Is Dynasty ruined down the road?

[ghettoqball]

Re: Is Dynasty ruined down the road?

I have seen countless times Redshirt players progressing.

Okay, I'll explain it again... you don't get training before your freshman year. You get training before each of the following seasons...

1. sophomore
2. junior
3. senior
4. redshirt

So yes, you do progress before your redshirt year, wherever it is. But you only progress 4 times. It is only possible to progress 4 times. If you can add another year to this I just made, go ahead.

[joejccva71]

Re: Is Dynasty ruined down the road?

Yes. In one of my sim test, I controlled 12 teams and set each season Recruiting need priorities and it worked perfectly.

I set Alabama needs for QB low until the 3rd season as A.J. McCarron would both be Juniors. Alabama still brought in a 72 Freshman QB the first season.

Isn't that a hell of a lot of work to do this for all the teams every year? You'd have to set their tendencies based on their needs, in which you'd have to research each team ..each year. Ugh...I have a full time job already.

[MattUMD224]

Re: Is Dynasty ruined down the road?

Isn't that a hell of a lot of work to do this for all the teams every year? You'd have to set their tendencies based on their needs, in which you'd have to research each team ..each year. Ugh...I have a full time job already.

Oh by no means and I going to do that. It was just a test dynasty SIM. The only thing I do for other teams is set the depth charts.

[PocketScout]

Re: Is Dynasty ruined down the road?

I do think its all relative, but would like to see a few minor changes that people have already talked about but I just want to reinforce them

1. Awareness progression needs to be greater. Fine if a recruit comes in at 40 awr, but he should at least be a 70 awr by senior year or could progress to 80-90 awareness. However I dont know what kind of impact this would have on the overall ratings.

2. 1*-3* recruits need to be rated higher and possibly throw in some sleepers in there. Have a bottom level rating of 55.

Changing awr from 50 to 99 only changes players 4 to 5 points on the overall rating so progression wouldn't really skew them very much at all. Only quarterbacks have a huge change. There ovr changes about 14pts with the same swing in awr.

[TracerBullet]

Re: Is Dynasty ruined down the road?

Isn't that a hell of a lot of work to do this for all the teams every year? You'd have to set their tendencies based on their needs, in which you'd have to research each team ..each year. Ugh...I have a full time job already.

Since you can only control 12 teams its not possible. It resets everytime your coach switches teams.

[MattUMD224]

Re: Is Dynasty ruined down the road?

Changing awr from 50 to 99 only changes players 4 to 5 points on the overall rating so progression wouldn't really skew them very much at all. Only quarterbacks have a huge change. There ovr changes about 14pts with the same swing in awr.

Ok, I rather have a 40 OVR player with 70 AWR, than a 70 OVR with 40 AWR.

Awareness is the biggest issue, it affects gameplay and how you see the game.

[MattUMD224]

Re: Is Dynasty ruined down the road?

Since you can only control 12 teams its not possible. It resets everytime your coach switches teams.

If you create a coach and hire him to a team to switch the depth chart and then fire him, the coaches records and everything stay the same.

Anything else you do gets reset and changes. During another SIM Test Dynasty, to see if I can control the terrible CPU Recruiting. I recruited for 15 teams with CPU help off and it all changed and reset right before the season.

[OSUFan_88]

Re: Is Dynasty ruined down the road?

So I simmed a few season ahead:

Awareness is a huge problem stat wise. At best, most teams will have seniors with 70ish ratings.

On Heisman, I found that teams do a better job in keeping with their needs. Now I think the CPU targets not a specific position, because one team will have like 5 LT's and 1 RT. However, that's not a big problem. Never saw a glaring mistake like PSU's 40's rb's.

Lower prestige teams "talent" is pretty GD bad. I don't have a huge problem with that, but I don't think it would be unfair to have a few lower prestige teams with a lot of older players to have quite a few 70's. Not a huge complaint but it is there.

So while I won't say dynasty is ruined, if they fix the AWR, it should be pretty solid.

[JJ_Bills9]

Re: Is Dynasty ruined down the road?

Let me clarify my previous comments on how I think progression should work. Potential shouldn't be an end all be all that decides how much players progress.

Potential should be a likeliehood that someone becomes great. Say you have two players, both 72 overall tailbacks as freshman. One has A potential, and one has D potential.

Both of these players should have caps on all of their attributes, which obviously the player can't see. For this argument, I'll say that both cap out at an 88 overall.

