When you are playing in a very competitive league with good/great builds, then yes, confidence would of helped him a ton. I think his confidence was something like 19 or 22, if he would of had it at a reasonable level, then I seriously don't think he would of had a death spiral. 2 picks, yes, 3 maybe, but that isn't a death spiral.
Forum > Suggestions > Make Turnover % Chance Dependent Solely on Builds & Not Previous Turnovers
Jed
offline
offline
Originally posted by Larry Roadgrader
In your opinion, that's the answer.
Some believe it's an inadequate one--that too much of the probability of turning the ball over is related to previous turnovers rather than baseline build.
That's like saying, "You think raising Speed and Agility is the best way to end up moving faster, but that's just your opinion, others believe there should be another way."
So is this thread really just complaining that people don't want to have to put more into Confidence in order to do what Confidence does at higher levels?
In your opinion, that's the answer.
Some believe it's an inadequate one--that too much of the probability of turning the ball over is related to previous turnovers rather than baseline build.
That's like saying, "You think raising Speed and Agility is the best way to end up moving faster, but that's just your opinion, others believe there should be another way."
So is this thread really just complaining that people don't want to have to put more into Confidence in order to do what Confidence does at higher levels?
jdbolick
offline
offline
Originally posted by Troymk1
If you have a build that is susceptible to a confidence spiral (downwards) then that's purely your own fault. If you listened to all the Build experts who left confidence as their last stat to do anything with then again it's YOUR fault. Confidence and Stamina are massive in this game as they effect EVERY other stat out there. (They may even effect themselves which would be a double whammy)
Is there a way I can put a minimum intelligence requirement on this thread so I don't have to waste my time with responding to comments like this?
I have explained this phenomenon over and over and over again. It is not a question of confidence because there is no amount of confidence that can stop a morale spiral. It cannot be done because confidence is an additive modifier, while the turnover penalty is multiplicative. How many times do I have to repeat myself before certain people either realize what I'm talking about, or else realize that they're so clueless that they should sit in the corner with their mouths shut while the adequately educated people discuss the topic?
The "death spiral" happens to QBs with 3rd and 4th capped confidence. No confidence is enough because of the nature of the factors involved. It's not about ignoring confidence, so whenever someone insists that's the issue, the only thing they accomplish is to shine a great big spotlight on their ignorance and their inability to comprehend basic sentences. This is a problem with how the effects of turnovers are coded.
If you have a build that is susceptible to a confidence spiral (downwards) then that's purely your own fault. If you listened to all the Build experts who left confidence as their last stat to do anything with then again it's YOUR fault. Confidence and Stamina are massive in this game as they effect EVERY other stat out there. (They may even effect themselves which would be a double whammy)
Is there a way I can put a minimum intelligence requirement on this thread so I don't have to waste my time with responding to comments like this?
I have explained this phenomenon over and over and over again. It is not a question of confidence because there is no amount of confidence that can stop a morale spiral. It cannot be done because confidence is an additive modifier, while the turnover penalty is multiplicative. How many times do I have to repeat myself before certain people either realize what I'm talking about, or else realize that they're so clueless that they should sit in the corner with their mouths shut while the adequately educated people discuss the topic?
The "death spiral" happens to QBs with 3rd and 4th capped confidence. No confidence is enough because of the nature of the factors involved. It's not about ignoring confidence, so whenever someone insists that's the issue, the only thing they accomplish is to shine a great big spotlight on their ignorance and their inability to comprehend basic sentences. This is a problem with how the effects of turnovers are coded.
Originally posted by jdbolick
Is there a way I can put a minimum intelligence requirement on this thread so I don't have to waste my time with responding to comments like this?
I have explained this phenomenon over and over and over again. It is not a question of confidence because there is no amount of confidence that can stop a morale spiral. It cannot be done because confidence is an additive modifier, while the turnover penalty is multiplicative. How many times do I have to repeat myself before certain people either realize what I'm talking about, or else realize that they're so clueless that they should sit in the corner with their mouths shut while the adequately educated people discuss the topic?
The "death spiral" happens to QBs with 3rd and 4th capped confidence. No confidence is enough because of the nature of the factors involved. It's not about ignoring confidence, so whenever someone insists that's the issue, the only thing they accomplish is to shine a great big spotlight on their ignorance and their inability to comprehend basic sentences. This is a problem with how the effects of turnovers are coded.
Wrong.
