Another attempt to improve the field-goal and play-calling logic at the end of the first half, particularly when your team has the lead. Good to see this. At times, the game would act like you were protecting a lead at the end of the game (as in run the ball three times inside the 20 with 45 seconds to go, then kick the FG.)
• Tweak (very small) the free agency AI player acquisition logic. This still needs a redesign in places, far too much for just an update. Hmmm...not sure what this means. Maybe for SP only? (AI) Maybe we can get Jim to weigh in here...
• Add an ordering of the importance of games during the regular season. The top game is shown on channel 2, on down to channel 17. Heh. StelmackSoft goes live!
• Tweak (very small) the player generator. This includes improving linebackers, safeties and fullbacks. I noticed some issues with LBs. Hadn't seen anything with FB/S, but I'm down with anything that might make the running game more vital.
• Tweak the TCY converter. Primarily giving tight ends a big-play rating and reducing punt and kick return abilities. I'll have to give this another look then. I'd love for this to be a viable option.
• Don't allow the AI to call a goal-line defense where it's horribly inappropriate. Should be very big for Rexers.

Just a tiny change. No attempt to go into the logic of how long a contract will work. The problem is that the minimum salary continues to drop as a percentage of the cap. The NFLPA is, I'm sure, aware of that. It makes it far too easy in real life to stay under the cap. And easier and easier within the game. I'm just trying to keep up with the NFL, which is itself years behind now.


Just a slight change to try and get AI teams to do a better job offering better free agents to fill their holes. Again, that's something that needs a full rewrite in places.

Both these changes will have only a small effect on game play. You probably won't even notice.

Holy moses... Now thats an update I can get behind.

Agreed on all counts here. ;)

Wow. I just created a new game, drafted an offensive juggernaut team (first 20 picks were on offense, then let the AI pick the rest), and loaded up the ol' Lowcountry Shuffle game plan--the one that's produced something absurd like maybe 10 out of my last 15 MP seasons having 50 TD passes or more. Loading up that kind of team would always give me a 13-16 win team in SP testing.

7-9 on the first try.

I've since loaded up several other old game plans, and I've yet to finish over 9-7 in about 10 trials. I guess defense might actually matter now.

I've got some work to do. Nice!

Agree, this is the biggest change towards realism and it's really welcome. Also looking forward to see the tweaks to the passing engine.

Too bad Jim couldn't finish a new FOF, but big thanks for still offering this nice update for free.

Really hope you will find the time to finish it in the future, the desktop text sims scene seems to be slowly dying and needs more releases from all the companies to raise the enthusiasm again. Probably due to it being a niche market where most of developers have it as hobby and with the global crisis they have been forced to work more hours in their regular jobs, leaving less time for their passion (and i'm referring to myself too not as developer but as designer).

Hope the golden years will be back, but i guess the genre will die with us hardcore gamers, as most of kids prefer the fast paced console games or the browser based multiplayer ones.

One thing I don't find in the FAQ that *seems* obvious, but I want to make sure: do we now need to drop the MP files in the "leagues" folder in the new location?

Played around more with this team. Went with Rex offense and Rex defense for several runs of the same season. Theoretically, a team like this (league's worst defensive talent and league's best offensive talent) ought to be a little worse than mediocre, because in the first few seasons of a drafted league, defense is ahead of the offense because of cohesion. (Of course, we all know that in past versions, even with the cohesion issue, offense trumped defense significantly.) SOS would make a difference, of course, so I've included that.

Trial	W	L	WinPct	OppWinPct
1	9	7	0.563	0.484
2	10	6	0.625	0.461
3	9	7	0.563	0.453
4	5	11	0.313	0.512
5	8.5	7.5	0.531	0.455
6	9	7	0.563	0.473
7	7	9	0.438	0.490
8	8	8	0.500	0.461
9	4	12	0.250	0.479
10	6	10	0.375	0.496
11	10	6	0.625	0.506
12	5	11	0.313	0.520
13	7	9	0.438	0.473
14	7	9	0.438	0.488
15	8	8	0.500	0.518
	112.5	127.5	0.469	0.485

The team is performing pretty much exactly how I would hope/expect that it would, passing the first sniff test for me with flying colors. This patch could be the kind of game-changer many of us have wanted.

wow alot of changes for sure.

Will any of this improve the ability to Go for it on 4th down. When ever ya want. Like 4th and 1 on the 1,2,3,4,5 instead of kicking FG's That just kills my team. Always to me means everytime Im in that situation. And it NEVER happens.

Very encouraging. I am going to go the opposite way, load up on defense and neglect the offense. Hopefully we will see something around .500, or just above.

