Grid-Iron american football game language selector
Language
ČeštinaDanskDeutsch
EnglishEspañolEspañol (Latinoamérica)
FrançaisItalianoMagyar
NederlandsPolskiPortuguês (Brasil)
RomânăSlovenčinaSlovenščina
SrpskiSuomiБългарски
РусскийУкраїнська 
Register
Login
Home field advantage
Forum index >> Grid-Iron discussions >> Home field advantage Goto page : 1, 2, 3, 4
 
Hard-core fan (ultimate supporter owner)shmertnicknameGI Supporter
Posts: 2499
Joined: 2011-10-17
II.2
Offline
Hard-core fan (ultimate supporter owner)
Posted on 2017-12-11 18:30:10
Will be fixed in v3.1
  
Hard-core fan (ultimate supporter owner)ChristyGI Supporter
Posts: 2368
Joined: 2013-12-16
III.6
Offline
Hard-core fan (ultimate supporter owner)
Posted on 2017-12-11 18:49:13
shmertnickname wrote:

Will be fixed in v3.1



Why. The two hard numbers given show it is not a ridiculous advantage as close as I can see.

I think it makes things a bit more interesting in title races where there are 2-3 clear favourites as teams will find it tough not to slip up away from home. Otherwise half the weeks are pointless as they wait for their few meaningful matches.

Though obviously if it has been implemented in the aflc it should not have been.
  
"In archery we have something like the way of the superior man. When the archer misses the center of the target, he turns round and seeks for the cause of his failure in himself.”— Confucius
Gatr22GI Supporter
Posts: 14540
Joined: 2009-09-29
I.1
Offline
Posted on 2017-12-12 0:07:08
AudreyForever wrote:

Home field advantage is really getting ridiculous in the Central Europe Top Division. Home teams are 13-2 so far and most of these wins have been blowouts. Everybody looks powerless against it, including the very best team in the world: the reigning CE champion and Iron Bowl winner FC Riproviamo was wiped out twice on the road, in spite of a roster of monsters and a 2.3M payroll.

This is not surprising though, considering that the CE TD is currently a very balanced league. From a Talent/BPOS standpoint, every team is fully equipped from top to bottom. And the infamous BMI thing has contributed to erase any difference in terms of physicals too. So we are left with 10 clones of the same team that are as evenly matched as they come. Once you throw some super duper bonus into the equation, the outcome of a given game is pretty much decided in advance because the away team is simply unable to offset that.

The old home field advantage (which was actually benefiting the away team, but you get the point) wasn't that bad. While noticeable, it wasn't a be-all and end-all affair. The current one is a death sentence instead and should be toned down a bit IMHO.

Maybe the OP should have opened this thread in the "Suggestion" section of the forum though. Otherwise chances are that the devs will not even notice it.



This is a pretty good summary of what is happening. I think it's a combination of the BMI and also, probably not so noticeable, the consistency factor for any player under 20 con (most especially those 10 con and below). The devs probably didn't even do anything to change the homefield advantage. It's just been adjusted by those changes in the game day calculations. Now pretty much all teams are even on fitness, whereas before that was a small difference maker and the consistency is now elevated by throwing those factors in to the same calculations and making a huge difference on the both the plus rolls for those players that got a good pre-game roll and the minus rolls for those players that got a crappy pre-game roll. All of this should likely be elevated when the leagues you're playing in are fairly even top to bottom and most especially at the TD or AFLC level (also the WC level). So in summary, I'd wager they didn't make any changes to the homefield, it just changed directions via the other changes made. It's a bummer, but I think high con is now very important to at least lock down home wins and then hopefully pull off 2-4 wins on the road each season
  
Owner of the Orlando Gators FC
Member GIAC
League 383-173 (TD Champs S17,S21,S22)
Regional Cup 223-25 (Cup Champs S14,S15,S17,S19,S20,S21)
AFLC 45-14 (Iron Bowl Champs S18,S22,S23)

It's Great To Be A Florida Gator
Hedda
Posts: 64
Posted on 2017-12-13 13:49:36
I have only players with cons above 10, most of them above 15 and it still didn't help me avoid silly defeats in AFLC last season.
Besides, in my league there is basically only one other club contending. He won his home game and I won mine so in the end he lost the championship on point differential, which is really not fair.
I agree there should be some element of surprise so sometimes you will lose to weaker teams but it shouldn't be limited exclusively to away games.
  
ledilot
Posts: 312
Posted on 2017-12-13 21:47:58
Gatr22 wrote:

The devs probably didn't even do anything to change the homefield advantage.





Haven't paid much attention to the game the last few months, but the following is my startratings from the first 13 matches last season.

Startrating home...5..4½...4.....Startrating away....5..4½...4

..........................18....4...0.................................9...10..3
..........................19....3...0................................11...10..1
..........................19....3...0.................................9.....9...4
..........................20....2...0................................13....7...2
..........................19....2...1
End of first half
..........................19....2...1................................12....7...3
..........................18....4...0................................11...10..1

Untill then I played with very much the same team, but after these first 13 matches I sacked/sold some of my players.

btw, here is what two cupgames look like played with the same team - one home, one away.