Even if the morale loss is multiplicative, with high confidence it can be controlled (2-3 TO should not start the death spiral)
Wrong
You can control it, by using SAs and VAs
Is there a way I can put a minimum intelligence requirement on this thread so I don't have to waste my time with responding to comments like this?
I have explained this phenomenon over and over and over again. It is not a question of confidence because there is no amount of confidence that can stop a morale spiral. It cannot be done because confidence is an additive modifier, while the turnover penalty is multiplicative. How many times do I have to repeat myself before certain people either realize what I'm talking about, or else realize that they're so clueless that they should sit in the corner with their mouths shut while the adequately educated people discuss the topic?
The "death spiral" happens to QBs with 3rd and 4th capped confidence. No confidence is enough because of the nature of the factors involved. It's not about ignoring confidence, so whenever someone insists that's the issue, the only thing they accomplish is to shine a great big spotlight on their ignorance and their inability to comprehend basic sentences. This is a problem with how the effects of turnovers are coded.
Wrong.
Even if the morale loss is multiplicative, with high confidence it can be controlled (2-3 TO should not start the death spiral)
Wrong
You can control it, by using SAs and VAs
Larry Roadgrader
offline
offline
Originally posted by Jed
Originally posted by Larry Roadgrader
In your opinion, that's the answer.
Some believe it's an inadequate one--that too much of the probability of turning the ball over is related to previous turnovers rather than baseline build.
That's like saying, "You think raising Speed and Agility is the best way to end up moving faster, but that's just your opinion, others believe there should be another way."
So is this thread really just complaining that people don't want to have to put more into Confidence in order to do what Confidence does at higher levels?
Reading comprehension--try it. The OP raises the question whether the "fix your build" crowd has missed something--that the build itself is too small a part of the equation regarding turnovers once an initial turnover has taken place. All your reply amounted to was "fix your build" without pondering the question asked.
Originally posted by Larry Roadgrader
In your opinion, that's the answer.
Some believe it's an inadequate one--that too much of the probability of turning the ball over is related to previous turnovers rather than baseline build.
That's like saying, "You think raising Speed and Agility is the best way to end up moving faster, but that's just your opinion, others believe there should be another way."
So is this thread really just complaining that people don't want to have to put more into Confidence in order to do what Confidence does at higher levels?
Reading comprehension--try it. The OP raises the question whether the "fix your build" crowd has missed something--that the build itself is too small a part of the equation regarding turnovers once an initial turnover has taken place. All your reply amounted to was "fix your build" without pondering the question asked.
DL24
offline
offline
Jesus Christ. Try responding to people just once without bringing up a lack of intelligence, or their astounding idiocy.
jdbolick
offline
offline
Originally posted by driftinggrifter
Link a game with a death spiraling 3rd capp'd confidence QB.
http://goallineblitz.com/game/game.pl?game_id=475766
And there are many, many more examples, I just didn't bookmark all the ones from previous threads complaining about turnover cascades. You're not new to this game, so stop pretending otherwise. You've seen numerous threads in the GLB forum where people said that their QB had high confidence (sometimes 70+) and yet had mass-turnover games.
Moreover, I HAVE EXPLAINED THE MATHEMATICS OF WHY THIS HAPPENS. You continue to troll this thread by yelling "Confidence! Confidence! Confidence!" as if you're completely incapable of processing any new information and simply repeating the same phrase over and over again like some trained parrot. "Fix your builds!" is the most common response to any thread on GLB precisely because it is so useless and takes no thought whatsoever. It is the standard response of the useless troll who wants nothing more than for flaws and exploits to be left alone in the game, on the off chance that they might benefit from them.
Link a game with a death spiraling 3rd capp'd confidence QB.
http://goallineblitz.com/game/game.pl?game_id=475766
And there are many, many more examples, I just didn't bookmark all the ones from previous threads complaining about turnover cascades. You're not new to this game, so stop pretending otherwise. You've seen numerous threads in the GLB forum where people said that their QB had high confidence (sometimes 70+) and yet had mass-turnover games.
Moreover, I HAVE EXPLAINED THE MATHEMATICS OF WHY THIS HAPPENS. You continue to troll this thread by yelling "Confidence! Confidence! Confidence!" as if you're completely incapable of processing any new information and simply repeating the same phrase over and over again like some trained parrot. "Fix your builds!" is the most common response to any thread on GLB precisely because it is so useless and takes no thought whatsoever. It is the standard response of the useless troll who wants nothing more than for flaws and exploits to be left alone in the game, on the off chance that they might benefit from them.
