Discussion in 'The Experience' started by jello1717, Sep 28, 2009.
There is a new update to NCAA '10
Just don't ask anyone what it does.....
From Adam Thompson at EA:
Wow, I'm shocked. This is an extra patch I'm assuming EA had to pay for (apparently you get 2 freebies, then you pay Microsoft/Sony big $$$$ for additional patches). And it fixes 2 actual problems. Hopefully.
Now the next question...Assuming this is true and we confirm it works, do we back up and redo our player progression? I know it's not going to sit well with some people since we've already seen the new recruits, set up our boards, played week 1, etc. But this is something that may impact our dynasty for the next 3-4 years.
No more backing up and starting over...We'll all get the patch and we can move on knowing this stuff is fixed.
yeah player progression!!
Ryno confirmed the progression thing.
Before I read this, I wanted to see if they did anything with progression. I took the OD file I saved offline which was at position changes and did progression.
I only did 1 test, but I had a fair number of +7 and +8, but no +10. It's very possible that the progression fix won't work during a dynasty's current season so it might not affect that save file I have.
If it doesn't affect a current season, then it might not even effect season 2 for us since we just began it right before the patch.
We can make that decision if we want to. Like you I'm tempted to say "screw it" because of how many times we've had to back up the last few days. Maybe AG doesn't want to mess with schedules again and he will kill this off the bat.
But let's not let our fatigue from the last few days cause us to potentially fix something that could make the next 3-4 seasons a lot better. I'm not saying it will definitely make a huge difference, but seeing how many 90+ players we all have, and knowing that many of those guys aren't even seniors, I think re-doing progression could possibly have a huge impact on our dynasty.
I don't want to be 2 seasons down the road and have ridiculous rosters and know that an extra hour or two of annoyance could have fixed it. I'm not advocating one way or another, but let's give it serious thought.
Ryno said he tested in an offline dynasty and the maximum progression he got was +5.
Jello, I'm guessing for some reason the patch didn't affect whatever file you were working with.
For what it's worth, doing nothing and just moving forward probably benefits me the most. My roster is full of freshmen and sophomores who are going to be around for a while, so I'll reap the benefits of the year 1 super-progression as much/more than anyone.
I also hate to lose my chance to sign that QB (not that Florida doesn't have a better chance - I'm just hoping they don't want his Ryan Mallet-slow ass).
My point is we need to weigh the benefits of backing up a little vs. the annoyance, and we need to try to not think about "what does it mean for my team". Having proper progression benefits everyone, the question is just whether or not the annoyance is worth it. AG's opinion counts here more than anything. He's the one dealing with most of the hassle.
And a little more from EA:
My vote is to keep moving.
I am with Bruce
No homo, haha
I think it'd be nice to get the progression done correctly, but I think I'd also vote to keep going and just bite it for 1 season. Hopefully just 1 season won't be bad.
Also, I did another season offline from year 1 with Michigan (using the same rosters that we used in this OD) and my top guy was +7 (instead of a +10 I had here). I also had a few +6es. When it was all said and done I had 12 90+s instead of the 16 I currently have, but those probably can't be compared because the transfers/draft guys were different.
I'm interested in hearing what Basis has to say. Personally, my team is young, and I held back a total of five senior redshirts over the two years, so I'm going to have studs for the next several years.
Basis stands to lose big, because he has crazy talent now, and faces a mass exodus no matter how much he tries to play different guys. The guys with the biggest classes last year and this year are the ones who will have it the toughest. Those of us with small classes last year and a bunch of youth on the bench are the ones who are going to reap the benefits. Come to think of it, this will hit AMP pretty hard, too, if not the hardest. He has huge gaps, and the guys coming in won't progress nearly as fast anymore.
I'll do whatever you guys want, just so no one thinks my opinion is a self-serving one, but to be honest, I get well off of this change. Some guys don't.
It's up to you guys,
I'm fine with keeping it going. And there isn't going to be a mass exodous AG; Gainesville is the place to be!
My roster has 27 guys that have 90+ overall ratings. That is absolutely absurd. However, you are right that this will be the best year for my Gators. I have 16 seniors, and some amazingly talented underclassmen (Jeff Demps, among others) that could have big enough seasons to go pro. I'm not all that worried about transfers, but hopefully nothing funky goes on. Look at the depth chart before transferring you young know it alls!!
I'd vote to just keep going and hope that 1 season of crazy progression wouldn't break things.
For the sake of disclosure, I'm one of those young teams that'd probably benefit more from having this good progression. On the other hand, I posted in that other thread how terrible my offensive skills players progressed, and I'd bet dollars to donuts that if we redid things with the lower progression, my skills guys would be better than they are now (but my D and O-line would be toned down).