...........................9....9...4..................................9...11..2

Tells me Cup-games are not affected.
Also suggests, that if devs didn't do anything, startrating in leaguegames - home and away - should be much closer to each other.

I know some managers pay no attention to ingamerating, but in my oppinion they allways tell a story.
  
AudreyForever
Posts: 1389
Joined: 2010-05-20
I.1
Offline
Posted on 2017-12-14 15:02:51
Gatr22 wrote:

The devs probably didn't even do anything to change the homefield advantage.



They most definitely did. As I pointed out, the old home (away) field advantage was tolerable, while the present one is not. The results of the Central Europe Top Division currently show a 18-2 supremacy of the home teams. And most of these wins were blowouts. I have never seen anything like that and it is not funny at all.

Not to mention that this thing is massively unfair in the AFLC, where you have teams that will play 5 times at home in their Group (e.g. FC Riproviamo) as opposed to teams that will play 3 home games only (e.g. Candiolo Bats).

It needs to be toned down.
  
liberalmenteGI Supporter
Posts: 3001
Joined: 2014-05-22
I.1
Offline
Posted on 2017-12-14 16:53:42
AudreyForever wrote:

Gatr22 wrote:

The devs probably didn't even do anything to change the homefield advantage.



They most definitely did. As I pointed out, the old home (away) field advantage was tolerable, while the present one is not. The results of the Central Europe Top Division currently show a 18-2 supremacy of the home teams. And most of these wins were blowouts. I have never seen anything like that and it is not funny at all.

Not to mention that this thing is massively unfair in the AFLC, where you have teams that will play 5 times at home in their Group (e.g. FC Riproviamo) as opposed to teams that will play 3 home games only (e.g. Candiolo Bats).

It needs to be toned down.



Totally agree. We should discuss this in the Suggestion forum, probably even the bug forum (even though it's not a "bug" in the classic sense). You and Turin Wolves are the front runners now in our Division because you both won an away game. The two teams who lost at home to you are in big trouble.

Right now, and I know it's early, it's not unlikely that the 3rd place and the 7th place will have the same record - and the relegation will be decided by point differential. That's madness.

Of course it can change, but I think it will be a huge boost for a team if someone has an injury and forgets to change his lineup or something like that. Luck like that always played a role, but now it can basically make or break your season if this happens at an away match.
  
Hard-core fan (ultimate supporter owner)lvessGI Supporter
Posts: 791
Joined: 2014-02-16
II.1
Offline
Hard-core fan (ultimate supporter owner)
Posted on 2017-12-14 17:24:16
It does appear that the developers made an adjustment to the way the start and end game ratings are calculated for home teams. There is no disput (in my mind at least) about this.

Want an example? Check out the ratings for my starting K/P, Cecil Wayne. He has 20 Con and 15 skills. He ALWAYS got 4.5* ratings due to that Con. However now he gets 5* for home games and 4.5* for away games.

However, this adjustment is only part of the issue IMO. The other factor is, that at the Top Divison/AFLC level everyone has players with 35 combined physicalls now. 20/15 receivers against 20/15 DB's, 15/20 OL, etc. Plus skill levels are all 18's, 19's and 20's.

The only difference now is CON and Stamina, plus the occasionally poorly trained player (which happens rarely at this level).

The adjustments to home field advantage have been exacerbated by the implementation of BMI at the same time. I bet if they reversed the BMI change, the impact of home field would be reduced.

In my mind this means a couple changes in team building are needed to adjust.

1) Players with CON below 10 need not apply.
2) Players with either 20 speed and 20 strength go up even more in value.
3) Don't ignore training of secondary skills (like footwork or stamina for example).
4) Stop training physicals past a combined 35.
  
liberalmenteGI Supporter
Posts: 3001
Joined: 2014-05-22
I.1
Offline
Posted on 2017-12-14 19:49:51
lvess wrote:

4) Stop training physicals past a combined 35.



Disagree. A 20/20 monster doesn't help you during the games (anymore), but he can play longer at the highest level. If you train him properly, he can easily play his age-31 season with 35 combined physicals, and also part of his age-32 should be no problem. So there is an advantage to higher than 35 physicals.
  
Hard-core fan (ultimate supporter owner)lvessGI Supporter
Posts: 791
Joined: 2014-02-16
II.1
Offline
Hard-core fan (ultimate supporter owner)
Posted on 2017-12-14 20:36:24
liberalmente wrote:

lvess wrote:

4) Stop training physicals past a combined 35.



Disagree. A 20/20 monster doesn't help you during the games (anymore), but he can play longer at the highest level. If you train him properly, he can easily play his age-31 season with 35 combined physicals, and also part of his age-32 should be no problem. So there is an advantage to higher than 35 physicals.



Acknowledged.

However, unless it is a QB or K I'm dumping most players when they turn 31 and start loosing points on physicals. Then again, I have a huge roster with multiple backups at various stages of training so I can afford to do that.

My point was, I'd rather use the time saved going from 35 to 40 to instead try to bump primary skills over soft caps.
  
 
Forum index >> Grid-Iron discussions >> Home field advantage Goto page : 1, 2, 3, 4