Philosophies

[JimK]

You should be able to set a philosophy for each individual roster slot, not just positions. Here are some examples of positions where this is necessary:

--WR. You want speed on the outside and quick route running in the slot.

--OT. In the NFL you generally have a better pass blocker defending the QB's blind side and a better run blocker on the strong side.

--DE. Sort of the converse. You usually see a better pass rusher at RE and a run stopper at LE.

--HB. Some HBs can do it all, but often you'll see a main power back and a 3rd down receiving back.

--SILB and WILB. In the 3-4, you'll usually see the strong side backer be a bigger guy that can take on blockers, whereas the weak side guy is faster and more athletic.

[shadowman]

1. You can put your best pass blocker on the left side and your best run blocker on the right.
2. You can put a speed WR on the outside and a quick route runner in the slot.
I think people depend to much on a players overall rating and don't look at specific ratings or a players performance.
The highest rated player doesn't have to always be in the first spot on the depth chart.

[JimK]

Re: Philosophies

1. You can put your best pass blocker on the left side and your best run blocker on the right.
2. You can put a speed WR on the outside and a quick route runner in the slot.
I think people depend to much on a players overall rating and don't look at specific ratings or a players performance.
The highest rated player doesn't have to always be in the first spot on the depth chart.

No offense my friend, but I think you may have missed my point. I know I can painstakingly look at every single attribute for every single player, but it's far from an ideal solution. After all, there is an overall rating for a purpose, and there are philosophies for a purpose. Most people hail the philosophies as a great advancement for assessing players. My suggestion would be a further enhancement. This is a great game, and I see several ways it could be made even better if there is ever another installment.

I don't feel like the existence of a time-consuming and inefficient method is proof that we don't need a faster and more efficient one. After all, we don't need GPS. We have maps. We don't really need cars since we have horses. And we really don't need electricity because we have candles.

[The Swag Killa]

Re: Philosophies

You should be able to set a philosophy for each individual roster slot, not just positions. Here are some examples of positions where this is necessary:

--WR. You want speed on the outside and quick route running in the slot.

--OT. In the NFL you generally have a better pass blocker defending the QB's blind side and a better run blocker on the strong side.

--DE. Sort of the converse. You usually see a better pass rusher at RE and a run stopper at LE.

--HB. Some HBs can do it all, but often you'll see a main power back and a 3rd down receiving back.

--SILB and WILB. In the 3-4, you'll usually see the strong side backer be a bigger guy that can take on blockers, whereas the weak side guy is faster and more athletic.

1. You can put your faster WRs at the flanker spots and move the possession receivers inside manually. It doesn't take very long to do...
2. You can edit positions and move your best pass blocking tackle to LT and put your best run blocker at RT. Again, it doesn't take very long to do.
3. You can put your best pass rusher at RE and best run-stopping end at LE. Once again, not very time-consuming.
4. You can put your main HB at the HB1 slot and have another back as your main 3rd down back using the depth chart.
5. You can edit positions to put your power LB at SILB and your finesse/speed LB at WILB.

It doesn't take very long to do any of these things. EA can't do it all, you know. No need to get lazy:wink:

[JimK]

Re: Philosophies

1. You can put your faster WRs at the flanker spots and move the possession receivers inside manually. It doesn't take very long to do...
2. You can edit positions and move your best pass blocking tackle to LT and put your best run blocker at RT. Again, it doesn't take very long to do.
3. You can put your best pass rusher at RE and best run-stopping end at LE. Once again, not very time-consuming.
4. You can put your main HB at the HB1 slot and have another back as your main 3rd down back using the depth chart.
5. You can edit positions to put your power LB at SILB and your finesse/speed LB at WILB.

It doesn't take very long to do any of these things. EA can't do it all, you know. No need to get lazy:wink:

I already addressed all this before you even said it. Do you think you can win the argument by repetition? If you're right, we might as well not even have philosophies or an overall rating. You've also failed to address the fact that you can't see individual ratings during the scouting and drafting process or the fact that the AI makes all decisions based on philosophies and overall rating.

