Dynamic Player Progression System - No Editor Needed

[kawkeye]

Quote: Originally Posted by joshrmlb

What about for all the other CPU teams though? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Every other team would take a long time, but a few seasons I did every P5 team + a few of the more notable lower level schools.

Some years I do just skill players, some years just QBs, etc

It obviously doesn’t keep things as even, but a major pillar of these sliders is handicapping the user to make it more difficult to build a dominant program, so I am fine with it.

[kingscilla]

kawkeye -

I'm curious, what are the chances of each of the situations? I know you said a transfer was 2.8%, but I'm also curious to know the chances of the other outcomes before I adopt it 100%. Figured you already had the numbers.

Love the system btw, very excited to use it in the offseason of my DP Dynasty.

[kawkeye]

Quote: Originally Posted by kingscilla

kawkeye - I'm curious, what are the chances of each of the situations? I know you said a transfer was 2.8%, but I'm also curious to know the chances of the other outcomes before I adopt it 100%. Figured you already had the numbers. Love the system btw, very excited to use it in the offseason of my DP Dynasty.

There is essentially a 37% chance that the player will regress, a 37% chance they will stay the same (only default improvement), a 22% chance they will slightly improve (in addition to default progression), and a <3% chance they will transfer.

The thing about these, however, is that in addition to regressing or improving, there is also a random number that determines how much they will improve.

That means there is roughly a 4-5% chance for a player to improve greatly (6-8 overall in addition to their default progression), and a 8-9% chance they will regress dramatically.

Don’t get hung up on the players regressing. Very few players end up lower ranked than the previous season when factoring in the games default system and my system together.

If you give it a try, let me know how it goes! I’m still having pretty good luck with it.

[tc020791]

I love the sound of this, and I’m definitely going to be using this in my upcoming off season. I just want to throw something out there to try and help me achieve what I’m looking for. Try to follow me real quick....

With your method, technically speaking 37% of the time your player ACTUALLY; stays the same, slightly regresses from last year, or even slightly progresses from last year (anywhere from -4 to +3 ovr). 37% of the time the player progresses normally (4 to 7 ovr). Therefore, since a good amount of the 37% of what you call “regression” is actually no progress at all from the year prior, or even a small progression, your regression number is actually a lot lower than 37%, if your referring to the year prior.

Meanwhile, you progress normal (4-7 ovr) 37% of the time, and progress more rapidly (5-15 ovr) 22% of the time. Therefore your players are actually progressing 59% of the time. Not to mention the small percentage when the regression you determine, plus the games default progression, still results in a small progression from last year. Now you’re progressing more like 60-65% of the time from last year and only truely regressing maybe 10% of the time, leaving no change at all with about a 25% chance.

The thing is, I liked your numbers, I just want them to actually reflect them for my dynasty. Therefore I think I’m going to change dice roll 3 from player stays the same (aka progresses normal), to player regresses. I’m also going to do the same for roll 6, getting rid of the transfer roll and adding another, what you call, “regression” roll.

Therefore “regression” or close to it will now happen 67% of the time. That 67% will theoretically be represented by about 18% real regression from year prior (-4 to -2 ovr), about 30% no change at all (-1 to 1 ovr), and about 18% very small progression (2-3 ovr). Now instead of 37% being normal progression, you’ll only get 17% normal progression plus 17% advanced progression, for 34% normal to advanced progression. Combine that with the 18% that get very small progression, and you still get a total of 52 % progression from last season which sounds about right to me. The other 48% is split between 30% without a change and 18% with a real regression.

As far as transfers go I’m still going to do it, just in a different way. I’m going to take all my 5th year seniors (aka grad transfers), players who have played very few meaningful downs for us, and players who aren’t starters on the depth chart, but could be #1 at other schools. For the last one, the player must be an underclassmen. It wouldn’t really effect you if your #2 SS, who’s a senior, transfers. You wouldn’t have used him next year anyway.

