CPU Games No More....Time for Substitute Players

Fr8trainShane wrote:

Mcnair2wycheck wrote:

GREENERRRR wrote:why should i play some1 other than the player i was schedule to play? are they gonna be the same skill level?

I dont jerk around restartn CPU games... I play my game - and take my injuries...

Perhaps - u could make this idea work by you get 1 chance to play the CPU game - but any start after the 1st has to be played vs a substitute player - i could live with that - because it wouldnt effect me - it only would effect guys who gratuitously restart CPU games because they get an injury...

Agreed, it's not fair if I have to play one of the best players because he's substituting for a player who is struggling.

Who says you are going to play one of the best players? Maybe you are scheduled for one of the best players, and instead have to play one of the worst players? Its a two way street. Hell there are a lot more average-worst players than there are FF, CP's, and Jmo's walking around.... and those guys might not even be Subs.

Maybe you make it so they can't be subs? Would that make you feel better?

NOPE wouldnt make me feel better... bc i still should be entitled to atleast my shot at the cpu... or instead of playing 1 of those 3 u mite have to play another mg member u dont like playing... everyone has there players in the mg they hate facing bc the way they play... so i still dont see it as an good idea... i would rather get my 1 shot at an cpu and take an sim then have to play someone random...

I have to say, I'm closer to Greener's and Saastar's side here than anything. I'm one who will probably take the CPU game, just out of it being less hassle than anything. The compromise I suggested was because there are people who say they restart it over and over because they don't want to play the CPU so they super-sim, and don't want to take a loss in a super-sim because they'd rather play a person. My compromise would allow people who play the CPU the right way to continue, with a small chance of taking a sim. So say you will win 90% of the time and lose 10% (some say they would win 100%). And say 20% of the time you get d/c and have to take a sim (I think that's very high, but going worst case). So 90% of 80% is 72% wins. Add in 50% of 20% (wins in the sim games) and you have an 82% chance of a win, 18% chance of a loss at the very worst. If the win on completed games is 100% and sim rate is only 10%, you have a 95-5 win rate. Seems more than fair, not automatic but very high. People that would rather play a sub will get to play their human, and no one commented on my handicapping solution, but I think the sub should have to drop 1 player of the regular's choice for the game, to put that team at a disadvantage.

phantomshark wrote:I have to say, I'm closer to Greener's and Saastar's side here than anything. I'm one who will probably take the CPU game, just out of it being less hassle than anything. The compromise I suggested was because there are people who say they restart it over and over because they don't want to play the CPU so they super-sim, and don't want to take a loss in a super-sim because they'd rather play a person. My compromise would allow people who play the CPU the right way to continue, with a small chance of taking a sim. So say you will win 90% of the time and lose 10% (some say they would win 100%). And say 20% of the time you get d/c and have to take a sim (I think that's very high, but going worst case). So 90% of 80% is 72% wins. Add in 50% of 20% (wins in the sim games) and you have an 82% chance of a win, 18% chance of a loss at the very worst. If the win on completed games is 100% and sim rate is only 10%, you have a 95-5 win rate. Seems more than fair, not automatic but very high. People that would rather play a sub will get to play their human, and no one commented on my handicapping solution, but I think the sub should have to drop 1 player of the regular's choice for the game, to put that team at a disadvantage.

+1

That's the whole point of making them use the other teams playbook.

my proposal:

• if the player requests an OPTIONAL human sub its on him and the commissioner to schedule the first available sub, basically whoever responds first OUTSIDE that league.

• no cpu game restarts, if you lose connection you must provide a picture of the error message

• cpu games are deemed forfeits, whether it be a schedule conflict or what have you...the player should always have to right to opt for the CPU or HUMAN sub.

• a lot of times these CPU games come down to the last minute, and the commish has to boot because the alotted time to play/respond has expired. with such a short time frame somtimes, it might not always be fair to pair someone up with a sub that (different playbook or not) is on a higher skill level. imagine subbing CP in to play and that team has a ton of offensive weapons but he's the only guy available?

