Boom/Bust should no longer be an issue in FOF2K4

[Bonegavel]

or, at the very least, it should be diminished greatly.

Pre-FOF2K4: the draft list was simply a grade and a few attribute stats. I almost always, picked the player that was graded best at the postition, only rarely checking the attributes (most were very similar anyway).

Now, it appears we have many factors to decide a player. Even, the volatility rating which can mean that the player could have a greater tendancy to be better or worse than predicted. I was hoping that the draft was made into "almost a mini-game" in itself, and it seems that we are getting there. I don't think I will ever let the scout finish my draft again, and that is saying something (for me at least).

I always found myself, later in the draft, letting the scout take over because the pickings were almost always the same. Now, with the combine ratings et al, i can see the later rounds having more meaning and being more exciting.

I hope future versions continue on this trend of more info in the draft (for those of us that want to spend more time on the draft). I think this is mainly because this is the best part of sports text sims for me: finding talent/drafting talent and watching them grow/progress through their careers. As much as it is painful, I like seeing some players bust that should, otherwise, have been superstars.

[damnMikeBrown]

Speaking of drafting in the later rounds, I expect to rely on volatility ratings a good bit. If I'm in the 5th round, and everything looks very similar, and very weak, I'm going to go for the guy with the highest volatility I can find. Why? Well, he could become as good as a 2nd rounder(perhaps), or, what, as bad as a rookie FA? Big deal. If you're playing 5th rounders, at least in the past versions, you're in a world of hurt (unless it's a C) at that position anyway.

[Bonegavel]

Exactly. The draft is going to go from my least favorite aspect to my the top of my list (hopefully).

[bamcgee]

are you sure that's what volatility indicates? What if that means his performance can vary widely from game to game, like say Warren Sapp?

[damnMikeBrown]

If it's a Warren Sapp indicator, I'd send the high volatility guys to a Fat Guy camp and make them lift weights..more than just the food they shovel into their gaping maws.

[kcchief19]

Quik indicated earlier that the volatility rating was indeed related to the likelihood of how a player developed according to projections, but that he hadn't really gotten his arms around how it worked yet.

I think it could a real nice touch, since in previous versions a late-round draft pick couldn't really every become a star, while in 2k4 it would seem possible. I'd love to see a 7th round O-linemen or an undrafted RB become a star every once in a while. It's another touch of realism. Imagine Kurt Warner as a low-rated QB with a high volitility rating.

[QuikSand]

My fear, though, is that DMB's strategy from above becomes too easy a shortcut -- just blow all your late picks on high risk guys and churn through the many who don't pan out. I, unlike BoneGavel, have had a lot of fun with the late drafts in FOF4 (after all its patches) finding useful role players who would accept a modest multiyear deal. In FOF2004, with extra special teams roles and easier gameplanning, I hope that this remains viable. I'd like to be able to get excited about grabbing a reserve linebacker/possible gunner with a 5th round pick, even if there's no reason to think that he'll explode into much more than that.

[Buzzbee]

Originally posted by QuikSand
My fear, though, is that DMB's strategy from above becomes too easy a shortcut -- just blow all your late picks on high risk guys and churn through the many who don't pan out. I, unlike BoneGavel, have had a lot of fun with the late drafts in FOF4 (after all its patches) finding useful role players who would accept a modest multiyear deal. In FOF2004, with extra special teams roles and easier gameplanning, I hope that this remains viable. I'd like to be able to get excited about grabbing a reserve linebacker/possible gunner with a 5th round pick, even if there's no reason to think that he'll explode into much more than that.

Ditto. Draft strategy for rounds 5-7 will no longer be to try and find that hidden gem, that player with some decent red and a fair amount of potential. It will now become a search on who has the highest potential rating and the highest volitility. Search, find, draft. No fun. I want UNEXPECTED breakouts from my late round picks. Adds to the satisfaction.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by QuikSand
My fear, though, is that DMB's strategy from above becomes too easy a shortcut -- just blow all your late picks on high risk guys and churn through the many who don't pan out.

That's one reason why I'm hoping that a patch or later version will expand the role of the "volatility" rating. If the rating is more of a part of the player's personality rather than just a likelihood of boom/bust, it could affect a number of things.

[Honolulu Blue]

I've always been able to get good value from late round picks in every version of FOF. Sometimes I'll convert a marginal player at a position the draft has a surplus of to one that I happen to need. Sometimes I need a solid return man. Sometimes I need a fifth receiver who can catch a deep ball with the game on the line. And sometimes I just need a big, fat guy to spell my other big, fat guys on the offensive line. So having additional ratings with which to make my selection is only a good thing.

And on topic, I think the volatility rating should have remained hidden.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by Honolulu Blue
And on topic, I think the volatility rating should have remained hidden.

If it is going to remain a bust/boom forecaster only, then I agree. However, in real life, you'd know going into the draft if a player was considered to have a "volatile" personality.

[Bonegavel]

but, i think that adding the volatility rating to the player in plain sight, just gives you another factor to mull over.

I guess a bigger question, is the volatility rating issued by your scout? Or, is it an imperical value?

[QuikSand]

I'm starting to think that people's connotations with the word "volatility" are just going to create baggage for this feature - even once its explanation is included in the game's help files.