I’d suspect this list to be about half of your players. Then use a random number generator to transfer two players. The reason I’m doing this is not only to free up the number 6 dice roll, but also because I don’t think it makes much sense for your star QB, who’s started for you 3 straight years, to all of a sudden transfer from Clemson as a junior. It doesn’t really add up to me. The grad transfer and guys who never play makes a lot more sense to me, as well as guys who want to get NFL exposure but can’t get playing time at your school. Sometimes you might lose a red shirt senior who is a 90+, other times you might lose a junior who has never played and is still below 80, other times you may lose a Junior DE who’s a 85 but rarely plays because there’s two 90+ DE’s ahead of him.

I can’t thank you enough for all the work you have put together with this tremendous idea. Just trying to continue to think outside the box like you.

[Hellisan]

Interesting takes and thoughts tc.

I tend to agree about the transfers. I want there to be some reason why they would and do.

khawkeye, this is a really cool system. Moreover, what I like most is you made it easy for people to figure out and follow provided they're willing to read (lol) the really well organized PDF. It's not just some slop half-a553d put together like *some other progression systems* lol - I totally agree with your point about not wanting to know a freshman's work ethic to know if they will improve a lot.

I think that having options and being able to just pick the one that makes the most sense is the best possible outcome for people still playing NCAA 14 so there are no negatives.

So, only question is, how long does this really take? You're saying that if you just do your roster, it takes five minutes? Are you talking about using a spreadsheet with all the ratings and running a macro to do it for you and then uploading it to the game with an editor?

This is where I have absolutely no experience is with modding the game, because I have been running one dynasty since the release of the game basically and wouldn't want to screw it up.

[kawkeye]

Quote: Originally Posted by Hellisan

Interesting takes and thoughts tc. I tend to agree about the transfers. I want there to be some reason why they would and do. khawkeye, this is a really cool system. Moreover, what I like most is you made it easy for people to figure out and follow provided they're willing to read (lol) the really well organized PDF. It's not just some slop half-a553d put together like *some other progression systems* lol - I totally agree with your point about not wanting to know a freshman's work ethic to know if they will improve a lot. I think that having options and being able to just pick the one that makes the most sense is the best possible outcome for people still playing NCAA 14 so there are no negatives. So, only question is, how long does this really take? You're saying that if you just do your roster, it takes five minutes? Are you talking about using a spreadsheet with all the ratings and running a macro to do it for you and then uploading it to the game with an editor? This is where I have absolutely no experience is with modding the game, because I have been running one dynasty since the release of the game basically and wouldn't want to screw it up.

I edit mine the old fashioned way and yes, if you do it several times, there is no reason you wouldn’t be able to knock out a team in 5-10 minutes.

First of all, once you have done it a few times, you memorize how many points to add to certain attributes for every situation. Alls it really takes is memorizing the 6 attributes that are affected for each position.

Second, it helps to have multiple screens to generate your dice rolls and random numbers. I usually use my phone and an iPad so I’m not switching tabs and reloading pages.

Third, you don’t edit every player with this system. Some years, there seems to be tons of 3’s and 4’s, which means you don’t touch those players attributes. You should really only have to edit about 60% of your roster on average, but I’ve had years where I’ve rolled so many 3’s and 4’s that I bet I only edited about 20 players total.

Also, I thought I would mention that I did get some of my ideas from the thread that you started a long time ago, and I just combined and tweaked a few plans I liked, added my own twists, then refined it.

And I could t agree more. My system might not be what everyone is looking for, but the more solid resources we can put out there, the more likely it is that any given gamer is going to find one they like that works for them. And that is the beauty of operation sports.