• the OPTIONAL sub should be paired off the commishes judgement of equal skill level if possible.

falconfansince81 wrote:my proposal:

• no cpu game restarts, if you lose connection you must provide a picture of the error message

Too easy to generate an error message, if I pull the plug on my modem it'll generate a lost connection message. Stick with the no restarts, period.

phantomshark wrote:

falconfansince81 wrote:my proposal:

• no cpu game restarts, if you lose connection you must provide a picture of the error message

Too easy to generate an error message, if I pull the plug on my modem it'll generate a lost connection message. Stick with the no restarts, period.

the only one i ever got was d/c from ea franchise servers, can't fake that one

i like FF idea as well...

falconfansince81 wrote:

phantomshark wrote:

falconfansince81 wrote:my proposal:

• no cpu game restarts, if you lose connection you must provide a picture of the error message

Too easy to generate an error message, if I pull the plug on my modem it'll generate a lost connection message. Stick with the no restarts, period.

the only one i ever got was d/c from ea franchise servers, can't fake that one

+1

falconfansince81 wrote:my proposal:

• if the player requests an OPTIONAL human sub its on him and the commissioner to schedule the first available sub, basically whoever responds first OUTSIDE that league.

• no cpu game restarts, if you lose connection you must provide a picture of the error message

• cpu games are deemed forfeits, whether it be a schedule conflict or what have you...the player should always have to right to opt for the CPU or HUMAN sub.

• a lot of times these CPU games come down to the last minute, and the commish has to boot because the alotted time to play/respond has expired. with such a short time frame somtimes, it might not always be fair to pair someone up with a sub that (different playbook or not) is on a higher skill level. imagine subbing CP in to play and that team has a ton of offensive weapons but he's the only guy available?

• the OPTIONAL sub should be paired off the commishes judgement of equal skill level if possible.

I don't like the "Optional" part, because everyone is going to option the CPU game because its pretty much a guaranteed win. Which it should not be. In the NFL there are no guaranteed wins... if a head coach can't play, they play with an interim head coach.

I'll go along with whatever is decided but I think people miss the points.

1. CPU Games should not "entitle" you to a free win.
   
2. The Entire point of the MG is to play human players.
   
3. IF you don't have time to play a SUB, you then you didn't have time to play the original game.
   
4. You will face people better, and worse than you when you have random subs.
   
5. The occurrence of CPU games isn't that high anyway...and the likelihood of you playing a Jmo, CP, FF, etc, is small.
   
6. You were originally scheduled for a human opponent, you should have to play one.
   
   I see a lot of people screaming entitlement, entitlement....I'm entitled to a CPU game? Really? How so? Not a single one of you has replied to my mention that most CPU games are because people can't be on at the same time. Not because people aren't responding. If we're both available, just at different times..... who gets the CPU game? (currently, its whoever offers it first).... but is that fair? Not at all.
   
   No CPU game should be last minute....especially if you apply the 32 hour rule that Greener loves. If your opponent doesn't answer within 32 hours of the last advance (and u actually messaged them), then you find a sub. That gives you a minimum of 18 hours to find a sub.
   
   Its clear you some of you just think you are entitled to Free Wins... but seriously? Why the sense of entitlement? You should be here to play against real people. Noone, including myself, is going to get any better playing the CPU.
   
   But, I'm really getting tired of arguing my point of view, so whatever you guys decide.
   

ok, but if in say week 17 you are 10-5 fighting for a playoff spot and your opponent who is 2-13 doesn't show and i'm the only one around to play, i don't wanna hear any complaints

i totally agree with the idea of always playing a human, i think most guys will OPT for that anyways.

falconfansince81 wrote:ok, but if in say week 17 you are 10-5 fighting for a playoff spot and your opponent who is 2-13 doesn't show and i'm the only one around to play, i don't wanna hear any complaints

You know you wouldn't from me I take my beatings like a man.... lol and usually tell my opponent to keep playing aggressive. No foot off the pedal with me...run that score up. Make me adapt and practice.

Fr8trainShane wrote:

falconfansince81 wrote:ok, but if in say week 17 you are 10-5 fighting for a playoff spot and your opponent who is 2-13 doesn't show and i'm the only one around to play, i don't wanna hear any complaints

You know you wouldn't from me I take my beatings like a man.... lol and usually tell my opponent to keep playing aggressive. No foot off the pedal with me...run that score up. Make me adapt and practice.

well not many are as humble as you, but you see my point right? again, i agree 100% i'd rather play a human as would most...but not EVERYONE will, so thats on them. could cause a lot of backlash...

I don't think this is even that big of a deal. I don't like being basically forced to play a CPU game, but whatever... if everyone preferred that, so be it.

On the other hand, I don't see why anyone really cares about a restart. It is not the huge advantage you guys think it is.

Regarding subs, I absolutely agree that it is better to play a person than the CPU. That is why most of us are here. Most of us don't want to play the CPU and run up stats and pad their record and act like they've accomplished something.

