Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Cmfix64
No, you are wrong... confidence has a lot to do with your repeated mistakes
I watch approximately 40 NFL games or more every season. I occasionally interview NFL players. I know what happens. Furthermore, the statistics show that I'm right. You don't see players other than quarterbacks fumbling 3+ times a game in the NFL. In fact, last season no HB fumbled more than twice in any NFL game, and there were only 11 times all season that it a running back even fumbled twice. If confidence caused additional turnovers, then real life running backs would experience more fumbles as a result of having a previous one. They don't. Fumbling in real life is determined by how well you secure the ball.

Originally posted by jdbolick
Originally posted by Cmfix64

No, you are wrong... confidence has a lot to do with your repeated mistakes
I watch approximately 40 NFL games or more every season. I occasionally interview NFL players. I know what happens. Furthermore, the statistics show that I'm right. You don't see players other than quarterbacks fumbling 3+ times a game in the NFL. In fact, last season no HB fumbled more than twice in any NFL game, and there were only 11 times all season that it a running back even fumbled twice. If confidence caused additional turnovers, then real life running backs would experience more fumbles as a result of having a previous one. They don't. Fumbling in real life is determined by how well you secure the ball.


This game is not the NFL, in fact the majority of this game (if it were to be measured) would be High school and college level... and those level players have way more confidence issues than pro's

Originally posted by kurieg
Your solution is not realistic and not the only way to solve the problem. I have proposed a better solution elsewhere.
How is my solution not realistic? My solution is more realistic, because in real life players don't become more likely to experience additional fumbles because they're depressed about having an earlier one. That's not remotely realistic and it should be done away with. Moreover, whatever solution you proposed is absolutely not better because you're just addressing te symptoms of this problem and not the root cause. Turnovers raising the chance of additional turnovers is what cause the 10+ interception games in Season 5. Bort made a band-aid fix that covered up the problem but didn't actually solve it, and it's not going to be solved until this suggestion is implemented.


Originally posted by kurieg
Furthermore, builds are not powerless to stop the specific Morale feedback loop.
Yes, they are. The effects of confidence & morale-boosting skills on confidence are minute compared to the massive effect currently in the sim from turnover penalties. A QB with 70 confidence and 10 in Field General won't be able to stop the cascade effect if he's unlucky enough to experience the third turnover.

Originally posted by
So your comment about build vs build is incorrect.
No, it wasn't. My comment is correct, but apparently you're having problems understanding what's being said. If you will point to whatever is confusing you, I'll attempt to help you understand it.

Originally posted by
Ball-carrier morale is clearly supposed to be a key build vs. build issue.
Offensive player skills affect defensive morale as well, which is fine for things other than turnovers because they're not subject to the cascade effect. I'm saying that morale should not affect the offensive player's chance of having another turnover OR the defender's chance of causing another one. That's a balanced approach that solves this problem once and for all.


Originally posted by Cmfix64
if he is playing someone with similar str then yes 5 times is a lot... but you don't know the other guy's build...
How many times are you going to make me repeat myself? Are you just trying to make me have an aneurysm? It doesn't matter what the defender's build is. Even if he's 100 str / 100 tackling, that still shouldn't make a 60 + carrying / strength HB fumble 42% of the time. If it does, then the game is broken and they should just shut it down. But that's not what happens anyway. The defenders don't have such great builds that they always cause fumbles 42% of the time, it only happens when this cascade effect occurs.

If you implement my suggestion, then the defender with a great build will still have a better chance to cause a turnover than a defender with a bad build, just as a HB with a great build will have a better chance to avoid turnovers than a HB with a bad build. If they make the chance I suggested, then turnovers actually will always be determined by builds and not sim penalties.

Originally posted by
whether you agree that it cascades too much or not it is still part of the build... so builds are still causing the results just now how you would like
No, it doesn't. This is why I made the crack earlier about your intelligence. You genuinely don't understand what is being said. It's not that you get it and just disagree, you really have no clue what's being said. You don't understand it. It's like walking into a Probability Theory class and pretending like you understand what's being discussed when you really don't. As I explained in the OP, it doesn't matter what your confidence is, no amount can stop this cascade effect. This was proven in Season 5 when QBs with second or even third capped confidence were still subject to it, and the same thing is happening this season.