Originally posted by Larry Roadgrader
Reading comprehension--try it. The OP raises the question whether the "fix your build" crowd has missed something--that the build itself is too small a part of the equation regarding turnovers once an initial turnover has taken place. All your reply amounted to was "fix your build" without pondering the question asked.
the OP makes a bunch of assumptions, pulls out the worst possible game and presents it likes it's a common occurrence etc. He also said (and I believe even bolded it) that there was nothing you could do to prevent this. So a bunch of people responded by saying "wouldn't getting more confidence help this"
personally I think if any of my players have a bad game I blame it on the sim
Reading comprehension--try it. The OP raises the question whether the "fix your build" crowd has missed something--that the build itself is too small a part of the equation regarding turnovers once an initial turnover has taken place. All your reply amounted to was "fix your build" without pondering the question asked.
the OP makes a bunch of assumptions, pulls out the worst possible game and presents it likes it's a common occurrence etc. He also said (and I believe even bolded it) that there was nothing you could do to prevent this. So a bunch of people responded by saying "wouldn't getting more confidence help this"
personally I think if any of my players have a bad game I blame it on the sim
jdbolick
offline
offline
Originally posted by tragula
Wrong. Even if the morale loss is multiplicative, with high confidence it can be controlled (2-3 TO should not start the death spiral)
Go away. Leave this thread and do not come back, because the only thing you accomplish by posting is showing that whatever mathematics teachers you had were clearly not deserving of any such position. No, multiplicative factors cannot be overcome by additive ones. They can't. If you don't understand that, then it's because you don't have the slightest clue what "multiplicative" means. And no, it has been proven numerous times that third and even fourth capped confidence does not prevent turnover cascades. The offensive build is only the primary determinant of the first turnover. After that, it's out of your control.
Originally posted by
Wrong You can control it, by using SAs and VAs
There are no SAs or VAs which prevent interceptions, and plenty of people have posted examples of RBs with 70+ carrying and 5+ in Cover Up who nonetheless had 5+ fumbles in one game.
Originally posted by DL24
Jesus Christ. Try responding to people just once without bringing up a lack of intelligence, or their astounding idiocy.
It may be bad manners to point out someone's lack of intelligence, but I only do so when they actually display it in my face. If someone could present a counter-argument that was actually mathematically and logically valid instead of just screaming "Confidence!" over and over again, then I'd be inclined to take opposition seriously. So far no one has stepped up to that level.
Wrong. Even if the morale loss is multiplicative, with high confidence it can be controlled (2-3 TO should not start the death spiral)
Go away. Leave this thread and do not come back, because the only thing you accomplish by posting is showing that whatever mathematics teachers you had were clearly not deserving of any such position. No, multiplicative factors cannot be overcome by additive ones. They can't. If you don't understand that, then it's because you don't have the slightest clue what "multiplicative" means. And no, it has been proven numerous times that third and even fourth capped confidence does not prevent turnover cascades. The offensive build is only the primary determinant of the first turnover. After that, it's out of your control.
Originally posted by
Wrong You can control it, by using SAs and VAs
There are no SAs or VAs which prevent interceptions, and plenty of people have posted examples of RBs with 70+ carrying and 5+ in Cover Up who nonetheless had 5+ fumbles in one game.
Originally posted by DL24
Jesus Christ. Try responding to people just once without bringing up a lack of intelligence, or their astounding idiocy.
It may be bad manners to point out someone's lack of intelligence, but I only do so when they actually display it in my face. If someone could present a counter-argument that was actually mathematically and logically valid instead of just screaming "Confidence!" over and over again, then I'd be inclined to take opposition seriously. So far no one has stepped up to that level.
DL24
offline
offline
Nonetheless, it's quite sad to anyone who opens up this thread to see you call 4 straight posters idiots, either in that wording, or something similar.
jdbolick
offline
offline
Originally posted by Chysil
the OP makes a bunch of assumptions, pulls out the worst possible game and presents it likes it's a common occurrence etc.
It's not a common occurrence. It has happened many times, but out of all GLB games that's still only like a 0.1% chance of happening, which is why most people haven't been bitten by it. The problem is that when your 0.1% chance of a turnover cascade hits, you lose. There's no build which can overcome it, you just lose. This has been proven over and over again in turnover-related threads as people posted examples of high confidence players who had this happen along with low confidence players who have never experienced anything of the sort. Confidence is not remotely strong enough to mitigate the multiplicative penalty Bort has coded for turnovers.
