There used to be rules about unfair greens

[GW_Hope]

This version of the game has made the greens a bit over the top. There used to be rules to limit the absurd greens. I think this should be reviewed. Maybe the default ball wasn’t the best choice?

[OldManGaming606]

I don't disagree that some of the greens are tough. I've had shots roll up to the hole, me thinking it's a great shot, only to watch the ball pick up speed and end up 35 feet away. ha ha. That being said though, the scores in each flight show this is not a systemic problem. Although, sometimes difficult, the default ball is working out pretty well.

And probably the most important part is it's the same for everyone.

[Brenelan]

Dec 10, 2022 18:27:01 GMT -5 GW_Hope said:

This version of the game has made the greens a bit over the top. There used to be rules to limit the absurd greens. I think this should be reviewed. Maybe the default ball wasn’t the best choice?

To be fair, this first part of the new season is going to be a learning experience for everyone, including the schedulers. No doubt they are evaluating future course setups as they receive feedback.

[GW_Hope]

All is fair. We all play the same conditions. It’s just the frustrating level of play that needs to be considered. I am frustrated!

[materialization]

I'm probably gonna be a bit unpopular for saying this, but I will anyway.

I think every green so far has been playable.

Plan the miss to be one side of the green or the other, don't make it too long, too short, or short sight yourself with a downhill chip from the rough.

With enough thought you can almost always avoid the scenario where you are left with impossible situations. Some downhill putts you can be ever so delicate with and you may get them to stop.. others? You just should never be there to begin with.

Its difficult though, course management this year is 100% way more in play with how hard things are on the greens.

Again like always I see other sides to this, but I do enjoy the strat side personally.

Lindsay.

[fransslabak]

Dec 11, 2022 3:59:25 GMT -5 materialization said:

I'm probably gonna be a bit unpopular for saying this, but I will anyway.

I think every green so far has been playable.

Plan the miss to be one side of the green or the other, don't make it too long, too short, or short sight yourself with a downhill chip from the rough.

With enough thought you can almost always avoid the scenario where you are left with impossible situations. Some downhill putts you can be ever so delicate with and you may get them to stop.. others? You just should never be there to begin with.

Its difficult though, course management this year is 100% way more in play with how hard things are on the greens.

Again like always I see other sides to this, but I do enjoy the strat side personally.

Lindsay.

I would enjoy strategy if that’s what I could use. It’s quite different though for those of us who do not know whether they’ll have decent tempo or not. Playing for a specific mis becomes rather difficult if you have no idea whether you’re gonna miss it long, short, left or right. Then strategy is not what’s gonna help you…
For me personally, currently, the game’s a lottery. Perfect stretches and then multiple holes with stutters, swing skipping parts, etc… And then perfect again for half or three quarters of a round. Really frustrating.

[MrQueez]

Dec 11, 2022 3:59:25 GMT -5 materialization said:

I'm probably gonna be a bit unpopular for saying this, but I will anyway.

I think every green so far has been playable.

Plan the miss to be one side of the green or the other, don't make it too long, too short, or short sight yourself with a downhill chip from the rough.

With enough thought you can almost always avoid the scenario where you are left with impossible situations. Some downhill putts you can be ever so delicate with and you may get them to stop.. others? You just should never be there to begin with.

Its difficult though, course management this year is 100% way more in play with how hard things are on the greens.

Again like always I see other sides to this, but I do enjoy the strat side personally.

Lindsay.

Sage advice from Lindsay. 

Course management is key.  One example is you should not always go for it on a drivable par 4.  In my Plat play along at Necedah Pines I went for it on hole #12 the first 3 rounds and the result was 3 pars.  In round 4 I laid up and made and easy birdie.  My goal was to get through the 4 rounds without a bogey and I was able to accomplish that.

TP

[boffo]

Spoiler alert:wall of text ahead.

Since the rangers are the ones that are doing the testing, and we’re mildly being called out here I guess I might as well respond.

Obviously we’re working with a brand new game here that has made some tweaks and changes to what we’d been used to for the previous two years. That means we’re in the learning curve for all aspects of a new course being put on Tour. From rangers to schedulers to designers to the players themselves this adjustment will take a bit of time and will seem most jarring now when the two year established status quo of things has abruptly been changed. This will improve given time.

Designers will start making courses more optimized for the way the new game plays. Players will learn the in’s and out’s of 2K23 and leave behind the stuff that no longer works the same from 2K21. HB will release updates that may or may not make the game better and may or may not start the learning curve all over again. From a ranger and scheduler standpoint we’ll learn what does and doesn’t play well across all the different levels of the Tour.

