FOF 8 is on the way guys.

[Sharkn20]

I would 100% get rid of potential in the BLB, ask around. Keep stats and turn off scouting.

Oh yea. I like it rough, baby.

I would like potential to be removed too

[Cory]

I can see getting rid of potentials in the BLB, you still have a lot of information to go on. In FOF you have absolutely nothing, except for the word of your coaches who you don't actually get to pick. You can get decent scouts by making sure that's all you focus on in the staff draft, but then you get shit coaches that can only scout. That's probably how I'll do it going forward because having decent coaches that can only kinda scout has not been working for me at all. I guess that aspect of the game is just going to be one dimensional for me going forward.

[Sharkn20]

I can see getting rid of potentials in the BLB, you still have a lot of information to go on. In FOF you have absolutely nothing, except for the word of your coaches who you don't actually get to pick. You can get decent scouts by making sure that's all you focus on in the staff draft, but then you get shit coaches that can only scout. That's probably how I'll do it going forward because having decent coaches that can only kinda scout has not been working for me at all. I guess that aspect of the game is just going to be one dimensional for me going forward.

It´s sad that a game with this potential, becomes so one-dimensional in MP because the way the Staff Draft is configured.

[Aston]

I think with drafting the question is what the standard is. I'm not a fan of sliders for that reason. I'm fully on board with getting rid of combine breakpoints -- that was just an absurd thing to have. What I find confusing is why it was decided that this be called "39". Just have one draft behavior and make that the default, or at least get rid of combine breakpoints all the time and have the same behavior at 50.

The introduction of a slider that doesn't even behave like a slider is doubly confusing.

But drafting in 39 is kinda fun. Could be improved. Not the system I'd design from the ground up. As an evolution it has been a positive one. To me, the less intricacy and puzzles the better. But those are not FOF's roots, understand. Divining masked pairs and combine breakpoints were part of the reasons for FOF's devoted following in its heyday, and such things were fun to learn in a community very open about sharing knowledge.

[Nemesis]

I think with drafting the question is what the standard is. I'm not a fan of sliders for that reason. I'm fully on board with getting rid of combine breakpoints -- that was just an absurd thing to have. What I find confusing is why it was decided that this be called "39". Just have one draft behavior and make that the default, or at least get rid of combine breakpoints all the time and have the same behavior at 50.

The introduction of a slider that doesn't even behave like a slider is doubly confusing.

But drafting in 39 is kinda fun. Could be improved. Not the system I'd design from the ground up. As an evolution it has been a positive one. To me, the less intricacy and puzzles the better. But those are not FOF's roots, understand. Divining masked pairs and combine breakpoints were part of the reasons for FOF's devoted following in its heyday, and such things were fun to learn in a community very open about sharing knowledge.

I like 39, but what I don't like about it is that I almost haven't looked at a combine that told me "this guy is REALLY good!". It's almost always the bars. Only time combines mean anything to me is offensive linemen bench and comparing it to their blocking strength, and I dunno what that even means considering the variance in the combines anyway.

Then again.... maybe there IS something to be seen in the 39 combines that no one has figured out yet.

[Aston]

Yes, it's perplexing not knowing what anything really means :P

The puzzles are the best thing, and also the most maddening thing.

I can't even be sure that these are puzzles. But as you can see from the Cy, there's at least the perception if not the reality that they are and that people are starting to figure out patterns.

I wonder what drafting in FOF8 is like. You guys who have the game already, anything to share?

[Nemesis]

Yes, it's perplexing not knowing what anything really means :P

The puzzles are the best thing, and also the most maddening thing.

I can't even be sure that these are puzzles. But as you can see from the Cy, there's at least the perception if not the reality that they are and that people are starting to figure out patterns.

I wonder what drafting in FOF8 is like. You guys who have the game already, anything to share?

Just a small test. 50 accuracy. Outstanding scouting on my coaches. 2017 was an AI done draft. 2018 and 2019 are when I started drafting guys. So I'm able to pull guys out like this vs AI drafting, which is nothing spectacular, and will change once humans are drafting vs each other. I did use constraints to cut out players I drafted from this screenshot, but that's not to say the constraints exist, or are changed.

[Sharkn20]

Just a small test. 50 accuracy. Outstanding scouting on my coaches. 2017 was an AI done draft. 2018 and 2019 are when I started drafting guys. So I'm able to pull guys out like this vs AI drafting, which is nothing spectacular, and will change once humans are drafting vs each other. I did use constraints to cut out players I drafted from this screenshot, but that's not to say the constraints exist, or are changed.

Great sample of why combines are important, I am all in to move the accuracy to 50 again. Again as the cut numbers are avaliable for everyone within a sticky post

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

[Guest]

Man, I think 39 drafting is vastly easier than previous versions of the game. You are definitely hamstrung when you have bad scouting though, but even with good Scouting I see people draft horribly so...

The staff draft, if you aren't in any of Ben's leagues, is terrible though, so I feel your pain.

[Guest]

Man, I think 39 drafting is vastly easier than previous versions of the game. You are definitely hamstrung when you have bad scouting though, but even with good Scouting I see people draft horribly so...

The staff draft, if you aren't in any of Ben's leagues, is terrible though, so I feel your pain.

I agree about CA=39. It's way easier than 50. You need good scouting and trust the bars.

[Guest]

39 feels good until you have a shitty draft. Then you sit there wondering what the hell you missed.

[Guest]

I've had those at 50.

[Nemesis]

39 feels good until you have a shitty draft. Then you sit there wondering what the hell you missed.

Thanking Obama usually helps you feel better after these.

[Delandis]

I shouldn't have to go back to Calculus 3 and apply advanced statistics to figure out who to draft in a game. Guys have great combines all the time and don't CORRELATE to on the field performance. Now I could be completely wrong but I would think that at 50, 500/1000 times combines point you in the right direction. Now only 390/1000 combines are a tell if the scouting is right. So now, 40% of the time you can rely on the combines and that's probably a much better representation of the real world.

As I see it, higher combine correlations are just a way to circumvent the poor scouting ratings of coaches and diminish the opportunity costs of having coaches with better scouting attributes vs. better on-the-field attributes.

[Nemesis]

I see alot of references to OOTP, is their talent system really as good as it seems?