[crow357]

Just gonna throw this out there.  I'm working on a course now with med soft fairways and med fast greens.  I can fly a 3w into most of the larger greens on the course and it'll hold.  But bounce once on the fairway or fringe?  You'll be pitching back from the other side.  Now, I don't play enough real golf to know if that's what's supposed to happen but it just seems off to me. 

[HB_LorinB]

Well if it is a course design thing then can you tell me a course that has softer greens? I would like to try it. Every course I have played the greens seems to act the same on approach shots.

Off the top of my head it is hard to pull out courses...but I just played The Golf Club at Hunter Meadows and it had very receptive greens for the most part.  I could hit anything from a 4 iron up and hold the greens quite well.

I will try to find other examples for you and post them here.  Remember, the green speed you see on the course info screen before playing is not what determines how well the green holds...that is what determines the speed of the ball roll.  Firmness setting in the GNCD impacts how well the ball holds more significantly.

[AdamV HB]

Adam: Just so all are clear here, is the official HB position that the current ball physics pertaining to spin on the ball (this thread) are correct?

We do believe that we have a fairly accurate simulation yes.  However, we are more than open to look at these things when the community feels strongly about it.  As mentioned above, a big factor that influences holding the greens comes down to course design and a balance between firmness and green speeds.  If you design a green that is too firm and too fast for the degree of slope you have given your green, I'm sorry, it's going to be hard to hold that green.  If there are no suitable landing areas and your ball hits a slope facing away from you, I'm sorry, the ball is going to roll more than you thought it would.  I just saw Lorin stick a green with a 4 iron on twitch with hardly any roll.  Above, something along the lines of, "Course Designers shouldn't have to make unrealistic greens to compensate for unrealistic physics" was mentioned.  I would 100% agree.  At the same time, the last thing we want to do is compensate for unrealistic greens with unrealistic physics.  Another thing we do not want to happen, is to have player's that have learned how to hold greens through practice and learning how to use the shot shaper along with well selected shot placements suddenly lose their competitive edge by making the game artificially easy for players that just stand and bang.  Now, all that being said, WE ARE looking closely at this and we do have plans to give course designers more control over a green's receptiveness apart from the fairway firmness setting.

[ajl5313]

@Adam:  be interested to hear your comments to McBogga's well articulated post.

Also not sure what you mean by "practice to hold greens". Could you elaborate how one practices that?

[IDontShineShoesAnymore]

   Saw a very interesting comment a few weeks back that may help here. They stated that greens are designed with slope from back to front to make approach shots "stick" and be more receptive. Perhaps that would help in holding the greens. I agree 1,000 % on this subject though, on a lot of the "top" courses I play, you almost have to land the ball in front of the green (fairway) to hold a green. Simply not fun or realistic. This has made me look for courses designed with more forgiving greens and has greatly increased my enjoyment. The better players (not being one of them) seem to have little problem with this, however for the average player, its a real concern. Shorter irons seem perfect, its mainly the 8 iron down. A lot of courses are made "harder" by creating long par 4's. It's next to impossible to hold most greens with a long iron presently.
   One positive is we get lots of practice with chip shots from the fringe, lol. These are my only birdie chances on some courses.

[AdamV HB]

@Adam:  be interested to hear your comments to McBogga's well articulated post.

Also not sure what you mean by "practice to hold greens". Could you elaborate how one practices that?

It was a good post and he his 100% correct about how spin loft works.  Here is a good video that discusses some of the concepts http://youtu.be/pdPXkAO8UlU. He is also correct about us not wanting to alienate casual gamers with an over complicated mechanic. This is why we kind of simplified things into the shot shaper mechanic.

As far as never "lofting up" a 3 iron. He is also correct. You really wouldn't ever do that. But, you could if you wanted to so we felt why not let you in the game. Like in this video https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7alj9n4x4sA.  We used to snap to the open stance animation when lofting up this much but it looked bad so we took it out.

And by "practice" I just meant through playing experience.

[ajl5313]

@Adam:  be interested to hear your comments to McBogga's well articulated post.

Also not sure what you mean by "practice to hold greens". Could you elaborate how one practices that?