Excellent. I'm simming forward about 15 seasons to look at talent, stats, etc. So far, it looks like the crazy TD pass numbers are falling into line with reality fairly well.

To me this, these tweaks are pretty much as good as a new game release.

We may have to re-look into the TCY-FOF conversion process again. If it's fixed, that may truly re-ingivorate my interest in SP.

Some interesting changes indeed, some resulting in additional questions on the matter.

Nothing to complain here. This sounds like it'll be a good fix. I do wonder: do these fixes make the contract-restrictions that many MP leagues picked a moot point, or will they still be required to avoid things turning into a one-year only party?

Mixed feelings from this comment.

A fix was required, the game had turned into a race to have the best QB-RB-WR-WR combo, where people can get away with (and even benefit from) neglecting other parts of their team. At the same time I don't understand the need for a learning curve to enjoy the game. Doesn't it just mean that going back to game planning to the strenghts of the players will be more important than having the right bars at WR?


If this included a fix to the 'wrong team calling the time out' part, I think I'm going to be really happy here.

Would it be possible to tell a bit more about this fix? Right now it seems to be a bit of a mystery when the QB1 gets pulled, or when QB2 gets pulled after that.

excellent.

Quoted this one as it may seem to not be an important fix, but for the SP environment I think it's a nice immersion booster. Small things sometimes do matter.

Just to avoid confusion between different interpretations of the term AI (I'm expecting some to read that just as the non-human opponent), is my assumption correct that we're talking about the simming of games here and not the part of the game where people go into play calling mode against a game-controlled team?

Based on what Jim said in response to me earlier, it sounds like one-year deals still work, and that it's actually *easier* now to keep a team together. He's going for realism there. I'd argue that the "realism" solution is less fun, but I get where he's coming from. This was his response on that...

"Just a tiny change. No attempt to go into the logic of how long a contract will work. The problem is that the minimum salary continues to drop as a percentage of the cap. The NFLPA is, I'm sure, aware of that. It makes it far too easy in real life to stay under the cap. And easier and easier within the game. I'm just trying to keep up with the NFL, which is itself years behind now."


Based on the tests I've run on that, it's the simming of games. I set my human-run team to HEAVY run-aggressive and GL, and it only did GL in places where GL made some sense--never on 1st and 10.

A few observations after 12 seasons of QuikSimming

• YAC per catch is wayyyyy up. Pulled a full season pre-patch and got 2.31. Post-patch? 3.51.
• Short pass attempts are wayyyy up.
• Ypa on short passing either didn't change at all or changed so little that it's insignificant.
• Completion percentage on short passes is significantly lower (dropped from around 82% to around 73%). So YAC must be what's causing ypa to stay fairly static. I like that.
• Rex has bumped up his short passing playcalls quite a bit. Loading up my WOOF team in 6.2 on one machine and 6.3 on the other, I get a 49-34-17 split on 1st and 10 in 6.3 as opposed to 49-21-30 in 6.2. Distances are 27.3-21-51.7 and 39.4-25.8-16.8-12.3-5.7 in 6.3 versus 31.0-23.7-45.3 and 30-28.7-20.3-14.5-6.5 in 6.2. If Rexy is our initial guide to game planning, it's clear that he's saying to throw shorter passes.

Damn, it's a shame my wife isn't going on a trip soon. ;)

this is really cool

As good as getting a new game, in my opinion.

Jim delivers. Again.

And you'll really let that stop you???

From testing, yes. Especially since I still have to finish up on her website. :(

:jawdrop:

:funkychickendance: :chickendance: :party: :banana:

(for those who don't know, I love me some faggoty offensive gameplans pre-patch)

Fabbo. Thanks Jim!

Thank you! :banana:

Just checking in for the first time, and I'm overwhelmed by the list of changes. Really above and beyond, Jim, hats off.

For those asking about what to do about multiple leagues, Flasch posted a thread, and I've answered, I think, all of the questions being asked.

6.3 MP Conversion thread - Front Office Football Central

Stats are falling into line nicely so far. The real test of that starts shortly, when I fully take control of a team against the AI. I expect to win, but I'm hoping I can no longer throw 50 TD passes virtually every season.

So far, it appears that the RB-->WR conversion thing that some have been concerned about basically works itself out in this version because RBs seem to be much more important.

I for one would REALLY welcome this kind of change. For dozens of seasons in MP, I have tried to build a west coast offense with YAC receivers and high completion percentages. Move the ball down the field with efficiency. And while I've been successful enough to finish with an average record of about 10-6, my squads have nonetheless consistently taken second-seat to the Air Coryell big-bombing, 50/60 TD teams. If all this is accurate, my gameplans might actually work BETTER, rather than worse, a welcome change.