There is always the guy that opposes progress and will defend the status quo no matter what it is. It's just in some people's DNA. How would the game not be improved by making the philosophies even better and more useful? Your opposition is illogical.

[shadowman]

Re: Philosophies

There is also the guy who whines and complains about everything and thinks that he is always right.

[The Swag Killa]

Re: Philosophies

Lol TC. Yea I did repeat what you said. If there were to be a new NFL Had Coach game, I think there are more important things to do with the game than expanding player philosophies. That's all I'm saying. I think you want this "enhanced philosophies" because you're too lazy to do the things you were complaining about yourself. It takes no more than 3-5 minutes to make the adjustments you mentioned.

[kcarr]

Re: Philosophies

1. You can put your faster WRs at the flanker spots and move the possession receivers inside manually. It doesn't take very long to do...
2. You can edit positions and move your best pass blocking tackle to LT and put your best run blocker at RT. Again, it doesn't take very long to do.
3. You can put your best pass rusher at RE and best run-stopping end at LE. Once again, not very time-consuming.
4. You can put your main HB at the HB1 slot and have another back as your main 3rd down back using the depth chart.
5. You can edit positions to put your power LB at SILB and your finesse/speed LB at WILB.

It doesn't take very long to do any of these things. EA can't do it all, you know. No need to get lazy:wink:

You may be able to but with a lot of these things the CPU can't

[TheUpperLegion]

Re: Philosophies

I think deeper position philosophies is a great idea. Things like "Possession WR" and "Hybrd/Tweener DE" would be cool.

[goalieump413]

Re: Philosophies

I don't think it's necessary to require position specific philosophies at all. Just do your homework and put guys where you believe they're best suited.

After all, wouldn't any coach want a burner wideout, a possession slot receiver, and so on?

I think the real question is whether you can tailor your team to really take advantage of your talent, not relying on philosophies that much. Paying too much attention to philosophy can get in the way of talent you have on your team already, and can skew things too much in the draft.

[JimK]

Re: Philosophies

Once again, *I can do it but the AI can't.* That's the great thing about the philosophies--it helps the AI pick the right players, not me.

It does effect the player to an extent because you don't see all the ratings when you draft. Again, nothing to do with laziness.

[bbriders]

Re: Philosophies

I could be wrong but I thought the philosophies just were a way to grade the players weighing different abilities slightly more. So baisicly it graded the players according to the philosophy you were looking for. So as the coach you would pick your main philosophy and then tweek your depth charts to match your players talent for where you wanted them. Really the philosophies and OVR rating just made it so the game could put numbers to players abilities so some people that didn't look closely at their players could rate their players.

If they wanted to make it more real you wouldn't need any of the OVR ratings and Philosophy because the coach (you/us) would set the depth chart according to players abilities and scouted potentials.

I hope this kinda made sense. If it didn't maybe I don't really understand what ya'll are getting at.

[kcarr]

Re: Philosophies

I could be wrong but I thought the philosophies just were a way to grade the players weighing different abilities slightly more. So baisicly it graded the players according to the philosophy you were looking for. So as the coach you would pick your main philosophy and then tweek your depth charts to match your players talent for where you wanted them. Really the philosophies and OVR rating just made it so the game could put numbers to players abilities so some people that didn't look closely at their players could rate their players.

If they wanted to make it more real you wouldn't need any of the OVR ratings and Philosophy because the coach (you/us) would set the depth chart according to players abilities and scouted potentials.

I hope this kinda made sense. If it didn't maybe I don't really understand what ya'll are getting at.

The biggest reason for overall ratings are there are not for the users but so the CPU can align their players. This is also the main reason for needing them to be more in depth. Also, could allow more depth in determining who your gm was mad about you drafting because they label them a bust when despite the fact that they have the ratings you need to fill a role other than that of a full time starter

[LordTC]

Re: Philosophies

CPU picking players is actually pretty easy to do. Give each scheme a custom matrix for each position to multiply the player ratings by and assign them an overall rating based on that. Any halfway decent machine learning technique will find correct values to hardcode after a reasonable number of sim iterations. If you have enough ratings you can make it harder for players to evaluate players than the CPU. Part of the problem is to a certain extent they want to make the game fairly easy.