[Hellisan]

Quote: Originally Posted by kawkeye

I edit mine the old fashioned way and yes, if you do it several times, there is no reason you wouldn’t be able to knock out a team in 5-10 minutes. First of all, once you have done it a few times, you memorize how many points to add to certain attributes for every situation. Alls it really takes is memorizing the 6 attributes that are affected for each position. Second, it helps to have multiple screens to generate your dice rolls and random numbers. I usually use my phone and an iPad so I’m not switching tabs and reloading pages. Third, you don’t edit every player with this system. Some years, there seems to be tons of 3’s and 4’s, which means you don’t touch those players attributes. You should really only have to edit about 60% of your roster on average, but I’ve had years where I’ve rolled so many 3’s and 4’s that I bet I only edited about 20 players total. Also, I thought I would mention that I did get some of my ideas from the thread that you started a long time ago, and I just combined and tweaked a few plans I liked, added my own twists, then refined it. And I could t agree more. My system might not be what everyone is looking for, but the more solid resources we can put out there, the more likely it is that any given gamer is going to find one they like that works for them. And that is the beauty of operation sports.

I appreciate your response man. I know for me, there's no way this would take anything less than an hour and a half the first time and I might be able to get it down to like 45 minutes. But that's me. I go to build a barbecue that's supposed to be put together in 15 minutes and it's an hour, easy. Another factor is, it takes me sometimes real-life years between offseasons, so I would have to remember how to do it over again... Kind of like how I have to remember my stuff. However, I can admit that the way I do it takes a lot longer than 45 minutes even when I remember everything - and that's with being scary good at nailing OVR even when adjusting varied aspects of a player's skillset. I might try to figure out how to hide the improvement ratings for myself. Since you have a lot of know how... If you have an idea for how to do this in excel without just blacking out the text, I'd be all ears. The way you put this together in a digestible way, again, is highly appreciated and might encourage me to at some point redo page 1 of my system to make it more accessible.

edit: The italicized part above I was originally going to pick your brain on that but I have gone back and forth on this a few times, and after updating my offseason again and going through the career-long improvement of certain players, I just keep finding that having the good Ethic rating guarantees very little in terms of the final rating over such a small sample size of say 3-4 improvements/regressions. Keep finding guys with a real solid rating that just never became a thing, so I'll keep doing that aspect as it has been.

[kawkeye]

Quote: Originally Posted by Hellisan

I appreciate your response man. I know for me, there's no way this would take anything less than an hour and a half the first time and I might be able to get it down to like 45 minutes. But that's me. I go to build a barbecue that's supposed to be put together in 15 minutes and it's an hour, easy. Another factor is, it takes me sometimes real-life years between offseasons, so I would have to remember how to do it over again... Kind of like how I have to remember my stuff. However, I can admit that the way I do it takes a lot longer than 45 minutes even when I remember everything - and that's with being scary good at nailing OVR even when adjusting varied aspects of a player's skillset. I might try to figure out how to hide the improvement ratings for myself. Since you have a lot of know how... If you have an idea for how to do this in excel without just blacking out the text, I'd be all ears. The way you put this together in a digestible way, again, is highly appreciated and might encourage me to at some point redo page 1 of my system to make it more accessible. edit: The italicized part above I was originally going to pick your brain on that but I have gone back and forth on this a few times, and after updating my offseason again and going through the career-long improvement of certain players, I just keep finding that having the good Ethic rating guarantees very little in terms of the final rating over such a small sample size of say 3-4 improvements/regressions. Keep finding guys with a real solid rating that just never became a thing, so I'll keep doing that aspect as it has been.

I’ve been thinking about your work ethic ratings because I like the idea, I just haven’t found a good way to implement them into my existing system. However, I did have one idea just come to mind:

Three levels of “work ethic.” I would probably assign these levels right away for freshman by rolling a bumper 1-3.

1. Low Work Ethic: This player CANNOT roll a five. This means that every given offseason, they have a 50/50 chance of either staying the same or regressing.

2. Average Work Ethic: This player simply goes by the existing rules.

3. High Work Ethic: This player has the opportunity to do ONE re-roll every year. This means they can redo either the dice-roll or the random number between 1-49. This improves their chances of progressing and decreases their chances of regressing.

Thoughts?