Onside Kicks,The Option, Reverses, and No TEs

[22sec]

Can onside kicks be designed, or can you consider that for a future update? It would be ashame to be make a come back, only to have to kick the ball deep.

Also, I know it was stated way back that you took the Option out because it killed the AI, but with the improved logic on D I would think it was ready for a comeback. Would force play designers to create more plays with keys and reads for the defense. Being a college football guy this is HIGH on my list of wishes[&o][&o][&o]

Oh yeah, can we also maybe get the ability to handoff to WRs. Not only for reverses, but to design plays similar to a few Florida runs for example.

One last one, can we maybe get the option to have 0 TE's when creating a new formation. I know you can substitute a WR for a TE, but that could be a lot of work.

[dreamtheatervt]

I agree with SEC.  At the bare minimum, no TE should be implemented as it poses no immediate game balance issues.
 
Also, make sure that when onsides kicks are added, that it isn't an easily broken play.  On FBPro, I designed an onside kick that would always be recovered by the kicking team.

[nmleague]

There has been discussion in the private beta forum about these items, this is how I recall the outcome.
 
1.  I dont think the onside kick will be MF 1
 
2.  Several people pushed hard for the option, but I believe that it also will not make it into MF1
 
3.  Im pretty sure that 3.5 will allow hand offs to WR, that release will also have positions broken out, G, T, DT, DE  etc..
 
4.  I also thin that 3.5 will allow no TE
 
Maybe Maruaders can correct any of these if I got them wrong.

[22sec]

ORIGINAL: nmleague

There has been discussion in the private beta forum about these items, this is how I recall the outcome.

1.  I dont think the onside kick will be MF 1

2.  Several people pushed hard for the option, but I believe that it also will not make it into MF1

3.  Im pretty sure that 3.5 will allow hand offs to WR, that release will also have positions broken out, G, T, DT, DE  etc..

4.  I also thin that 3.5 will allow no TE

Maybe Maruaders can correct any of these if I got them wrong.

Thanks NM for the reply. Good to see you still hard at it. Might have to hit you up for some more college jersey's someday[:D] That's too bad about the onside kick, and option. Although I know you can fake an option play.
When 3.5 comes out, and we finally get actual positions, what impact will that have on preexisting rosters???

[nmleague]

3.5 will mean some work, I will probably go back and redo all my playbooks with the new players positioning.   The draft wont be effected, you still draft OL, DL, LB etc..  But we will have to break those players down to C, G, T etc.. , and of course the formations will have to be changed with those new positions, and thus the depth charts.  Its will cause alot of change, but overall it is probably going to be great for the game.

[22sec]

ORIGINAL: nmleague

3.5 will mean some work, I will probably go back and redo all my playbooks with the new players positioning.   The draft wont be effected, you still draft OL, DL, LB etc..  But we will have to break those players down to C, G, T etc.. , and of course the formations will have to be changed with those new positions, and thus the depth charts.  Its will cause alot of change, but overall it is probably going to be great for the game.

Two more questions, first what kind of ETA is there for 3.5? What happens to existing players? For instance a player is currently a DL, when 3.5 comes out, will he just stay a DL, or can I just go edit him to either a DE or DT?

[nmleague]

David has been working on 3.5, but cant give you a definite time.  I believe that players that are DL will stay DL and that we then have to assign them to either DT or DE, same for OL etc..

[22sec]

ORIGINAL: nmleague

David has been working on 3.5, but cant give you a definite time.  I believe that players that are DL will stay DL and that we then have to assign them to either DT or DE, same for OL etc..

I know 3.5 will be here when it gets here [:D] I just was more concerned about starting something to have my work rendered meaningless by a new patch.

[nmleague]

Same here, I have havent started any new leagues, created any new plays, have put everything except testing on hold until 3.5 is released.

[David Winter]

Two more questions, first what kind of ETA is there for 3.5? What happens to existing players? For instance a player is currently a DL, when 3.5 comes out, will he just stay a DL, or can I just go edit him to either a DE or DT?

 

David has been working on 3.5, but cant give you a definite time.  I believe that players that are DL will stay DL and that we then have to assign them to either DT or DE, same for OL etc..

 
 
Player position tags are automatically upgraded. There is no need to rename them. What you may have to do though is reposition some of them in the plays/formations. This may be required where a generic DB position was renamed to CB or SA (and an example), and the newly renamed player is in an inappropriate position on the field. A second example would be when players are retagged to DE or DT from the generic DL. There could have been plays/formations created where the retagged DT ends up on the outside.
 
As for the time to release 1.35, I have been working on it but that work has been side tracked with Vista and further updates to version 1.3

[Marauders]

21SEC, are you sure you didn't get a hold of my list of 3.5 questions from the private forum? Maybe I should wear a foil hat from now on to shield my thoughts from your alien brain scan. [;)]

Can onside kicks be designed, or can you consider that for a future update? It would be ashame to be make a come back, only to have to kick the ball deep.

I have tried to create onside kicks in various builds. The two problems are in player AI going for the ball and the kicking strength not being adjustable in coach only mode.

A few months ago, I had a play created that would work to some extent if the kicker was replaced by a player with a weak leg. Obviously, it would be better to be able to set kicking angle and strength as part of the play, but that would require quite a bit a coding.

David has updated some special teams player code since I worked on this, so I'll see how the updated code works with a weak kicker.

Also, I know it was stated way back that you took the Option out because it killed the AI, but with the improved logic on D I would think it was ready for a comeback. Would force play designers to create more plays with keys and reads for the defense. Being a college football guy this is HIGH on my list of wishes

I use pro leagues, so I don't really need the option, but I have pushed hard for it in the private board, as college league players have had this high on their wish lists.

I know that David has stated he would like to get the option in, but it requires coding and testing that may not be available for 3.5. Because Maximum-Football is a 3D physics based game, there is much more programming involved in doing an option than there is in games that simulate plays in tables.

Oh yeah, can we also maybe get the ability to handoff to WRs. Not only for reverses, but to design plays similar to a few Florida runs for example.

This should be in for 3.5, but it may take some testing to see if it breaks the AI code. It will also require the ability to key WR's, and that should be in as well.

One last one, can we maybe get the option to have 0 TE's when creating a new formation. I know you can substitute a WR for a TE, but that could be a lot of work.

This may be in the game after the depth charts are changed for 3.5. That's about all I know, as we have not seen a build for this yet. David is working on it though.

As always, my answers are just informed opinions that are subject to change by time constraints and other factors.

[22sec]

Well your answers are more informed than my wishes, so they are always welcomed[;)]

Yall have done a great job with the maturation process of MFB.