As far as rangering goes, strictly from a green testing perspective I’ll go over the process. Back in TGC, TGC2, and TGC19 we used the 9 box rule as the barebones fundamental. The 9 box is the square of the green grid containing the hole and then the 8 squares that surround that one. The basic rule of thumb was that we wanted only green slope within that box. Some yellow along the edges of the box could be OK depending if we were looking at a platinum course versus a CC course or whatever. This was always an imperfect method because the slope colour could vary depending on where on the green you were, distance from the hole, etc. It’s impossible to test a green enough to account for more than a couple putt possibilities on any given hole. Aside from the inevitable couple of complaints each week from the sore loser that didn’t score as well as they thought they should have and wanted to blame everyone but themselves this system worked pretty well.

2K21 kind of changed the way the green grids worked and suddenly yellow and even orange slope wasn’t anywhere near as bad as it had been in the earlier games. We quickly realized that the 9 box was no longer as relevant as it used to be and it was no longer used while rangering. Instead we basically shifted to a straight up judgement call on the part of whatever ranger was playing the course. It’s normally fairly easy to tell the difference between a difficult or challenging green and an unfair one. The schedulers are also very good at knowing what kind of greens work or don’t work for their levels and some weeks they want to be more challenging than others. Even using this method of rangering which was far more open ended than previously I think it worked out well the overwhelming majority of the time.

In 2K23 we’ve so far gone back to the 9 box system of rangering again but mixed with some judgement calls as well. Thus far the slope colour has seemed relevant again so we’ve erred on the side of caution to hopefully ease some of the transition period from old game to new. Will we continue this way as everyone adjusts? Maybe, maybe not. I assure you the schedulers pay attention to feedback that is received on the weekly threads to get an idea of what is or isn’t working. If you thinks the hole locations on any given course are “absurd” then speak up in that weekly thread.

Just don’t be the person that didn’t play well that week and then whine because obviously it was the greens fault and not yours. If you can provide details or insight into what you didn’t like and possibly even include video or screenshots that is infinitely more helpful to everyone. Just telling the rangers and schedulers that you don’t like the job they’re doing without providing specific examples is basically useless and none of us are really going to care that much to make changes that will inevitably still be complained about with no explanation by a vocal minority.

As far as adjusting the courses picked to account for things like tempo inconsistency or other game mechanic issues, sorry. I’m sure you know that isn’t something we can possibly account for and still use courses that are actually fun and/or challenging to play. In the end just be patient. If you thought things were mostly done well last season as far as greens and course selection went, I’m sure we’ll all get there again. You’ll get better at the game. Designers will get better at making courses suited for the game. Schedulers and rangers will get better at noticing all these things. Then we can start the whole process over again in a year or two when the next game comes out just like we did this time. And the time before that. And the time before that. And the time before that.

[bubbadave]

Dec 11, 2022 8:32:43 GMT -5 MrQueez said:

Sage advice from Lindsay. 

Course management is key.  One example is you should not always go for it on a drivable par 4.  In my Plat play along at Necedah Pines I went for it on hole #12 the first 3 rounds and the result was 3 pars.  In round 4 I laid up and made and easy birdie.  My goal was to get through the 4 rounds without a bogey and I was able to accomplish that.

TP

What are these drivable par-4s of which you speak? My choice of rhythm and club fittings geared towards larger grey area sweet spots has relegated me to averaging about 285 yards unless downhill and/or wind at my back. The unintended consequence is not getting into serious trouble on most holes because I'm not tempted to "go for it". That said, if I muff a tee shot on a long par-4, I might be in trouble. My take? Everyone is different and my scores have improved despite not being able to drive for show, so to speak.

[jack12k10]

Good post Boffo.

[mrohde4]

Dec 11, 2022 8:56:08 GMT -5 boffo said:

Spoiler alert:wall of text ahead.

Since the rangers are the ones that are doing the testing, and we’re mildly being called out here I guess I might as well respond.

Obviously we’re working with a brand new game here that has made some tweaks and changes to what we’d been used to for the previous two years. That means we’re in the learning curve for all aspects of a new course being put on Tour. From rangers to schedulers to designers to the players themselves this adjustment will take a bit of time and will seem most jarring now when the two year established status quo of things has abruptly been changed. This will improve given time.

Designers will start making courses more optimized for the way the new game plays. Players will learn the in’s and out’s of 2K23 and leave behind the stuff that no longer works the same from 2K21. HB will release updates that may or may not make the game better and may or may not start the learning curve all over again. From a ranger and scheduler standpoint we’ll learn what does and doesn’t play well across all the different levels of the Tour.