Now this is the part that gets tricky and may be impossible to program into a game. Potential is a somewhat vague term, but I think everyone would agree that players show their full potential at times even during their freshman years. This doesn't mean they have reached their potential yet, just that they are showing glimpses.

* My argument is that the player with A potential will have more flashes of greatness than the player with D potential.

How would this work in a game you may ask?
My answer is that during a game, there should be plays where players are playing at their full capacity. Like their stats are at their cap and they are in the zone playing at their peak level of performance (meaning that their ratings on these plays are at their caps, ie this 72 running back is playing like the 88 he's capable of becoming).

The 72 with D potential will also have these moments but they will be fewer and far between, but he will still have plays where he is performing at his 88 potential.

* I guess I should add that the user will not know when these moments are occuring unless their player pulls off some moves and broken tackles, or linemen dominate the guy accross from them, a linebacker lights up the ball carrier on a great read, or a DB just shuts his man down. You would only be able to tell is a player is living up to his potential if he is showing it on the field.

Back to my 72 running backs. I can't see the potential ratings, so I decide to start the guy with D potential because he's a little faster. By virtue of his being on the field much more, even though he's not going to have many flashes of brilliance, he stands to get plenty of chances to prove his potential. Now maybe he gets shut down on the few chances he gets to show his worth... OK, that means he's not living up to his potential yet.

Now let's say my backup with A potential gets on the field for about 20 plays a game compared to the other guys 60. It stand to reason that in 40 fewer plays, he's going to have just as many "full potential" moments as the other guy because his A potential means he's more likely to become great.

* Now at the end of the season, we'll say that player D potential had 185 carries for 820 yards and 4 TD's. He had a pretty good year, but pretty average YPC and not much scoring.
Conversely player A potential had 100 carries for 600 and 7 TD's. You tell me which player is playing better and "living up to their potential".
Obviously, player A potential (to me at least) is showing he's more explosive and needs more touches.

* Now the actual progression is based off overall numbers and how well a player performed during his "full potential moments".

Judging from the aforementioned numbers, Player A took advantage of his great moments despite fewer touches, give him a 6 point increase to a 78 (or something like that) Player D had more chances and failed to be really impressive in his them, but he had better overall numbers in yards, give him a 5 point increase to 77.

Now my back-up Player A potential will be my starter going into next year because he's living up to his potential moreso than the other guy.

* Let me add one more thing about not living up to potential. In real life there have been several good players doomed by having poor supporting casts. If I have a QB who's a 73 with A potential who caps out at a 92 overall, but he's playing behind a sieve O-line, it stands to reason his development could be hindered. Let's say he goes through the year and completes just barely over 50% of his passes, throws about 15 Int's and only 12 TD's and he gets sacked 55 times. Based off those numbers, I'm guessing the guy got sacked a lot or was forced into making bad throws during his "full potential" moments. Because of this and his numbers, he stands to progress maybe 2 or 3 points. However, the potential is still there for him to become a 93 if he plays better.

*Using this method, it's realistic that a player could live up to his potential by the end of his freshman or sophomore season based on how he performs. This would be players like Adrian Peterson or AJ Green.

Say my 72 A potential running back was name my starter, and he goes out there and puts up 250 carries for 1500 yards and 15 TD's, well by the end of the season, I'd say he's earned a rating in the mid-80's, and he doesn't have that much more room to improve.

If a guys does reach his full potential while he's still got time left, he can still improve his ratings, but by very small increments, like one or two points per year.

* These ratings progressions would happen throughout the course of the year and can go back down if a player regresses on the field. Off Season Progression should only effect STRENGTH, STAMINA, INJURY, SPEED, ACCELLERATION, JUMPING, tell me if I'm missing anything. I say these because they can be improved through strength and conditioning

The actual skill ratings that relate to positions all have caps that the player is trying to live up to. These are the numbers that raise based on on-field performance. They SHOULD NOT be affected during off-season progression because they are inherent abilities that the player has all along, but they are still figuring it out.

Sorry for the extremely long post, and I know this is probably impossible to program into a game, but I think this would make potential truly mean what it should mean, and it would alos rememdy what we've been asking for forever. On Field performance would actually mean something. Frankly it would mean quite a bit but not quite everything.