Thanks Jim!

Great news. Looking forward to playing some SP again and messing around with gameplans this week.

Thanks Jim, this patch is almost like getting a new game for free..

I will always continue to support your games no matter what because of your dedication.

OK. I've cleared all of the "I can't figure out how to install the patch" posts and help. Use this thread to discuss the patch, the changes, the impressions, thank Jim, etc.

I'm thrilled about the potential implications. I've stubbornly built more into a good defense/running game team over the years, now it looks like it may actually have some effect.

JT Roever says thanks!

ORLY?

Has anyone tried to build a "dominate defense" team. Just curious if you could make a 2000 Ravens type team with the new patch

Lucky!

That's my initial impression, at least.

Well, to be honest, you can do this in SP if you want with the current/past version(s). It's MP where you have guys like Ben, Quik, etc that make gameplans to make the most of the engine. In SP, the AI doesn't focus on getting the stud QB/WR/WR combo to dominate for the next decade, they focus on perceived holes (even if it's an OG with the 3rd pick).

Nice!!!

Thank you Jim!

Jim, all you are missing are some hand-warmers or a new mini-game and you could have charged us for a brand new game like some other companies we hold so dear to our hearts.

I simmed two seasons with my short pass GP just to make sure it still works.

10th year QB (92/92)
4th year RB (47/47)
5th year FL (72/72)
10th year SE (37/37)
7th year TE (76/76)

The FL average 1800 yards per season, the TE average 800 yards, and the RB mustered 1,000+ yards both season.

First run: 12-4 and a championship
Second run: 14-2 and a championship

Testing complete.

(EDIT: I will say this, that stud QB didn't get 100 QB Rating either season...I found that noteworthy.)

...thoughts on what this does to leagues with house rules in order to effect cap space etc. Ie, only reneg players in final years, only offering X amount of year deals to FA's, etc.?

I don't see any backup slots on the nickel and dime screen.
(or did I screw up my update?)

If your nickel back is also your backup CB.
Who gets substituted in?

What is the TV station ia aid of in the preview screen, :)

I am also seing very little goaline on 1st and 10 which i think changes the game so much for the better

Why take a knee then try to pass on the next play.

Chicago: Pro formation, strength is right. The defense is in a 43 with nickel personnel and 2-deep bump-and-run coverage, keying aggressively on the pass. Russell and Fisher are blitzing.
1-10-CHI25 (2Q: 00:36) Calvin Dick dropped to one knee for -1 yards.

Chicago: Weak formation with two tight ends, strength is left. The defense is in a 43 with nickel personnel and 2-deep bump-and-run coverage, keying aggressively on the pass. Russell is blitzing.
2-11-CHI24 (2Q: 00:09) Calvin Dick pass was blocked at the line, intended for TE Jerald Grusendorf. OLB Earnest Russell blocked the pass. The quarterback threw away from the double coverage.

C4, that's been there a long time. Not new to 6.3 by a long stretch.


All, just thought of another sniff test. I'm going to re-run the most recent FOWL season in 6.3 a few times with the same game plans and whatnot to see how league-wide stats might have changed.

I am very interested to see the results of this Ben. Go Cowboys!!!

How do I get the custom logos to work again?

Heh. The most obvious shift is that Dallas, a team built on a running game and defense, improved from 10-6 to averaging 13.5 wins. Nice. League-wide QB rating drops from 81.7 to 76.2

Is anybody else seeing RB's catching too many balls? In my last season, it seemed like half of the top 20 receivers were running backs. Adrian Peterson was the leading receiver with over a 100 catches. Looking at this year's real season, the highest RB ranked (Tim Hightower) is ranked 36th.

I play using the Steelers and my leading receiver was my RB, Mendenhall.

I have attached a sample screenshot of another season. All the seasons I have simmed so far are similar, with a ton of RBs catching balls. RBs circled in Blue.

As you'll see, roughly 14 of the 36 listed receivers are RBs. Seems very excessive to me.

Very interesting indeed

Thanks for the update, Jim.

I'm pretty sure this is a function of the shorter-passing Rex game plans. I'm seeing similar results for AI in SP, but when I re-ran the FOWL season, for example, it was nothing like that. The top RB had 74 catches, next 68, third 63. 18 of the top 20 guys in catches were WRs, then the one RB and one TE filled out the top 20. If it's a big deal to you in SP, I'd report it to support AT solecismic DOT com.

Ben, didn't know about the kneel then try and pass play...my bad.