Maybe Jim would be better off with "unpredictability" or something along those lines (though that word has similar overtones, I fear). Or, perhaps, go with an inverse term, like "Confidence" -- giving a clear indication that the rating is not one measuring the player's personality, but rather the scout's security in his forecast, the inverse of the current implication.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by QuikSand
I'm starting to think that people's connotations with the word "volatility" are just going to create baggage for this feature - even once its explanation is included in the game's help files.

Maybe Jim would be better off with "unpredictability" or something along those lines (though that word has similar overtones, I fear). Or, perhaps, go with an inverse term, like "Confidence" -- giving a clear indication that the rating is not one measuring the player's personality, but rather the scout's security in his forecast, the inverse of the current implication.

I agree that "confidence" would be a MUCH better term to define the scope of what you've indicated this ratings measures.


...but I'd still LOVE to have a true "volatility" rating somewhere down the road.

[Bonegavel]

Originally posted by QuikSand
My fear, though, is that DMB's strategy from above becomes too easy a shortcut -- just blow all your late picks on high risk guys and churn through the many who don't pan out.

This is a valid concern that I hope Jim addresses (or has addressed).

I, unlike BoneGavel, have had a lot of fun with the late drafts in FOF4 (after all its patches) finding useful role players who would accept a modest multiyear deal. In FOF2004, with extra special teams roles and easier gameplanning, I hope that this remains viable. I'd like to be able to get excited about grabbing a reserve linebacker/possible gunner with a 5th round pick, even if there's no reason to think that he'll explode into much more than that.

I feel that the limited amount of information provided just wasn't enough to pique my interest in the late rounds. I know that it isn't everyone's cup 'o tea, but the MORE information provided for draftees the better. I would love to spend hours sifting through data to find my picks for the draft.

[Bonegavel]

dola,

as a matter of fact, I think it would be great if the game provided for a print-out of draft information that I could take with me to the John or sofa. That would be sweet.

[albionmoonlight]

I don't think that an indicator that a guy may differ from his draft projection should have anything to do with an indicator that a guy may have a "volitile" personality as a player.

I am not saying that I would be opposed to both ratings in the game (though I am leary of a number that simply indicates how much like Warren Sapp a guy is without any way to control it). But they should have nothing to do with each other.

[albionmoonlight]

dola--

As I have stated before, I think that the draft is the hardest thing to do well in a game like this. If it is too random, then there is no fun in doing it. If it is not random enough, then it is too easy for the gamer. I am interested in the way FOF2004 appears to do this--give the gamer lots and lots of info, but make it all fuzzy. That solution may end up being the best a programmer can do.

[Bonegavel]

Overall, the boom/bust cycle in FOF versions to date has been big for me in regards to it being a toss-up. The dearth of info in the draft caused this feeling for me, and I don't have the "keen eye for the boom guy" that Quik has.

I would basically start the draft and, for the first 3 or 4 rounds I would draft from amongst the top 3 highest rated players for a desired position and then let the scout take over when the pickings became slim in the later rounds.

With the added information it can no longer be considered random, in as far as the selection process goes. And, if they bust you at least know you didn't just pick him because he was rated 7.2, you selected him for a multitude of reasons (at least a lot more than was given in prior versions).

This is why I say the problem is gone with this new version. Who cares if they bust now (bear with me) because you selected them for many reasons and not just because 1 attribute looked good.

[HornedFrog Purple]

Originally posted by Bonegavel
dola,

as a matter of fact, I think it would be great if the game provided for a print-out of draft information that I could take with me to the John or sofa. That would be sweet.

I think this will be coming. Jim has indicated that HTML output would be coming in a patch. I would be surprised if this wasn't part of it.

[Ben E Lou]

Speaking of printouts, am I the only one that wishes that the help file (while very info-filled) was more easily printable? I always read and re-read game manuals several times to make sure I haven't missed anything.

[HornedFrog Purple]

You can.. any section you look at you can print if you want to. I just look through the sections and print the parts I want.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by HornedFrog Purple
You can.. any section you look at you can print if you want to. I just look through the sections and print the parts I want.

Right, but you can only print one section at a time. I'd like one big fat "print manual" button. I've printed out the manual in the past without being sure that I'd printed every single page.

[mckerney]

I know the volatility has to do with draft boom and bust type things, but is anything known if it has anything to to with in game performance, i.e., a player with high volatility would be similar to Shaun Alexander or last years Dante Culpepper, either having a huge game or performing well below average?

[Ben E Lou]

Originally posted by mckerney
I know the volatility has to do with draft boom and bust type things, but is anything known if it has anything to to with in game performance, i.e., a player with high volatility would be similar to Shaun Alexander or last years Dante Culpepper, either having a huge game or performing well below average?

Quik has indicated pretty clearly that it only has to do with the accuracy of the scout's ratings of a given player.

[HornedFrog Purple]

Originally posted by SkyDog
Right, but you can only print one section at a time. I'd like one big fat "print manual" button. I've printed out the manual in the past without being sure that I'd printed every single page.

Oh I get it now. I don't know how to do that, maybe we can get Jim to make a text version of the help file to download it. It is probably only 200k tops. I am sure he had a draft before he put it into winhlp32.