it would be something like this:

If an offense players are a:
QB
RB
FB
WR
TE
LT
LG
C
RG
RT

then the offense gets a +25% Greater chance of plays resulting in first downs

and if a defense players is an:

LDE
DT
RDE
SLB
MLB
WLB
SS
FS

then the defense has a +25% greater chance of a play resulting in negative yards

it could also go as far as to increase FG chances if you have a P or K, but special teams really isn't an issue and doesn't need to be fixed too much

if the 25% bonuses don't work, you can decrease it, mine was just an example. Im a noob at game development so what would I know about coding a bonus based on all positions being filled by said position players

(ie the bonus wont work if a WR player is in the RB slot or a CB is in the WLB slot)


Also JDB won't see this so prepare for this to literally never happen lol

anyways cya!

I like the idea of forcing a balanced team, I would only hope it wouldn’t take gimmicks to make it happen. There was supposed to be decreased familiarity and increased injuries for playing underweight players out of position, but it doesn’t seem to happen.

It's a reasonable idea, but will remove alternate approaches to the game and risks more cookie-cuttering.

Personally, I prefer an approach that puts league control in the hands of the league admin. For example, setting the distribution of player stats in each draft class; reduce the number of high speed players, increase it, whatever suits the nature of the league best. Alternatively, a setting for giving under/overweight players increase fatigue or injury likelihood. Equally, you could introduce a global buff/nerf to individual stats to make the game play "better".

The issue right now is that without regular rebalances from JDB gameplanning and roster building has become more single-route based. As soon as you put any game in the hands of the enemy (the players) they will find a way to make it play in a way you didn't intend. This leads to and endless series of exploit whack-a-mole. Each nerf may prevent one problem, while simultaneously inadvertendly creating new ones. 4.6 reduced the number of breakaway plays, increased the number of sacks and deflected passes, added greater likelihood of QB scrambles... at the same time it rendered medium/long passes significantly underpowered.

Giving league administration to adjust the way attributes are interpreted would allow each league to hunt for the right balance, potentially leading to a scenario where, rather than sharing the fast track to exploit the current engine, instead we're sharing the set-ups most likely to lead to an exciting and fun game. It also sets up alternative challenges for veteran owners - play in 3 different leagues, and have to adapt to each one individually, no more cookie cutter. Any idiot can replicate "here's the exact build to win with", to be actually skilled requires one to work that out for themselves instead of focusing on ideal weights, or easy exploits.

The biggest problem with the sim is the "game physics" greatly rewards speed while ignoring physical size of the players as it pertains to strength, durability, fatigue & injury.

In the NFL, edge rushers weigh less then traditional DEs and its a balance between getting pressure on the QB and the ability to set the edge and stop the run.

In the NFL, you will see teams run right at elite pass rushers who focus too much on blitzing and can rush themselves right out of the play instead of going right at the tackle to set the edge.

Until JDB addresses the "game phyics" and accounts for physical size at say RB to be durable enough to be the bellcow RB, you will continue to see 190 LB WR at RB because the gain in speed far outweighs any negative being smaller at RB currently has.

As a league administrator in multiple leagues, I applaud any admin who uses custom positional rules and I did it myself in of my leagues using very detailed & strict rules on roster construction & physical weight for each position. It was so strict that it became a full time job and I'm here to play a game.

The honor system is great but unfortunately all it takes is 1 bad seed to ruin it for everyone in a league. It's happened to me in one of my leagues during the Conference Championship games and created one **** of a mess.

Besides, this is a game and it shouldn't be the administration's responsibility to fix the code, I love writing extra content and creating fun, full & competitive leagues but I'm done policing owners to follow rules and besides booting an owner, there is no other real penalty I can enforce. With the state of the game as it is, not many leagues can actively boot owners anyways.

I don't write code or even pretend to understand what it involves but fixing the game physics to account for height & weight....not just speed would correct many "exploits" currently in use by creating an environment where 191 LB CBs get pancaked by 330 LB OL and taken off the field on a stratcher.

I pretty much echo Cjfred's comments. I used to have custom rules in the USFL but trying to enforce them became a chore. If league admins had the ability to edit any team's draft picks/salary cap we could impose penalties that fall short of booting someone like taking draft picks, reducing cap, etc.

I agree with everything you say, but (as I often argue) giving greater control to admins over how the game is played can mitigate over/underperforming areas of the engine that are exploitable in the periods between engine updates. As it stands, we've been in the same version of the game for 18 months with no sign of any further updates. In that time, knowing the methods of squeezing the most juice out of the engine are known and we're powerless to do anything about then.

As admins, "threat of ban" is the only thing we can wield. It's a poor way to combat exploits in leagues that try to play the game rather than the engine.

Any type of custom rule could be a toggle switch LA's can turn off/on as the league wants, sort of like the injury slider.