Now, any chance that we (the FOWL GMs) can see the results of the sims you ran? I would like to know what adjustments, if any, I will need to make to the gameplan I used in the previous season.

I didn't track anything besides Dallas (because of their team makeup) and league-wide QB rating. I've closed the last sim I ran, too.

Speculation based on my SP play so far: cohesion may be more important. I'll be watching that.

Sure, but the list of fixes actually has the end of first half play-calling logic on it.

That's really not new to 6.3. In 6.2, if there are a lot of good receiving RBs, you'll notice a lot of RBs in the 50-75 catch area.

As Ben pointed out, if the AI is calling more shorter passing in 6.3, you should expect the number of RBs in the 50-75 catches area to improve.

Right, but given the specific wording...


...I don't have any reason to believe this is going after the oft-mentioned (by Jim) fact that each play is an individual event. That fix doesn't seem like it would be anything that big to change the fundamental way it works of examining each play situation individually. I'm guessing that the fix is mainly for this:

I ran a test this morning funnily enough, after our chat over at the vNFL. Only brief, and hardly scientific, but just for my own interest.

I ran the same season 5 times with a standard set of rosters, and a standard set-up. No injuries etc. I then swopped Peyton Manning to the Patriots and Tom Brady to the Colts.

Colts passing cohesion was 1st, Patriots was 5th. After the trade the Colts went to 15th, and the Patriots to 23rd.

No obvious differences. Manning took the Pats to 16-0 one year, 8.80 Avg A and a 119.4 rating, only to be beaten by Brady and the Colts in the playoffs. Colts went on to win the title :)

Anyhow, I saw no obvious difference in performance in terms of win-loss, QB rating or anything for that matter, from the control. I will do a more in depth scientific study when I get time. Initial impression though is that cohesion still means very little. Its not scratching the paint work of the overall equation.

Thanks for the info. I'll go ahead and report it at the support site, but guessing not much will be done. I know I might be in the minority, but this seems way to excessive for my liking. I don't mind a shorter passing game, but at the same time I don't think it should make a ton of RBs better then actual WRs. For me personally, kind of ruins the experience.

Thanks.

Looking at those stats you posted, most of them aren't better. If anything, I suspect many of them are actually hurting their team by getting so many catches.

Dola...but I do think I get what you're trying to say.

Thanks. Your right they might not be a better actual receiver, but their stats are making them seem that way:)

Again, thanks for your thoughts.

Gotcha....formations maybe?

I'm not sure I agree here. There were three issues with the end of first half logic:
* teams running out the clock when they are in position to score
* related to that, teams are calling time outs where the other team should be calling the time out
* the knee drop, play on sequences

Maybe I'm missing something, but those three all seem related to me.

hmmm...I never saw #1 and #2 on your list. Sometimes teams would get too close to the edge and therefore would try to run another play rather than kick the FG, but that's not really what it sounds like you're saying in #1. #3 really makes complete sense if each play is an individual decision.

Damn! How good would my (early FOWL) JAX teams have been with 6.3? :rant:

Without doing much investigation...could it be that in your tests (assuming injuries are off) that the RBs don't leave the field...ever? I mean, it's a rarity in the NFL that one RB plays every snap anymore so maybe we should be looking at the total number of tosses to a back in the NFL (or total per team) before we get too concerned about sniff test results.

To the best of my knowledge my injuries are turned on. I wish this was just a one time thing, but if you sim a year, you'll see it happens everytime.

Just for grins, I simmed a year with max injuries turned on and no difference. RBs still are too excessive so I don't think it has anything to do with injury setting.

What I'm now wondering is the long term effects of this RB issue. Won't it in theory take away opportunities from the WRs too much? How will WR skills increase? Will RBs make the hall of fame because of these numbers? Will less WRs make the hall of fame because not enough opportunities? Will RBs be the career leaders in receiving? Will RBs own receiving records? etc.

I noticed 8 of the top 20 reception leaders as RB's. Not sure what that used to be like, but I don't recall it being that high. And a RB led the league with 127 receptions. So the short passing game (which should lead to more RB receptions) is becoming more popular with the AI teams.

I haven't noticed any other stats that seem quite so dramatically altered from 6.2 to 6.3. Particularly, I haven't seen the top WR #'s drop as a result...

(FWIW: In the NFL, there have only been perhaps 6 RB's in the last 5 years combined that have had a Top-20 effort in receptions.)

In my SP league, from 2007-2011, the most passes ever attempted by the league was 17,702. In 2012 (6.3) the record was smashed with 18,737.