Originally posted by Cmfix64
This game is not the NFL, in fact the majority of this game (if it were to be measured) would be High school and college level... and those level players have way more confidence issues than pro's
You're wrong. It doesn't matter what level of football you're talking about, fumbles are determined by how well the ball carrier secures the football. In high school you don't see guys fumbling because they're depressed about earlier fumbles. That's not remotely realistic. It's about how you hold the football, which in GLB terms would be carrying. And actually, if anything ball carriers are much less likely to experience fumbles after having a first one because they're even more conscious of making sure to secure the football.

wow... you are truly a waste of life if you believe everything you just typed ...

/fail

done arguing with a little child who CLEARLY has no grasp on reality

Originally posted by jdbolick
Originally posted by Cmfix64

No, you are wrong... confidence has a lot to do with your repeated mistakes
I watch approximately 40 NFL games or more every season. I occasionally interview NFL players. I know what happens. Furthermore, the statistics show that I'm right. You don't see players other than quarterbacks fumbling 3+ times a game in the NFL. In fact, last season no HB fumbled more than twice in any NFL game, and there were only 11 times all season that it a running back even fumbled twice. If confidence caused additional turnovers, then real life running backs would experience more fumbles as a result of having a previous one. They don't. Fumbling in real life is determined by how well you secure the ball.



My problem with this argument is that it assumes that all players are Pro level players. Most players until they get to about 40 i would argue are barely college players, and before that are mostly high school players.
Im not entirely sure about high school and college football stats, but I coach Pop Warner Football twice each year. Once during the regular season, and once again for the club travel team. that rounds about to about 60+ games coached in, and 40 kids watched indivually.
point is.. theres lots of fumbles. because no matter how much you teach a kid to have 5 points of contact on the ball..."eagle claw" when it comes time to play a game, they have trouble translating the skill until they much more practice at it...
Wth time and levels, players will learn not to fumble. So by the time they are ready for the NFL, they wont fumble it as much.
http://harvardmagazine.com/2006/09/how-not-to-fumble.html

Nothing is confusing me. You're incorrect on your assumption of the amount of the morale effect and the ability to compensate. A player who's generally low on morale will be worse at all phases of the game.

Bottom line is you really don't get where the streakiness in GLB comes from. You've attributed way too much of it to morale. I'll give you a hint - Morale is somewhat of a positive feedback device.

There is no negative feedback device in GLB.

First off, Tiki Barber was pulled for fumbling 3 times in the 2002 game against the Eagles. It does happen. Now we see it less because most teams split carries between two running backs. The coach will just give more touches to the other running back after the other coughed it up and lost it a couple of times. I digress.

Second, the NFL is the best of the best and we are talking range restrictions. In GLB, we have countless different builds and thousands of games a day. Thus, there are going to be more multi fumble games and you (we) are hearing what seems to me to be a vocal minority that had a bad game. So what? It happens. Again, that back also has had huge, unrealistic games with no fumbles and 10 touchdowns. I would like to see the numbers, and not just anecdotes from an owner that thinks his back is built not to fumble without knowing anything about the defense he is playing.

Oh, and I don't want to hear how it is the way the game operates that is a problem. This is the way it does operate. It may be a bit more extreme than real life, but so is the rest of the game.

Originally posted by jdbolick
And actually, if anything ball carriers are much less likely to experience fumbles after having a first one because they're even more conscious of making sure to secure the football.

You are finally starting to see the concept of negative feedback. This is the true thing that is entirely missing from GLB.

Originally posted by gijosh
theres lots of fumbles. because no matter how much you teach a kid to have 5 points of contact on the ball..."eagle claw" when it comes time to play a game, they have trouble translating the skill until they much more practice at it...
Wth time and levels, players will learn not to fumble.
You're absolutely right, but you're also describing the fact that fumbling is about insufficient skill in securing the football, not an emotional response to a previous fumble.