Originally posted by DL24
Nonetheless, it's quite sad to anyone who opens up this thread to see you call 4 straight posters idiots, either in that wording, or something similar.
I don't demand that people agree with me, I just require that they post intelligently if they're going to be in one of my threads. If they refuse to abide by that, then of course I'm going to say something. Do you have any concept how maddeningly frustrating it is to answer the same question five hundred times because posters are so thoughtless that they keep repeating "Confidence!" when that factor was disproven long ago? It's just like the X-factor thread where the same slow individuals insisted on other explanations.
the OP makes a bunch of assumptions, pulls out the worst possible game and presents it likes it's a common occurrence etc.
It's not a common occurrence. It has happened many times, but out of all GLB games that's still only like a 0.1% chance of happening, which is why most people haven't been bitten by it. The problem is that when your 0.1% chance of a turnover cascade hits, you lose. There's no build which can overcome it, you just lose. This has been proven over and over again in turnover-related threads as people posted examples of high confidence players who had this happen along with low confidence players who have never experienced anything of the sort. Confidence is not remotely strong enough to mitigate the multiplicative penalty Bort has coded for turnovers.
Originally posted by DL24
Nonetheless, it's quite sad to anyone who opens up this thread to see you call 4 straight posters idiots, either in that wording, or something similar.
I don't demand that people agree with me, I just require that they post intelligently if they're going to be in one of my threads. If they refuse to abide by that, then of course I'm going to say something. Do you have any concept how maddeningly frustrating it is to answer the same question five hundred times because posters are so thoughtless that they keep repeating "Confidence!" when that factor was disproven long ago? It's just like the X-factor thread where the same slow individuals insisted on other explanations.
Edited by jdbolick on Sep 18, 2009 14:56:18
BansheeTime
offline
offline
The better solution to this, imo, is to be able to sub based on morale. Like if my QB Cay Jutler wants to throw four picks to take his morale down to the teens, I obviously want to make a sub and put in my backup, but I can't see that during the sim.
DL24
offline
offline
Originally posted by jdbolick
Originally posted by DL24
Nonetheless, it's quite sad to anyone who opens up this thread to see you call 4 straight posters idiots, either in that wording, or something similar.
I don't demand that people agree with me, I just require that they post intelligently if they're going to be in one of my threads. If they refuse to abide by that, then of course I'm going to say something. Do you have any concept how maddeningly frustrating it is to answer the same question five hundred times?...
Ever been in FAQ
?
Originally posted by DL24
Nonetheless, it's quite sad to anyone who opens up this thread to see you call 4 straight posters idiots, either in that wording, or something similar.
I don't demand that people agree with me, I just require that they post intelligently if they're going to be in one of my threads. If they refuse to abide by that, then of course I'm going to say something. Do you have any concept how maddeningly frustrating it is to answer the same question five hundred times?...
Ever been in FAQ
?jdbolick
offline
offline
Originally posted by BansheeTime
The better solution to this, imo, is to be able to sub based on morale. Like if my QB Cay Jutler wants to throw four picks to take his morale down to the teens, I obviously want to make a sub and put in my backup, but I can't see that during the sim.
No, that is not even remotely close to being a better solution. It would be a band-aid, just like every other attempt Bort has made to cover up this problem. Moreover, turnovers don't just affect the player they happened to, they also increase the likelihood of other players on that team having turnovers. The latest death spiral for our team had three different players (with builds designed to limit turnovers) turn the ball over four times in 16 minutes. The last three were interceptions by two different quarterbacks within 86 seconds of each other. 3 interceptions by two different QBs in 86 seconds. Again, that's because the penalty from turnovers doesn't just affect the player who committed the turnover. The effect is greatest on that player, but it also affects his teammates.
The better solution to this, imo, is to be able to sub based on morale. Like if my QB Cay Jutler wants to throw four picks to take his morale down to the teens, I obviously want to make a sub and put in my backup, but I can't see that during the sim.
No, that is not even remotely close to being a better solution. It would be a band-aid, just like every other attempt Bort has made to cover up this problem. Moreover, turnovers don't just affect the player they happened to, they also increase the likelihood of other players on that team having turnovers. The latest death spiral for our team had three different players (with builds designed to limit turnovers) turn the ball over four times in 16 minutes. The last three were interceptions by two different quarterbacks within 86 seconds of each other. 3 interceptions by two different QBs in 86 seconds. Again, that's because the penalty from turnovers doesn't just affect the player who committed the turnover. The effect is greatest on that player, but it also affects his teammates.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