It was a good post and he his 100% correct about how spin loft works.  Here is a good video that discusses some of the concepts http://youtu.be/pdPXkAO8UlU. He is also correct about us not wanting to alienate casual gamers with an over complicated mechanic. This is why we kind of simplified things into the shot shaper mechanic.

As far as never "lofting up" a 3 iron. He is also correct. You really wouldn't ever do that. But, you could if you wanted to so we felt why not let you in the game. Like in this video https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7alj9n4x4sA.  We used to snap to the open stance animation when lofting up this much but it looked bad so we took it out.

And by "practice" I just meant through playing experience.

I guess I just back to the beginning.
One way or another, too many balls don't hold the greens when they should.
Whatever all the reasons, it makes the approach shots a lot less fun, a lot of the time.

[Pubknight]

I'll be honest, I've generally avoided using the Loft Up mechanic.
It struck me as a bit cheap, and the grid just allows far too much of it.
Maybe if the grid was 2x2 instead of the current 8x8 or whatever it is it would make more sense to me.
But as I'm reading Adam's comments, I'm beginning to think that the Loft Up is the design intention.

To use a golf example, since most (if not all) of us posting in this thread seem to be real golfers struggling with it, what about this:
- 0 added loft, playing the 'stock shot' is like golfing with a Top Flite golf ball.
- Adding one 'gridline' up on loft would be more like playing with a ProV1.

I'm going to agree to disagree with Adam as the 'feel' of approach shots to me, is just wrong... and in general it's all about the first bounce, and the balls behaviour after that.
But if HB doesn't see it as an issue, that means it's likely never to hit the radar for adjustment... so for the player, it's a matter of adjusting to what is there.
That's disappointing of course.
I was hoping more for a response of "it's something we think could be a bit better, perhaps with the ball physics, perhaps the green firmness needs some looking at, etc"

I do find it kind of ironic that with the talk of course design issues on the greens, the bulk of my opinion on this matter came from my initial time playing, when all I played were official courses.  I think in a lot of ways the Official Courses are some of the worst offenders (Flin Flon is a pretty good example of what I see as approach shot problems).

It's a shame, as I do think it is something that could be better.
Or at least share some of the backspin info to reassure?
A good rule of thumb with irons (in real life) is about 1000 rpm of backspin per number on the iron.
So a 7 iron is typically good for about 7000 rpm of backspin (on a stock shot without opening/closing the face).
I would be extremely interested in what the backspin figures for a Golf Club stock 7 iron shot are.

[McBogga]

It was a good post and he his 100% correct about how spin loft works.  Here is a good video that discusses some of the concepts http://youtu.be/pdPXkAO8UlU. He is also correct about us not wanting to alienate casual gamers with an over complicated mechanic. This is why we kind of simplified things into the shot shaper mechanic.

Thank you. No way to please everyone. That's why I want an optional "pro" mode with these tweaks... 

As far as never "lofting up" a 3 iron. He is also correct. You really wouldn't ever do that. But, you could if you wanted to so we felt why not let you in the game. Like in this video https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7alj9n4x4sA.  We used to snap to the open stance animation when lofting up this much but it looked bad so we took it out.

But - he is also slicing these which is exactly what happens when trying this with a 3-iron. Try doing the same thing with right to left spin. Impossible, just maybe you could straighten it out but would likely blade 9/10 trying that. Unless you are this guy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jl4qMb0TUc0. In game its the same difficulty no matter which way you want the spin. Most realistic would be for the grid to move (snap) to a diagonal from low left to high right. On this diagonal there would be minimal penalty as it represents just opening or closing club face. Still a smaller cone when moving farther from center, maybe same penalty as straight up/down today. When moving away from this line however, there should very quickly be severe penalties when moving to the top left and slightly less moving towards bottom right - simulating that it is somewhat easier to hit a low slice than a high hook. Also introduce a large chance of either blading the ball or duffing it when moving far away from the basic line. Much less penalty with irons from the tee as this allows you to hit up on the ball which makes the high hook much easier.

And by "practice" I just meant through playing experience.

[ajl5313]

I'll be honest, I've generally avoided using the Loft Up mechanic.
It struck me as a bit cheap, and the grid just allows far too much of it.