As far as rangering goes, strictly from a green testing perspective I’ll go over the process. Back in TGC, TGC2, and TGC19 we used the 9 box rule as the barebones fundamental. The 9 box is the square of the green grid containing the hole and then the 8 squares that surround that one. The basic rule of thumb was that we wanted only green slope within that box. Some yellow along the edges of the box could be OK depending if we were looking at a platinum course versus a CC course or whatever. This was always an imperfect method because the slope colour could vary depending on where on the green you were, distance from the hole, etc. It’s impossible to test a green enough to account for more than a couple putt possibilities on any given hole. Aside from the inevitable couple of complaints each week from the sore loser that didn’t score as well as they thought they should have and wanted to blame everyone but themselves this system worked pretty well.

2K21 kind of changed the way the green grids worked and suddenly yellow and even orange slope wasn’t anywhere near as bad as it had been in the earlier games. We quickly realized that the 9 box was no longer as relevant as it used to be and it was no longer used while rangering. Instead we basically shifted to a straight up judgement call on the part of whatever ranger was playing the course. It’s normally fairly easy to tell the difference between a difficult or challenging green and an unfair one. The schedulers are also very good at knowing what kind of greens work or don’t work for their levels and some weeks they want to be more challenging than others. Even using this method of rangering which was far more open ended than previously I think it worked out well the overwhelming majority of the time.

In 2K23 we’ve so far gone back to the 9 box system of rangering again but mixed with some judgement calls as well. Thus far the slope colour has seemed relevant again so we’ve erred on the side of caution to hopefully ease some of the transition period from old game to new. Will we continue this way as everyone adjusts? Maybe, maybe not. I assure you the schedulers pay attention to feedback that is received on the weekly threads to get an idea of what is or isn’t working. If you thinks the hole locations on any given course are “absurd” then speak up in that weekly thread.

Just don’t be the person that didn’t play well that week and then whine because obviously it was the greens fault and not yours. If you can provide details or insight into what you didn’t like and possibly even include video or screenshots that is infinitely more helpful to everyone. Just telling the rangers and schedulers that you don’t like the job they’re doing without providing specific examples is basically useless and none of us are really going to care that much to make changes that will inevitably still be complained about with no explanation by a vocal minority.

As far as adjusting the courses picked to account for things like tempo inconsistency or other game mechanic issues, sorry. I’m sure you know that isn’t something we can possibly account for and still use courses that are actually fun and/or challenging to play. In the end just be patient. If you thought things were mostly done well last season as far as greens and course selection went, I’m sure we’ll all get there again. You’ll get better at the game. Designers will get better at making courses suited for the game. Schedulers and rangers will get better at noticing all these things. Then we can start the whole process over again in a year or two when the next game comes out just like we did this time. And the time before that. And the time before that. And the time before that.

The summary of a ranger’s role and evolution of the standards is certainly appreciated and walls of text are always welcome. Rangers are perpetually under appreciated in this league. The vast majority of messages directed your way are probably negative, and that’s unfair. When a fun/fair/enjoyable course and setup is selected, collectively we should be better in communicating that.

I understood your response’s general theme as a call for patience on course selection and rangering.

But I took the OP as less a disparagement of course selection and more a critique of course condition decisions and the prohibition of HB’s magic balls in light of 2K23’s new physics. He also made no mention of playing poorly. Certainly those factors are part of a ranger’s duties, and perhaps the OP could have provided some deeper context.

But he’s not alone.

Just yesterday, a very very well-known streamer and top “nextmaker” tweeted that anything above 155 “should be banned,” that fast greens are “unbearably bad” and that he was taking a hiatus from TGCTours.

With this version’s increased rollout especially on the standard ball, I think it’s fair to keep the conversation alive. Defending your ranger staff and explaining the process helps to explain perspective, it just doesn’t help foster conversation when the message is to lay shame on the OP for perceived mild criticism.

[sroel908]

Dec 13, 2022 12:59:39 GMT -5 mrohde4 said:

Dec 11, 2022 8:56:08 GMT -5 boffo said:

Spoiler alert:wall of text ahead.

Since the rangers are the ones that are doing the testing, and we’re mildly being called out here I guess I might as well respond.

Obviously we’re working with a brand new game here that has made some tweaks and changes to what we’d been used to for the previous two years. That means we’re in the learning curve for all aspects of a new course being put on Tour. From rangers to schedulers to designers to the players themselves this adjustment will take a bit of time and will seem most jarring now when the two year established status quo of things has abruptly been changed. This will improve given time.

