I have to disagree about the rules only being used to beat the code. I use rules as pure football strategy only. I have the following rules:

I have a "Go for it" rule on 4th and 1 within the opponents end of the field based on score and field position.

I have an "Eat the clock" rule for the 4th quarter when I have a certain lead with a certain amount of time remaining. This guarentees I will run the ball in certain game situations and not leave it up to the A.I.

I have a "2 minute offense" rule for the end of the half and game based on score and position on field.

I have a "goalline offense" rule when I reach a certain down and distance to call specific plays

I have a "redzone defense" rule to call certain defenses when Im defending in the redzone.

I have a "prevent defense" rule to call specific secondary packages when leading by a certain amount at a certain time remaining in the game.

I have a "3rd and long" rule for using specific plays based on down, distsnce, location, score and time.

I have a "down big" rule for when I fall behind by a certain amount with a certain amount of time remaining to call more of a passing offense.

All of these rules are simply based on making better decisions on playcalling during specific scenarios in a football game. Im sure owners make rules to exploit the code but Im not that smart. My rules are pure strategy so I have better control of my team and dont leave it up to the A.I. to make those decisions.

This means I dont have to watch my team leading by 4 or more with 2 minutes remaining throw 3 incomplete passes before punting the ball to my opponent with 1:45 left and 3 time outs. I will run the ball 3 times and make him burn his timeouts.

Rules are in place because once we submit the gameplan, everything is out of our control. Have you ever watched a sim and asked, why the **** would they do that? I dont very often anymore and on the times I do, I make a rule to prevent that from happening.

I don't want to screw myself over by discussing too much strategy, however, kind of to tack onto what CJ said and the situations he tosses rules to...

With each code change it's gotten more difficult to move the ball. V4.2 would see lightning scoring strikes in the final 2 minutes all over the place. Rules were not needed. Just watch and enjoy the fireworks.

But as we've gone through v4.3 and now into v4.5 it has become more difficult. Hmm, how to be careful here. If you're down by more than a field goal with less than 2 minutes to go without deviating from the AI you have no shot at coming back.

It'll mire you with short gains as the clock ticks out quickly within a few plays. It's sad.

Just one example.

While Im quite flattered by being called a "code warrior" but I wouldnt know or understand code if you hit me with it. My gameplanning is simply trial and error with rules to solidify strategy so the A.I. doesnt make bone headed decisions. No different then a real football coach planning for any contingency.

My playcalling is throwing a bunch of stuff against the wall to see what sticks. Anyone can do what I do, there is no secret exploits Ive uncovered in the code, I wouldnt even know where to begin doing that. If a play works, I keep using it and if it doesnt I wont.

Yeah, a lot of it is trial and error. Defensively, some of it is playing a shell game. Keep the opposing GM guessing or clicking a useless scouting point on a play you removed. Install a cushion of defensive plays for each set and then winnow it as they percolate in a bad way. I don't f too much with it. If a defensive play suddenly gets zapped I expect it to continue along that trend, especially if it's in the blitz family of plays....

I have one defensive rule and one offensive rule that I have used since I started playing. I tried a couple of others and decided if I am going to play against the code instead of my opponents then it isn't worth playing. Many people have wandered why I take over losing teams rebuild them, get them to the playoffs and leave those teams. It is because once I get a team to the playoffs I know the code warriors are going to win most of the time at that point as they do in every league. In my mind getting a team to the playoffs without using rules is winning the championship and in that case I have won many.

I don't mean actually mean "code" when I say code warriors. For example there have been numerous posts about how to stop runs in certain situations and how to stop passes in certain situations by setting rules in a specific way so no matter what plays are called out certain formations they will be stopped. That is not playing against your opponent, that is playing against the code. The people that do that are what I consider code warriors. If you say you must have rules in certain situations ok, I say you don't. I have one of the top defenses in every league I am in without using rules, so I guess my way has also been proven to work. The difference between me and code warriors are the championships they win, but if you measure the amount of times I have been to the playoffs and they have been to the playoffs, you won't see a difference. The difference comes in with the rules.

Please don't think I am knocking or in this case looking down on it. It has just been my observation in the 2+ years I have been playing mfn.

It's difficult to navigate because it's levels and tiers. You'll hit a plateau and then the Stage Boss will be someone your equivalent in terms of usage of rules and how far they're willing to take it. So in that situation you're good to go and more than likely you'll be victorious. Then you escalate a tier (not saying the caliber of GM is better, just saying it gets deeper in terms of what you're going to face....where they're willing to go)

I wanna be careful and not put names. I edited myself.

But there's some GMs whom will go all out aggressive and the goal is to win the title so you hit a point where you're like f*&* I wanna win, therefore, you have to match their fire with fire of your own.

I'll take it all the way to the peak of the mountaintop: Bryson.

Man, I wanted to beat him bad. I did and tried everything. I set up for 2 straight seasons a passing attack, the 2nd season no one has ever seen with 110 passing touchdowns for the season.....got him in the title game and still LOST...!!! That was with throwing everything I could possibly think of at him and taking my strategies to the max.

It's difficult because you have to weigh where will my opposing GM take it and can I be competitive or how can I be competitive....

I completely understand, but that is exactly my point "The Big Boss", knows how to use the rules better than his opponent. You can have two exact teams in terms of game plans and strengths and the winner is going to be the one that figures out how set rules to manipulate the code the best.

I have learned that I am going to go as far as my 2 rules takes me, sometimes it is to the championship, a majority of the times it is just to the playoffs. That as much as I want to set rules against the code.

Yes, pretty much. nods

Team structures do strip away and it comes down to GM vs. GM and who can figure out the edge.

Caveat being from the past the loaded WR arsenal and what's always been the case and still holds true...a DB fortress.

A side not to Bryson. I took over for him in NCAA, a Trojan team that had the #1 defense last season and had lost 1 game in 2 seasons. I didn't do as well as his record, I went 9-7 won the division and had the #2 defense in the league while only using my 2 rules. I am in the playoffs which in my mind means I already won. In USFL I came within one game last season going to the championship, had the #4 defense while losing to raidergreg in the conference championship. I had gone to the league championship 2 other times, while using 2 rules. This season once again I have the #4 ranked defense, just dropped out of the #1 spot while using 2 rules.