But if HB doesn't see it as an issue, that means it's likely never to hit the radar for adjustment... so for the player, it's a matter of adjusting to what is there.

That's disappointing of course.

I was hoping more for a response of "it's something we think could be a bit better, perhaps with the ball physics, perhaps the green firmness needs some looking at, etc"

Totally agree

[AdamV HB]

I believe I also said we are looking closely at this.  We are looking at all aspects, backspin lost on the bounce, separating green firmness into it's own setting, default firmness and green slope settings, etc.  What we won't do is make any knee-jerk reactions.  Watching this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-cl=84359240&v=xgld_edclXY&x-yt-ts=1421782837&feature=player_detailpage#t=233), Tim has zero problems holding the green with a 7 iron on hole 6 of Jebel Ali Emirates.  I myself gave this course a test and held hole 3 with a 4 iron stock shot.  The firmness settings are normal and the green speeds are med-fast.  As far as the stock shot for the 7 iron, it's just over 7000 rpm. 

[Pubknight]

I can't speak for everyone, only myself, and Adam I do appreciate you engaging us in the discussion.
And yes, you did say you were continuing to look at it.
But, to be fair, you have used a few examples of holding greens with no problems.
Which, without the aid of conversational tone, and only relying on reading forum words, could be interpreted as minimizing the issue to a degree.
(not being confrontational, just sharing the view from the other side).

You obviously have a much better idea of what's going on behind the pixels than any of us.
All we can really do is share our thoughts and observations and 'feels'.
Personally, I do that from the perspective of comparing The Golf Club to my real life golf.
It seems as though others in the thread do the same.

I think approach shot roll out can be a bit better than it currently is.
And it's not broken by any stretch... it just seems a bit 'off'.
To me, it's a bit of a tweak that's needed, not an overhaul.  Fine tuning if you will.
It sounds/reads like you are open to looking at that sort of stuff, and that is appreciated.

[ajl5313]

I can't speak for everyone, only myself, and Adam I do appreciate you engaging us in the discussion.
And yes, you did say you were continuing to look at it.
But, to be fair, you have used a few examples of holding greens with no problems.
Which, without the aid of conversational tone, and only relying on reading forum words, could be interpreted as minimizing the issue to a degree.
(not being confrontational, just sharing the view from the other side).

You obviously have a much better idea of what's going on behind the pixels than any of us.
All we can really do is share our thoughts and observations and 'feels'.
Personally, I do that from the perspective of comparing The Golf Club to my real life golf.
It seems as though others in the thread do the same.

I think approach shot roll out can be a bit better than it currently is.
And it's not broken by any stretch... it just seems a bit 'off'.
To me, it's a bit of a tweak that's needed, not an overhaul.  Fine tuning if you will.
It sounds/reads like you are open to looking at that sort of stuff, and that is appreciated.

Very well said - Agree 100%

[Pubknight]

Thanks.

I just read Adam's post in a thread talking about green firmness in the GNCD sub-forum, where he said (with respect to green vs fairway firmness):

We definitely want to separate this into two settings.

Perhaps it really is that simple, and very well could be.
That still doesn't prevent bad design with concrete greens... but we can choose to not play those courses.

Previously, I was looking in the Feature/Content Requested thread stickied, where it reads this:
"Separate slider for green and fairway firmness   - Not Planned"

So Adam's post that I quoted seems to be a bit of a change.
To quote/paraphrase Caddyshack, as I so often do: "So we've got that going for us... which is nice".

[HB_LorinB]

Thanks.

I just read Adam's post in a thread talking about green firmness in the GNCD sub-forum, where he said (with respect to green vs fairway firmness):

We definitely want to separate this into two settings.

Perhaps it really is that simple, and very well could be.
That still doesn't prevent bad design with concrete greens... but we can choose to not play those courses.

Previously, I was looking in the Feature/Content Requested thread stickied, where it reads this:
"Separate slider for green and fairway firmness   - Not Planned"

So Adam's post that I quoted seems to be a bit of a change.
To quote/paraphrase Caddyshack, as I so often do: "So we've got that going for us... which is nice".

Hey Pub - I just went and changed that in the Feature post.  That must have been an error on my part.