Designers will start making courses more optimized for the way the new game plays. Players will learn the in’s and out’s of 2K23 and leave behind the stuff that no longer works the same from 2K21. HB will release updates that may or may not make the game better and may or may not start the learning curve all over again. From a ranger and scheduler standpoint we’ll learn what does and doesn’t play well across all the different levels of the Tour.

As far as rangering goes, strictly from a green testing perspective I’ll go over the process. Back in TGC, TGC2, and TGC19 we used the 9 box rule as the barebones fundamental. The 9 box is the square of the green grid containing the hole and then the 8 squares that surround that one. The basic rule of thumb was that we wanted only green slope within that box. Some yellow along the edges of the box could be OK depending if we were looking at a platinum course versus a CC course or whatever. This was always an imperfect method because the slope colour could vary depending on where on the green you were, distance from the hole, etc. It’s impossible to test a green enough to account for more than a couple putt possibilities on any given hole. Aside from the inevitable couple of complaints each week from the sore loser that didn’t score as well as they thought they should have and wanted to blame everyone but themselves this system worked pretty well.

2K21 kind of changed the way the green grids worked and suddenly yellow and even orange slope wasn’t anywhere near as bad as it had been in the earlier games. We quickly realized that the 9 box was no longer as relevant as it used to be and it was no longer used while rangering. Instead we basically shifted to a straight up judgement call on the part of whatever ranger was playing the course. It’s normally fairly easy to tell the difference between a difficult or challenging green and an unfair one. The schedulers are also very good at knowing what kind of greens work or don’t work for their levels and some weeks they want to be more challenging than others. Even using this method of rangering which was far more open ended than previously I think it worked out well the overwhelming majority of the time.

In 2K23 we’ve so far gone back to the 9 box system of rangering again but mixed with some judgement calls as well. Thus far the slope colour has seemed relevant again so we’ve erred on the side of caution to hopefully ease some of the transition period from old game to new. Will we continue this way as everyone adjusts? Maybe, maybe not. I assure you the schedulers pay attention to feedback that is received on the weekly threads to get an idea of what is or isn’t working. If you thinks the hole locations on any given course are “absurd” then speak up in that weekly thread.

Just don’t be the person that didn’t play well that week and then whine because obviously it was the greens fault and not yours. If you can provide details or insight into what you didn’t like and possibly even include video or screenshots that is infinitely more helpful to everyone. Just telling the rangers and schedulers that you don’t like the job they’re doing without providing specific examples is basically useless and none of us are really going to care that much to make changes that will inevitably still be complained about with no explanation by a vocal minority.

As far as adjusting the courses picked to account for things like tempo inconsistency or other game mechanic issues, sorry. I’m sure you know that isn’t something we can possibly account for and still use courses that are actually fun and/or challenging to play. In the end just be patient. If you thought things were mostly done well last season as far as greens and course selection went, I’m sure we’ll all get there again. You’ll get better at the game. Designers will get better at making courses suited for the game. Schedulers and rangers will get better at noticing all these things. Then we can start the whole process over again in a year or two when the next game comes out just like we did this time. And the time before that. And the time before that. And the time before that.

The summary of a ranger’s role and evolution of the standards is certainly appreciated and walls of text are always welcome. Rangers are perpetually under appreciated in this league. The vast majority of messages directed your way are probably negative, and that’s unfair. When a fun/fair/enjoyable course and setup is selected, collectively we should be better in communicating that.

I understood your response’s general theme as a call for patience on course selection and rangering.

But I took the OP as less a disparagement of course selection and more a critique of course condition decisions and the prohibition of HB’s magic balls in light of 2K23’s new physics. He also made no mention of playing poorly. Certainly those factors are part of a ranger’s duties, and perhaps the OP could have provided some deeper context.

But he’s not alone.

Just yesterday, a very very well-known streamer and top “nextmaker” tweeted that anything above 155 “should be banned,” that fast greens are “unbearably bad” and that he was taking a hiatus from TGCTours.

With this version’s increased rollout especially on the standard ball, I think it’s fair to keep the conversation alive. Defending your ranger staff and explaining the process helps to explain perspective, it just doesn’t help foster conversation when the message is to lay shame on the OP for perceived mild criticism.

Ranger here.

I saw the tweet you're referring to, and responded to it. And I will say the same thing here:

1) PGA 2K23 is a game that is designed to be played with consumable golf balls. The way the courses play shows to me that 2K/HB wanted people to shell out VC for golf balls that slow greens speeds down and make the surfaces softer. I was 100% against the use of consumable golf balls in TGCT, but it is pretty obvious to see why they are in the game. So I do think there's a bit of validity to the discussion about whether or not banning them is the right thing.

