Whoa, total miscommunication here. I'm definitely not calling you a "lout", and you don't need to join any Discord. I'm fine with us disagreeing on any topic you wish. Enjoy your day.

I'm responding to you claim that putting rule names in the log means you'd see other people's rule names,which would clearly not be the case since it's trivial to generate logs with rule names only shown for the requesting owner, given that's done already for the web client.

Nobody forces anyone to join the discord and tbh your presence or non presence doesn't bother me either way. There is a small core of owners there who are giving back to the game by helping flesh ideas out, giving clear, concise, accurate feedback. If that gets expanded, then too many voices can dilute too much.

Perhaps rules should not have priority based upon order of presentation.
Perhaps rules should just be rules, absent an order of operations based upon first to last stacking.
The fact that rules must be stacked in an order of priority (1 through etc) is NOT a fact given to the player in MFN's home pages.
Rule priority must be discovered - but it should be common knowlegde. It should be stated in the GP rules pages that rules occur according to their numerical order.
It is not.

I only discovered that rules have an order of operation based upon first in to last out by reading these forums.
The info is NOT on the MFN home page, info page, or any educational page. That info must be discovered through happenstance or slogging through 15 years or so of forums.

Rules are always first in, last out.
This is not an easy item to learn. It should be declared on the MFN home page or within the UI itself.

The simplest user interaction is to absolve the first in, last out order of operations for rules.
If a player makes a rule, it should occur, regardless of how that rule is placed in the gameplanning rules page.
Rules should not have an order of operation - a list of first to last.

Rules simply should be. Make rule, it fires. Period.
Having to place rules - especially defensive rules in an order of priority regarding and directly related to the # of offensive plays called to the least plays called, has and always will be rediculous.

I cant be the only one who's tired of gridding my opponents offensive plays by formation by times called in order to set my defensive rule priorities in order to make my defensive rules work correctly.

Oh, so they run the 0.1.4 17 times in 4 weeks, but the 5wr 14 times in 4 weeks... SO i better be sure i place my 0.1.4 rule ABOVE my 5wr rule or neither rules will work.

F that nonsence.
Rules are rules, priority requirements only make things more difficult, require more maths, and the need to prioritize rules is not explicit nor directed ANYWHERE in the player FAQ nor the MFN guides.

Rule priority is just another thing that either a player knows it, or they don't.
FWIW: always place d rules in order of O plays called, highest to lowest.

I use 4 weeks, but i always know i'm simply adding numbers of plays called so I can place my D rules in the proper order.

F all that. WHAT NONSENCE.
MAke rule. Rule is in effect. Placement of rule #1 - etc should NEVER be an item of consideration. NO one should have to do all that work and all that tracking and all the math to make sure their D rules are congruent to the amount of times their opponent calls that offensive set.
I don't care that my opponent calls the 5wr less than the all pass 2.2.1. nor should I have to make sure that I place that 2.2.1 D rule above that 5wr.
Rule priorities are a freakin' joke.

Either the rule is, or is is not.
Having to place my rules every week in a specific order based on my ever changing opponents and to also have to adjust those rules based upon the opponent...
I hate working twice.

Ditch the priority requirement for both O and D rules created by any users.

Make our life easier, not harder.
For F's sake, people are having to run spreadsheets and shiite.
MFN should not be this way.
Normal people do not do such work.

I guess were all crazee, now. DOing all that extra math and spreedsheeting and blah blah blah just to play a game thats become more blah and more math.
No wonder MFN has under 100 players. Normal people dont make spreadsheets and graph data to play a football game. They dont play games with a spiral notebook, a pencil, and google docs. They dont run CSV's and they dont like doing work beyond the game they want to play.
They want to just play.

MFN is still not a game that any one can just play within the browser itself, and it remains very far from it.

Re: Include Rule Usage in Game Log
by TheWitchHunter @ 5/23/2026 11:20 pm

Last edited 5/24/2026 5:22 am

Please fix the forum time stamp. I did not spend 6 HOURS editing this post.
it currently 11:22 PM.

Maybe your time stamp is in UTM (GMT). I am posting this comment at 10:45 am MEST. You can see UTM at time stamp for edit.

Just write a 5w rule and then it covers defending that set. Write rules for each set and it will fire what you want. Parallel Slants will always pair with Quarter Defense etc. You put the set by set rules at the bottom and specific overlap rules above it. It is cumbersome but workable. I had to write on paper the rules in order and then load them in a way that it laid out properly.

All rules have trigger conditions. The only time ordering kicks in is when you've identical triggers.

Simple example, got rules for 1/short, 2 for 2/short, 1 for 3/short. When 2/short occurs, 1/short, 3/short irrelevant; the issue then is the 2/short ones. First rule there is the one that gets picked up - but only if criteria matches. So if the first is for say 1st qtr only, second one for qtrs 2+, there's no conflict.


That's not the case though.

If you set up a rule, one of the criteria being that the off formation was 014, a second rule for 005 and those rules only have the one offensive formation listed, then the order is irrelevant. THey'd only be triggered (based upon other criteria set) when the particular off formation is encountered.


Again, that's not how it works.

The basis of it is that you have your more specific rules about generic rules. 1/short opponent in 212 rule should always take priority over 1/short with no off formation specified. That's basically it - and t=where you've two matching rules, the one listed first take priority.


It's a difficult thing to answer. It's not an arcade game, nor should it be. Should there be a balance around work put in, possibly, but should people putting the work in end up with same results as someone who logs in once a week? If the game doesn't reward effort, a lot of users would leave. American Football is stat heavy, complex. I don't see how the game can ignore that.

Felt like it took 6 hours to read, tbh...

Thanks to those that made it possible for owners to see what rules are firing/not firing. I'm not as adept to rule making, as those that have been in the league for awhile, but this new advancement has improved my ability to make better rules. Thanks to all!!!

Only person doing it was JDB. Others just added input.