[don flamenco]

Re: Is Dynasty ruined down the road?

first post here...I'm in 2017 in a dynasty with Michigan State. I've been playing 1-2 games per year and doing the recruiting. MSU starts off as a 3 star prestige, B overall, preseason rank of around 45 or so. Since then I've won a couple of championships and increased my prestige to 6 stars and have been consistently in the top 5 in recruiting. Unfortunately, I'm still a B overall. The highest ranked team in the entire NCAA is a B+ overall (Alabama). Like others have posted, about 50% of the 120 teams fall in the "D" range.

I gotta say, it's pretty annoying that my talent level in 2017 is on par with what it was in 2010 after being so successful.

I noticed some people saying the awareness ratings are messed up...so i went through the NCAA and looked at the top for each position.

2017 AWARENESS STATS BY POSITION
QB...89 OVR
HB...87 OVR, then drops to 79, 75
FB...81 OVR, then drops to 78, 77
WR...81 OVR
TE...94 OVR, then drops to 84, 83
LT...89 OVR, then drop to 87,86
LG...90 OVR, then drops to 89, 86
C...90 OVR, then drops to 87, 81
RG...92 OVR, then drops to 87, 86, 83
RT...2 93's OVR, then drops to 86, 82
LE...61(!) OVR, then 60, 59... I scanned the rest of the rankings and around 75% are ranked 49 or below
RE...68 OVR, then a couple of 67's
DT...82 OVR, then drops to a couple of 78's
LOLB...63 OVR...about 70% fall in the below 49 OVR rating
MLB....66 OVR, then a couple of 64's
ROLB...79 OVR, then a huge dropoff to a couple of 64's
CB...87 OVR, then a couple of 85's
FS....87 OVR, then a bunch of 84's
SS...92 OVR, then a drop down to 82, 79
K....88
P...90

So, that's the top of the NCAA in AWR in 2017. These aren't even close to acceptable....

[TracerBullet]

Re: Is Dynasty ruined down the road?

So far I've noticed that 3* recruits come in between the ratings of 61-76. I think that gap is way too wide. Having a 3* recruit come in as a 61 every once in awhile is one thing, but having them rated this low often kinda makes it so the 2* and 1* just suck even more than they probably should. 2* prospects should be rated from the mid to low 60s on average imo not from the low 60s to the mid 50s. 3* prospects should have a gap of about 7-8 OVR points on average, not 15.

[whodeycin85]

Re: Is Dynasty ruined down the road?

Personally I think what has changed is that there are 2 factors in play now instead of 1....I felt like on the older versions that teams were soley based on thier player rating...so XXX team has an average of 95 across thier starting 22 then they are an A ranked team and etc. But i feel now that a teams overall grade may have more to due with thier record for instance a 9-4 team is a B+ ranked team...now if a team averages 10-11 over a period of time that make an A ranking....Make sense?

As for the rating...I think that most people get too caught up in overalls...and player attribute make him great...Just to throw this out there but 15 of the top 40 overall recurits IRL in 2005 can be considered bust...either by injury or by lack of talent or transfered to the lower tiers...So randoness is a great thing...I think that a 2 or 3* team isn't gonna get an an 75 4* HB but they might have a shot at a 4* HB whos whas overated and is really a 69...

[scadh]

Re: Is Dynasty ruined down the road?

Wow. Following this thread with great interest and disappointment. That's the worst news I've heard about what is otherwise the best NCAAF since 2003. It's making me want to shelve the game in hopes that a patch will come out soon before too many schools have dropped significantly.

[EvanRG]

Re: Is Dynasty ruined down the road?

Logic says that the dev team cannot simply patch an attribute to be higher. It would require them editing all 8,000 of the recruits.

I don't perceive this to be a game breaker by any stretch. I try to enjoy the gameplay and simply forget about 1 attribute that is too low.

If my players start tackling their own teammates or tripping over themselves -- then of course we will have issues, but it seems that the entire NCAA is like that so it will go both ways.

[LionsFanNJ]

Re: Is Dynasty ruined down the road?

Logic says that the dev team cannot simply patch an attribute to be higher. It would require them editing all 8,000 of the recruits.

I don't perceive this to be a game breaker by any stretch. I try to enjoy the gameplay and simply forget about 1 attribute that is too low.

If my players start tackling their own teammates or tripping over themselves -- then of course we will have issues, but it seems that the entire NCAA is like that so it will go both ways.

I'm with you. As long as the lower recruits are all around the board i'm ok with it. Plus I personally make ten great recruits every year so there's a few standouts. But like in another thread i wish teams wouldn't stack on a position that they don't need. I guess i'm not as picky about things.