6.2 year (17,702)
SHORT PASSES - 7,696 (43%)
MEDIUM PASSES - 6,828 (39%)
LONG PASSES - 3,138 (18%)

6.3 year (18,737)
SHORT PASSES - 10,889 (58%) +15%
MEDIUM PASSES - 5,727 (31%) -8%
LONG PASSES - 2,092 (11%) -7%

The big shift made obvious with color and explains the significant RB reception increase.

Seems like a reasonable explaination as to why this might be happening. I simmed through 2021 just to see what career stats would look like and as expected, RBs are listed very much. The only thing that is probably keeping them from completely dominating the career stats is the fact a RB career is usually less than a WR so gives the WR some time to catch up.

I know I sound like a broken record, but this is not really a good thing and will make it hard for me to continue playing this version. I'm sure others will be fine with it which is Ok. Such a shame since the other stats seem pretty good besides receiving.

Keeping fingers crossed for a fix:)

thoughts on how this RB increase in production is going to effect MP leagues that are on 6.3?

Have you tried keeping your runner in to block more in pass situations?

Yeah, it makes sense that the change has led to more RB catches, however, it does not properly reflect reality. It seems to me that that really hurts this update...

Further information on RB issue. I have simmed through 2025 to check out impact to Hall of Fame. Some observations.

1) So far, no WRs elected to the hof - makes sense to me since the RBs are taking too many catches/TDs away from them.

2) So far (5) RBs have been elected to the HOF. All of them appear to be "Thurman Thomas" like. Reasonable rushing yards 11-12k range and big receiving stats.

3) None of the RBs elected appear to the type where they dominated simply running the ball versus combined with their receiving stats.

So to me the RB issue just gets compounded over time...

Again, I don't mind the engine being tweaked to have more shorter passing involved, but that does not need to equate to the RB getting huge receiving numbers. At this point, not realistic and takes away too much from the WRs.

Remember...those increases are with the AI running the show...will that translate to MP directly?

I dont know but if people know about it up front I wold guess you simply go from the QB/WR/WR equation to a QB/RB/? Equation....

Even if that would work, it would only be for my team. You can't make the AI controlled teams do this.

It doesn't appear to be a huge production increase, Flasch. It's a change in Rex game plans. If you ramp up short passing in 6.2, you'll see the exact same thing. RBs and FBs. Point being, it's significant for SP, but probably barely a blip on the radar for MP. It's not like a bunch of these guys are getting 8ypt. More savvy owners will shy away from RBs who suck up targets and don't do anything with 'em. Nitwits will ooh and ahh over their 90-catch, 550-yard, 4.8 ypt RB. *shurg*

How often is Rex throwing screens? One issue here is that short passes should still be able to go to WRs a bunch (see Welker, Wes), but FOF has a tendency to throw a lot of screens and hit FBs out of the backfield.

Perhaps RB RR is having too big of an effect?

That is what I was thinking too....I don't mind the short passing game, but more passes should go the WRs instead of the RBs.

I don't know that this will actually have an affect in the MP environment.

For RBs the Avg/C and catch percentage appears the same. I think it has more to do with REX favouring the shorter passing game and giving the screens + 0-4 yards passing about 50% of those plays.

WRs do seem to get more 3rd down targets then RBs compared to normal passing situations.

Some people don't like using the screens + 0-4 yards much and will probably put 90+ % of short passing to the 5-8 yards passes. I have tried this and my RB is no where near the top.

I don't think it's RR. It's the significant shift in game plans that Dutch mentioned, and I've seen as well. Lemme do a quick screen shot demonstration...

Isn't the primary target in the shorter passing formations the RB?

Okay but I do get your point, primary target or not WRs also catch quick slants.

EDIT FOR SEFOR EDIT:

Yes, in FOF 6.3, 6.2, 6.1, 6.0, and back in FOF2K4, throwing shorter gets the RB more targets no matter what his RR is.

Sorry, not sure I understand. Could you explain further?

Ben, thats a big difference there. The shorter passes gets favoured quite heavily.

Yup. And throwing that much shorter *will* get the RB more looks. It works that way in 6.2. It worked that way in 6.1. It worked that way in FOF2K4, even. RR is important, but for WR vs. TE vs. RB/FB targets, pass distance is probably equally (if not more) important. The easiest way to avoid the RB getting the ball is to throw it down the field more. The easiest way to get the ball to the RB is to throw it short. As I said earlier, it's pretty much a non-issue in MP. I *do* wonder if this might be making SP easier than it should be for the human. (You want *good* receiving RBs to get a lot of passes, but it appears that because of the game plans, even bad ones are.)