However... I think instituting subs will be very problematic. It would be begging for a new kind of complaint session:

"So-and-so doesn't even try when he's a sub against his cronies...all they do is lab, so it's an easy win. But when he plays me, he puts forth a better effort just because he's out to get me...Not Fair!"**

**This is a fictional account. Any similarities to real people or personalities is purely coincidental.

I see your point blammers. Sadly enough I could see some people saying stuff like that.

What I don't get is why people have to complain like that. I mean like I've stated a 1000 times before. We are all here for the same reason. To play a game against another person. I think this sub idea is one of the best we have had.

Fr8trainShane wrote:

falconfansince81 wrote:my proposal:

• if the player requests an OPTIONAL human sub its on him and the commissioner to schedule the first available sub, basically whoever responds first OUTSIDE that league.

• no cpu game restarts, if you lose connection you must provide a picture of the error message

• cpu games are deemed forfeits, whether it be a schedule conflict or what have you...the player should always have to right to opt for the CPU or HUMAN sub.

• a lot of times these CPU games come down to the last minute, and the commish has to boot because the alotted time to play/respond has expired. with such a short time frame somtimes, it might not always be fair to pair someone up with a sub that (different playbook or not) is on a higher skill level. imagine subbing CP in to play and that team has a ton of offensive weapons but he's the only guy available?

• the OPTIONAL sub should be paired off the commishes judgement of equal skill level if possible.

I don't like the "Optional" part, because everyone is going to option the CPU game because its pretty much a guaranteed win. Which it should not be. In the NFL there are no guaranteed wins... if a head coach can't play, they play with an interim head coach.

I'll go along with whatever is decided but I think people miss the points.

1. CPU Games should not "entitle" you to a free win.
   
2. The Entire point of the MG is to play human players.
   
3. IF you don't have time to play a SUB, you then you didn't have time to play the original game.
   
4. You will face people better, and worse than you when you have random subs.
   
5. The occurrence of CPU games isn't that high anyway...and the likelihood of you playing a Jmo, CP, FF, etc, is small.
   
6. You were originally scheduled for a human opponent, you should have to play one.
   
   I see a lot of people screaming entitlement, entitlement....I'm entitled to a CPU game? Really? How so? Not a single one of you has replied to my mention that most CPU games are because people can't be on at the same time. Not because people aren't responding. If we're both available, just at different times..... who gets the CPU game? (currently, its whoever offers it first).... but is that fair? Not at all.
   
   No CPU game should be last minute....especially if you apply the 32 hour rule that Greener loves. If your opponent doesn't answer within 32 hours of the last advance (and u actually messaged them), then you find a sub. That gives you a minimum of 18 hours to find a sub.
   
   Its clear you some of you just think you are entitled to Free Wins... but seriously? Why the sense of entitlement? You should be here to play against real people. Noone, including myself, is going to get any better playing the CPU.
   
   But, I'm really getting tired of arguing my point of view, so whatever you guys decide.
   

i really dont see why ur getting so defensive about this.. i mean yes human games can be better sometimes.. but there are times when i would actually rather play an cpu and have an break from playing someone and it actually count toward my record... i mean i have no problem playing people but like FF said if im 9-7 or 10-5 looking to make the playoffs and it comes around to where i am suppose to get an cpu gm or i have an cpu opponent and instead FF, jmo or cp step in or someone i dont like playing in the mg.. then i would just rather the commish sim my gm and i have an 50/50 shot of getting the W then playing 1 of those 3 that i personally maybe can only beat 1 out of 10 times playing them.. or playing someone else who i dont like playing or they hate the way i play and will just go all out with some BS just to ruin my playoff hopes..

also like mblammers said its not that big of an deal like ur trying to make it out to be fr8.. and again u keep come paring madden to the NFL.. and in an honesty there are gms in the NFL teams consider easy that only 1 out of 5 times maybe will the sucky team win.. like the colts facing the browns?? now u tell me thats not an easy W for the colts.. or patriots vs rams? jets vs bills? ravens vs seattle seahawks? i could go on an on naming match ups where only maybe 1 time out of 5 the sucky team wins... thats why when u go look at betting on teams with the points spread that the sucky team almost always is being given 14 pts or more... bc the experts know that they are going to lose unless its that 1 time out of 5 and they are confident its going to be by 14 pts or more...

also like mblammers said its not that big of an deal like ur trying to make it out to be fr8.. and again u keep come paring madden to the NFL.. and in an honesty there are gms in the NFL teams consider easy that only 1 out of 5 times maybe will the sucky team win.. like the colts facing the browns?? now u tell me thats not an easy W for the colts.. or patriots vs rams? jets vs bills? ravens vs seattle seahawks? i could go on an on naming match ups where only maybe 1 time out of 5 the sucky team wins... thats why when u go look at betting on teams with the points spread that the sucky team almost always is being given 14 pts or more... bc the experts know that they are going to lose unless its that 1 time out of 5 and they are confident its going to be by 14 pts or more...