2) The course he's talking about was tested for tour play in November, prior to the ability to ban the consumable golf balls. So all ranger play was done with the knowledge that (at that time) most players would be using a ball that would slow speeds down.

3) The course he's talking about is meant to be hard...it was a Plat course last season. Some weeks are tougher than others.

4) We are only 6 weeks in, and the designer was/is still buggy, so new courses designed for play in 2K23 have been slow to come out. Most courses used on tour to this point are 2K21 ports. It's just requiring a bit more patience this time around to have courses specifically built in 2K23, with the gameplay from 2K23 in mind.

[Griz891]

This game has awful green rollout. The worse i've ever seen since this game started. Not much you can do about it but try to land short and hope the ball rolls up nice and slow.

[SeventyFour]

Dec 11, 2022 8:56:08 GMT -5 boffo said:

Spoiler alert:wall of text ahead.

Since the rangers are the ones that are doing the testing, and we’re mildly being called out here I guess I might as well respond.

Obviously we’re working with a brand new game here that has made some tweaks and changes to what we’d been used to for the previous two years. That means we’re in the learning curve for all aspects of a new course being put on Tour. From rangers to schedulers to designers to the players themselves this adjustment will take a bit of time and will seem most jarring now when the two year established status quo of things has abruptly been changed. This will improve given time.

Designers will start making courses more optimized for the way the new game plays. Players will learn the in’s and out’s of 2K23 and leave behind the stuff that no longer works the same from 2K21. HB will release updates that may or may not make the game better and may or may not start the learning curve all over again. From a ranger and scheduler standpoint we’ll learn what does and doesn’t play well across all the different levels of the Tour.

As far as rangering goes, strictly from a green testing perspective I’ll go over the process. Back in TGC, TGC2, and TGC19 we used the 9 box rule as the barebones fundamental. The 9 box is the square of the green grid containing the hole and then the 8 squares that surround that one. The basic rule of thumb was that we wanted only green slope within that box. Some yellow along the edges of the box could be OK depending if we were looking at a platinum course versus a CC course or whatever. This was always an imperfect method because the slope colour could vary depending on where on the green you were, distance from the hole, etc. It’s impossible to test a green enough to account for more than a couple putt possibilities on any given hole. Aside from the inevitable couple of complaints each week from the sore loser that didn’t score as well as they thought they should have and wanted to blame everyone but themselves this system worked pretty well.

2K21 kind of changed the way the green grids worked and suddenly yellow and even orange slope wasn’t anywhere near as bad as it had been in the earlier games. We quickly realized that the 9 box was no longer as relevant as it used to be and it was no longer used while rangering. Instead we basically shifted to a straight up judgement call on the part of whatever ranger was playing the course. It’s normally fairly easy to tell the difference between a difficult or challenging green and an unfair one. The schedulers are also very good at knowing what kind of greens work or don’t work for their levels and some weeks they want to be more challenging than others. Even using this method of rangering which was far more open ended than previously I think it worked out well the overwhelming majority of the time.

In 2K23 we’ve so far gone back to the 9 box system of rangering again but mixed with some judgement calls as well. Thus far the slope colour has seemed relevant again so we’ve erred on the side of caution to hopefully ease some of the transition period from old game to new. Will we continue this way as everyone adjusts? Maybe, maybe not. I assure you the schedulers pay attention to feedback that is received on the weekly threads to get an idea of what is or isn’t working. If you thinks the hole locations on any given course are “absurd” then speak up in that weekly thread.

Just don’t be the person that didn’t play well that week and then whine because obviously it was the greens fault and not yours. If you can provide details or insight into what you didn’t like and possibly even include video or screenshots that is infinitely more helpful to everyone. Just telling the rangers and schedulers that you don’t like the job they’re doing without providing specific examples is basically useless and none of us are really going to care that much to make changes that will inevitably still be complained about with no explanation by a vocal minority.

As far as adjusting the courses picked to account for things like tempo inconsistency or other game mechanic issues, sorry. I’m sure you know that isn’t something we can possibly account for and still use courses that are actually fun and/or challenging to play. In the end just be patient. If you thought things were mostly done well last season as far as greens and course selection went, I’m sure we’ll all get there again. You’ll get better at the game. Designers will get better at making courses suited for the game. Schedulers and rangers will get better at noticing all these things. Then we can start the whole process over again in a year or two when the next game comes out just like we did this time. And the time before that. And the time before that. And the time before that.

Per-fect-ion.

[sroel908]

I also just want to add that I think there can and should be discussions and feedback about how courses play, how setups are playing out, etc. Everyone is still getting their bearings in this game, and even the game itself seems to change how it plays by the week.