My fear is that it's going to affect more than one season. We've already got a crazy number of 90+ players and they aren't all going to disappear in a year.
Then again, when you think about it as every player on the roster just getting +3 on average, it doesn't seem like it's going to be a HUGE issue.
Are we sure that if we keep going from this point the patch will impact our year 2 progression? Didn't someone say you have to start a new season before it takes effect? 2 years of this would probably affect us until 2011 comes out.
Are you guys who want to move forward just saying that because you're tired from the events last week, or are you thinking this all the way through and deciding it's not worth it? No one's posted a reason yet.
Reason to keep going: CPU controlled teams benefited from the "progression bug" just like user teams did. Go look up Air Force's roster. Go through the "A rated" teams. They are for real! We should be losing to the CPU way more than we are, although I did almost drop a game at Miss State last season. I think this progression will be a good way to keep the CPU relevant, which has always been our goal through recruiting yet we have never seen it pay off.
Yeah, I get that it affected all teams pretty much equally (except it didn't, because there's a huge gap between 6* programs and 2-3* programs).
I'm not so worried if we're sure that our progression at the end of the year will be fixed. If the patch doesn't take effect until the next FULL season though, I think 2 seasons of this could really mess thing up.
My two pennies are to keep it going
I only have some "kinda sorta anecdotal" evidence for this. In the Mid Majors we progressed last night so it was right after the patch. This isn't really apples to apples because the prestige of the teams are lower, but I think it's a good comparison anyway.
I saved the OD file at training results so I can look at the stuff more in depth later if need be, but I won't have any pre-patch results for these teams to compare it to. Here's a table of the "most improved" player and the school's prestige.
These results are lower than what we saw prepatch. This could be because the patch did in fact affect this dynasty midseason, or it could be because the teams are lower prestige. There are, however, a 6 star prestige school and a and their top guys were +6 and +7 so I'd say that the patch worked on this dynasty, mid season. Also, some teams had their "most improved" guy as +5. I can't imagine that was a prepatch number because if you have good schools signing guys and having them progress by as much as +10, while other schools can only sign guys and they only progress by +5 max, this seems extremely harsh to me.
If we really wanted to know more, tonight I could start an offline dynasty with these 12 teams and advance to progression and see if I get similar numbers. I could also, if it were deemed really necessary, find the average progression for some of these teams in this saved file, but hopefully the most improved is good enough.
I'm not so sure. I'm a 6* and I didn't have anyone progress by more than 7. I don't know what Army is but they didn't have anyone more than 5.
Ryno said no one in the entire dynasty improved by more than 5 when he tested it offline. I think your results would seem to show that the patch didn't take effect.
Unfortunately, I also think average is going to be much more telling than max. Not asking you to do this, but let's keep our eyes on the OS and NCAA strategies boards to see what we should be looking for from the patch.
Maybe this is just a Michigan thing then. My top guy was +10 in this OD. It sounds like tonight I should start a new offline dynasty with these 12 teams and sim it to compare the results.
Also, even though I'm itching to get this season going, I'm not at all opposed to restarting this year if it'll save us some heartaches down the line. I'd imagine that we expect to be playing this OD for months and I'd hate to have multiple seasons tarnished later on because we didn't want to lose 3 or 4 days.
I just found Ryno's quote on OS.
This sounds to me like he took an already existing OD and just simmed to the progression stage. This should be the same test as the one I posted above where we took an existing, midseason OD and went to progression. The only difference is that his was probably not in the offseason stuff while ours was in offseason.
I think that's good news. And I ran a sim myself and found that going by the max isn't the way to go.
I took an offline dynasty file and simmed it from mid-season to the end of the season. Progression ranged from +1 to +7, but it was obvious that the average was closer to 3 (as opposed to before where it was probably more like 5-6). Only a handful of players on each team were +5-7, most were + 2 or 3. It also appeared to take out the prestige factor, as lesser teams progressed just as much.
So I think it's probably ok to assume that our next offseason will see the fixed progression. I wouldn't mind going back a step, but if people don't want to, I won't complain. We'll see ratings inflated across the board for a few years, and our current sophs and redshirt freshmen will all be superstars, but I'm guessing it won't be terrible and will work itself out in a few seasons.
Something I just thought of that definitely factors in here:
EA programs in way more freshmen for the top teams than they do the lesser teams. I'll bet the top 25 teams get at least twice as many true freshmen put on their teams than the lesser teams. So progression helps them more.
I just looked at our letter grades, so many A+'s. Georgia is A+, A+, A+, A, and they're ranked #33.
I don't know if this is necessarily bad, but I think we might run into a situation where playing USC, Penn State, and Georgia gives a big challenge, but the mid-tier teams might become a cakewalk for a few seasons.
Separate names with a comma.