Originally posted by kretchfoop
First off, Tiki Barber was pulled for fumbling 3 times in the 2002 game against the Eagles.
No, he wasn't. He did fumble three times in that game, but he had 32 carries and was still the one carrying the football when the Giants drove for the winning field goal in over time. Please check your facts before posting: http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playbyplay?gameId=221228019&period=0

Originally posted by
Second, the NFL is the best of the best
The "5 fumbles in 12 carries" game I keep referring to was a contest between two established SEA Pro teams, not just some random BBB teams.

Originally posted by
Thus, there are going to be more multi fumble games and you (we) are hearing what seems to me to be a vocal minority that had a bad game. So what? It happens.
No, it shouldn't. In the original thread I calculated the probability of 5 fumbles in 12 carries happening randomly without a turnover penalty and it was something like 1 out of 700,000. I think it's a great thing that Bort increased QB fumbles because those were comically low, and I'm certainly not suggesting that HBs should never fumble. But the amount that they do fumble should be based on their builds and the builds of the defenders tackling them, not some sim penalty for a random event.

TBF, SA Bats are a good team but they arent a elite team. BLPP has been a fumble causing team for a few seasons now. I know cuz i used to have to gameplan around them before I joined them.

Originally posted by jdbolick
As stated earlier, it's fine if morale affects the HB's chance of hanging on to a pass, breaking a tackle, or how fast he accelerates. None of those things produce a disastrous cascade effect that decides the outcome of a game simply because someone got unlucky and had a couple of early turnovers that produced a chain reaction no build could ever hope to stop.

Wait a second, it is more realistic if a halfback loses acceleration but not if he fumbles more often? Okay. Confidence doesn't matter at all. I guess you know more than an ex-NFL head coach because you write for your school paper, or whatever.

"'If those fumbles happened with Bill Parcells,' said Anderson, 'they'd be in the doghouse by now. They wouldn't be playing, but Ray being a running back himself, he'll do all he can to develop a running back's confidence. Those fumbles weren't carelessness. They were second-effort and blindside hits, but Bill would've exploded. If you fumbled with Bill, lots of times you didn't get a chance to make amends, but Ray wants to build their confidence.'"

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/07/sports/pro-football-sports-of-the-times-the-giants-marquee-now-features-hampton.html?n=Top%2FReference%2FTimes%20Topics%2FPeople%2FH%2FHampton%2C%20Rodney

Originally posted by kretchfoop
Originally posted by jdbolick

As stated earlier, it's fine if morale affects the HB's chance of hanging on to a pass, breaking a tackle, or how fast he accelerates. None of those things produce a disastrous cascade effect that decides the outcome of a game simply because someone got unlucky and had a couple of early turnovers that produced a chain reaction no build could ever hope to stop.

Wait a second, it is more realistic if a halfback loses acceleration but not if he fumbles more often? Okay. Confidence doesn't matter at all. I guess you know more than an ex-NFL head coach because you write for your school paper, or whatever.

"'If those fumbles happened with Bill Parcells,' said Anderson, 'they'd be in the doghouse by now. They wouldn't be playing, but Ray being a running back himself, he'll do all he can to develop a running back's confidence. Those fumbles weren't carelessness. They were second-effort and blindside hits, but Bill would've exploded. If you fumbled with Bill, lots of times you didn't get a chance to make amends, but Ray wants to build their confidence.'"

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/10/07/sports/pro-football-sports-of-the-times-the-giants-marquee-now-features-hampton.html?n=Top%2FReference%2FTimes%20Topics%2FPeople%2FH%2FHampton%2C%20Rodney

No, ..ramble..ramble... Insult... I stated this already... Ramble...

there i saved you reading his post

The main problem I have is that you want to correct the blotted defensive stats without wanting to correct all the bloated offensive stats. There needs to be a balance. The defense has been getting neutered for seasons now. I asked you about your offensive players production cuz they are far from realistic. Just like the high number of fumbles. If you want to make one aspect more realistic the, you need to do so in all phases.