Hardwood - Suggestions: Increase Fatigue Effects

Forum >> Suggestions >> Increase Fatigue Effects

Post ID	Date & Time	Game Date

#21706	11/10/2024 8:35:21 pm	Dec 14th, 2041
admin Joined: 01/24/2017 Posts: 2475 Hardwood Administrator	We have in-game fatigue effects -- which occasionally are reported in the game report, but always exist. And we have fatigue "injuries". So which do we need to increase? And is fatigue effect sufficient, but just not reported enough? Thanks, Steve

#21707	11/11/2024 6:22:46 am	Dec 14th, 2041
TavesSoul Joined: 06/25/2020 Posts: 149 Nazareth Golden Flyers IV.8	Hey Steve, I'd like to raise this again. I love this game, and really appreciate all the work you've put into this, but the fatigue thing really is driving me nuts and this is the closest I've ever been to quitting. This year, in IV.8, my team Nazareth has lost 19 games to injury. It'll be 21 after today's games. I've always tried to treat this game more realistically, and avoid high fatigue, even though I know it's not really punished. This season, I've had only 5 times where a player has hit "Lght" fatigue. I took a look at my Conference overall, and the next highest amount of games lost is 10. There's a team, Wisconsin-Superior, who has 0 games lost. I looked at them, and they have 16 instances of "Lght" fatigue, 3 "Mod" and 1 "Hvy". I'm not sure what needs to be increased, but it makes no sense that my team has by far the most injuries in the Conference (you could and 2nd and 3rd together and still be less then mine), despite not fatiguing players, while a team one could argue is constantly pushing their players hasn't lost a single game. I'm not trying to argue against random injuries by the way. I'm kind of okay with there just being season's like this where your guys can't stay healthy. It's more realistic that way. I just wish there was some balance to it, so that teams that don't push the boundaries have less chances of it happening, while teams that do push the boundaries are basically guaranteed trouble.

#21708	11/11/2024 7:42:06 am	Dec 14th, 2041
gards710 Joined: 05/17/2020 Posts: 450 Dominican Univ. of California Penguins I.1	I think that based on what we've seen, both fatigue injuries and the effect of fatigue need to be increased

#21710	11/11/2024 11:19:47 am	Dec 19th, 2041
Hayseed Joined: 04/05/2019 Posts: 133 Lewis & Clark Pioneers I.1	i agree w/ gards that both need to be increased.

#21711	11/12/2024 2:19:27 am	Dec 19th, 2041
mavstar21 Joined: 08/14/2019 Posts: 88 Wisconsin-Superior Yellow Jackets V.16	Hey hey hey no need to call us out 😅. 21 injuries to this point of the season is wild. We are very lucky to be so healthy this season for sure. I agree that in game and injury fatigue penalties should be greater - especially Moderate & Heavy fatigue. Light fatigue I feel would be a pretty standard workload for most college starters in real life. I guess progressive Light fatigue building up across 10+ games would be the concern in modern day load management.

#21712	11/12/2024 9:18:19 am	Dec 19th, 2041
TavesSoul Joined: 06/25/2020 Posts: 149 Nazareth Golden Flyers IV.8	Sorry, Mavstar. Wasn't really trying to call you out as much as call attention to the disparity in injuries versus the affects of fatigue. I know there are way worse examples out there, just picked the one in Conference to illustrate my point.

#21714	11/12/2024 2:20:06 pm	Dec 21st, 2041
mavstar21 Joined: 08/14/2019 Posts: 88 Wisconsin-Superior Yellow Jackets V.16	Haha all good mate. My fault for recruiting a bunch of couch potatos

#21719	11/13/2024 1:44:59 pm	Dec 26th, 2041
Dytrea123 Joined: 04/23/2022 Posts: 10 Trine Thunder III.4	Gards is correct, but I want to add that the in-game fatigue effect might need to be affected more than injuries. Almost every starter I have is high fatigue by the end of the game and if it was like recruiting it would be Very high. Yet these guys still crank out points in the second half like crazy, like how are guys hitting shots after 38 minutes (which is like 95 possessions) of straight running. I've had 0 injuries this season which should not be happening since my guys are all on very high fatigue by the end of the game. Updated Wednesday, November 13 2024 @ 1:45:14 pm PST

#21720	11/13/2024 3:23:29 pm	Dec 26th, 2041
BMacG Joined: 03/19/2023 Posts: 21 Rochester Institute of Technology Tigers IV.4	We have in-game fatigue effects -- which occasionally are reported in the game report, but always exist. And we have fatigue "injuries". So which do we need to increase? And is fatigue effect sufficient, but just not reported enough? Thanks, Steve I think both need to be adjusted but by varying degrees. The defensive impact of fatigue doesn't seem bad to me - in my own experiments with high fatigue it seems to almost always lead to allowing more scoring. But on offense the impacts probably need to be increased noticeably. I don't know how it's currently implemented, or how hard it is to adjust it, but I feel like it should not be linear - "low" fatigue should probably only have a small impact like it currently does, as in an actual game I think it's very normal for everyone to have a little fatigue at the end. Moderate should have a slightly larger impact than it currently does, and Heavy fatigue should carry a higher penalty than it currently does. For injuries very similar, where low should probably not have much of an impact, but Heavy should carry a much larger increase in injury chance than it currently seems to. Ideally there would be some sort of cumulative effect: a heavy fatigue game here or there or from OT games is no big deal, but 3, 4, 5, etc games in a row should compound and lead to a severe increase in the effects of high fatigue, but I don't know how hard implementing a cumulative system like that would be. A compromise idea could also be that in exchange for increasing the performance effects and injury chance of fatigue, high minutes played could have an impact on increasing stamina development?

#21726	11/14/2024 9:51:47 pm	Dec 28th, 2041
admin Joined: 01/24/2017 Posts: 2475 Hardwood Administrator	The players only experience heavy fatigue in the last few minutes of the game. So they are able to score well in the second half, because they are not overly fatigued for much of the game. In contrast to the past, when coach John Wooden rarely rested his starters, today's players see significantly reduced average playing times, with 35 minutes per game now considered substantial. Fatigue often sets in as the game progresses, negating any advantage either team may have built up. However, if one team is playing significantly more minutes, they may lose their edge over the opposition. Do people believe we should implement more in-game fatigue indicators, or is it sufficient to display fatigue metrics mostly in the box score? Steve