Well everyone always wants to bring up the Exceptions to the rule... but they forget that the exceptions rarely happen.
Whether its Colts/Browns.... or using Bill Belichick as an example for going for it on 4th down. Those are exceptions to the norm, and they will always be there... but its absolutely not the basis for rule or law.

You don't make rules or laws because less than 10% of the time a scenario is something you might see... you make the rules based on the scenario you will see 90% of the time.

Like i said, I'll agree to whatever you guys decide.... I'm not on the council, I don't have a vote.

I have had the handle on this argument for many seasons now. No restarts win or lose and No running up scores/stats. If so Player suspensions issued, for instance if an owner beat the cpu 5210 or something like that and a WR had like 5 Td's, adn scored 2 Tds late in 4th qtr while up by 24, that Player would be suspended for 1 to 3 gms, the wr or possibly the qb, once the owner realizes the outcome of there restarts or running up score by not having that player or players for 1-3 weeks with a suspension and loses stats for those games, you quickly realize this taking advantage of cpu raraely happens. There is one player in my league now with Wr with 1 gm suspension, and there have been others , but very rare now that we are entering 5th season, all owners are aware of this and it simply does not happen as far as Restarts and running up scores/stats, it keeps all rules like it was a human opponent, meaning alot of the owners play pay attention to how to play by the MG Rules as opposed to just taking advantage of Cpu gm, if u instill rules and suspensions like this, u will rarely see Restarts and running up scores/stats

Bigmullet wrote:I have had the handle on this argument for many seasons now.

This is a joke right? lol Cuz I'm laughing my ass off right now.
When I think of great commishes of the MG, I immediately think, "Bigmullet"
When I think of stable franchises of the MG, "Bigmullet" is the first to come to mind...
When I read people's posts about how awesome a franchise is...."Bigmullet" is the first to come to mind...

Sorry, I gotta go drink some tiger's blood man.....

Fr8trainShane wrote:

Bigmullet wrote:I have had the handle on this argument for many seasons now.

This is a joke right? lol Cuz I'm laughing my ass off right now.
When I think of great commishes of the MG, I immediately think, "Bigmullet"
When I think of stable franchises of the MG, "Bigmullet" is the first to come to mind...
When I read people's posts about how awesome a franchise is...."Bigmullet" is the first to come to mind...

Sorry, I gotta go drink some tiger's blood man.....

Kinda unnecessary, Shane. Just because his league is not one of the 'elite' leagues (of which there really are only 2 now) doesn't mean you have to ridicule it. It doesn't mean he can't have some good ideas, worthy of discussion.

Fr8trainShane wrote:

Bigmullet wrote:I have had the handle on this argument for many seasons now.

This is a joke right? lol Cuz I'm laughing my ass off right now.
When I think of great commishes of the MG, I immediately think, "Bigmullet"
When I think of stable franchises of the MG, "Bigmullet" is the first to come to mind...
When I read people's posts about how awesome a franchise is...."Bigmullet" is the first to come to mind...

Funniest thing I've read all day....hahahaha

[quote="Fr8trainShane"]

falconfansince81 wrote:.

I see a lot of people screaming entitlement, entitlement....I'm entitled to a CPU game? Really? How so? Not a single one of you has replied to my mention that most CPU games are because people can't be on at the same time. Not because people aren't responding. If we're both available, just at different times..... who gets the CPU game? (currently, its whoever offers it first).... but is that fair? Not at all.


[/list]

this is simply not true - i would say over half of the CPU games that i award are because guys are in breach of the 32 hour rule - and thats ok - we all have lives outside of Madden - as long as its does not consistantly happen...

and when guys give uo CPU gmes - its often becayuse their season record has made it imppossible to make the playoffs - adn they dont want to play the gfame - (altyhiugh i dont like this attitude - it happens) - wouldnt be fair to give some1 who is playoff contention the possibility of playn a player who is "better" when they clearly should be playn a player that didnt have the skills to make the playoffs in the 1st place

unless of coarse in the event u havta have a sub and im online,,guys would jump line to play me ..lol

slickmonkyz wrote:unless of coarse in the event u havta have a sub and im online,,guys would jump line to play me ..lol

i wouldnt say that is true slick - u gave mne a huge man-handling in DW lg this year...

greener is obviously drinking early today .lol . i only got 3 wins so far