Dynasty Mode - NCAA Football 12 Wish List & Feedback [Archive]

SmoothPancakes

07-21-2010, 12:43 AM

Player Discipline Rating - It used to be on the previous gen versions, but I think with the recent sanctions that the NCAA have been imposing on teams perhaps a variation of what was done last gen can make its way back.

I would only support this (assuming EA would then bring back the program discipline system like they had back on 06 or 08 or whatever it was) if it worked right! Whatever year that was, where you had to assign recruiting, training, and discipline points before the season, once you got in season, by like week 6, you had 10 players in trouble/suspended and all your discipline points were used up and gone, resulting in a bunch of penalties from the NCAA.

It's a great idea in theory, but EA's attempt at it in the past failed HORRIBLY. There is no way a school, with the best of the best of disciplined players in the game, should be getting hit with penalties after only the first season of a dynasty simply because the game decided to make 20 of their players get in trouble during the season and use up all of those 2/3rds of the points you had allocated towards discipline (leaving you with very little points to use for training and recruiting) by week 6 or 7 of the season.

If EA can fix that horrible train wreck of a disaster and actually make it a viable system that the game doesn't abuse you with, then I wouldn't mind seeing it possibly make a return. But only if they actually make it work and not be some cheap piece of junk that screws over every team in college football by the end of the 1st season.

cdj

07-21-2010, 01:04 AM

I agree with SP. While I liked the idea behind Player Discipline, the mythical, magical point system was horrible for the reasons he mentioned.

JBHuskers

07-21-2010, 01:07 AM

In talking with Russ at Community Day, medical redshirts create a lot of problems, but it is something they're still trying to do.

SmoothPancakes

07-21-2010, 01:12 AM

Didn't medical redshirts used to be in the game? I swear I remember being able to apply for a medical redshirt, maybe back in the PS2 days, when a player would go down in like week 3 with a season ending injury, and then you'd get a pop-up response saying your request was either accepted or it was denied for "enter reason here".

HuskerBlitz

07-21-2010, 01:20 AM

Yeah, that was in the PS2 days.

SmoothPancakes

07-21-2010, 01:23 AM

Yeah, that was in the PS2 days.

Damn, I guess those really were the good days in NCAA after all. :D

JeffHCross

07-21-2010, 01:32 AM

Damn, I guess those really were the good days in NCAA after all. :DYes and no. While you could apply for a medical redshirt, that feature didn't get added until, at the earliest, NCAA 07. So it was a looooooonnnnnnnnnngggggggggg time before that feature was part of the game.

SmoothPancakes

07-21-2010, 01:36 AM

Yes and no. While you could apply for a medical redshirt, that feature didn't get added until, at the earliest, NCAA 07. So it was a looooooonnnnnnnnnngggggggggg time before that feature was part of the game.

Ahh yes, now I remember it. It would have been NCAA 08, which was my last one before I jumped to 360. That was the one that had both the medical redshirts and the train wreck of a disaster that was the Program Discipline system.

JeffHCross

07-21-2010, 01:44 AM

Btw, Smooth, does 5 games in 7 years winning by a touchdown or less really constitute "owning"?

;)

I mean, beating, yes .. winning, yes ... but owning?

SmoothPancakes

07-21-2010, 01:52 AM

Hey, they may not be giant margin, pretty wins, but when Navy is 15-1 against Air Force and Army combined, and 8-0 solely against Army since 2002, then yes, I consider that owning. Ask the past 8 senior classes at Army what they consider it. :P

That and Navy now owns the longest streak for outright possession of the Commander-in-Chief's Trophy with 7 years in a row (and soon to be 8), beating the previous best of 6 in a row held by Air Force from 1997-2002. ;)

Kingpin32

07-21-2010, 01:58 AM

I would only support this (assuming EA would then bring back the program discipline system like they had back on 06 or 08 or whatever it was) if it worked right! Whatever year that was, where you had to assign recruiting, training, and discipline points before the season, once you got in season, by like week 6, you had 10 players in trouble/suspended and all your discipline points were used up and gone, resulting in a bunch of penalties from the NCAA.

It's a great idea in theory, but EA's attempt at it in the past failed HORRIBLY. There is no way a school, with the best of the best of disciplined players in the game, should be getting hit with penalties after only the first season of a dynasty simply because the game decided to make 20 of their players get in trouble during the season and use up all of those 2/3rds of the points you had allocated towards discipline (leaving you with very little points to use for training and recruiting) by week 6 or 7 of the season.

If EA can fix that horrible train wreck of a disaster and actually make it a viable system that the game doesn't abuse you with, then I wouldn't mind seeing it possibly make a return. But only if they actually make it work and not be some cheap piece of junk that screws over every team in college football by the end of the 1st season.

I definitely agree. The way they had it back then sucked greatly, but I think after 4-5 years they can think of ways to use it a lot better.

I think if they tied the prestige of the school along with coach prestige (another reason for real coaches), which can influence how a player acts, at least in a video game, then it has the potential to add another touch of realism. But it shouldn't have any type of point system involved.

JeffHCross

07-21-2010, 02:01 AM

Ask the past 8 senior classes at Army what they consider it. :PI didn't disagree with the Army part of the statement ;) That has been an owning.

SmoothPancakes

07-21-2010, 02:06 AM

I definitely agree. The way they had it back then sucked greatly, but I think after 4-5 years they can think of ways to use it a lot better.

I think if they tied the prestige of the school along with coach prestige (another reason for real coaches), which can influence how a player acts, at least in a video game, then it has the potential to add another touch of realism. But it shouldn't have any type of point system involved.

Yeah, I don't know what EA was thinking back then. That was just a massive disaster. Like I said earlier, it has a lot of potential and is a great idea in theory. It's just taking that theory and making it a reality. If EA can figure out a way to do that, then it could be an awesome addition to bring back. It's just going to depend on if EA could actually come up with that stroke of genius and make it work as to whether or not a reappearance of something along those lines would be a success or a massive failure just like the first time.

Kingpin32

07-21-2010, 02:11 AM

Yeah, I don't know what EA was thinking back then. That was just a massive disaster. Like I said earlier, it has a lot of potential and is a great idea in theory. It's just taking that theory and making it a reality. If EA can figure out a way to do that, then it could be an awesome addition to bring back. It's just going to depend on if EA could actually come up with that stroke of genius and make it work as to whether or not a reappearance of something along those lines would be a success or a massive failure just like the first time.

I look at it as one of those things where if EA thinks they have a system that greatly outdoes the first iteration of it, then by all means introduce it to us. But if they insist it has some type of point system, then just let the suggestion go by the wayside.

SmoothPancakes

07-21-2010, 02:23 AM

I look at it as one of those things where if EA thinks they have a system that greatly outdoes the first iteration of it, then by all means introduce it to us. But if they insist it has some type of point system, then just let the suggestion go by the wayside.

Amen to that. If it's anything similar to their first iteration of it, just let it go! If they come up with a totally new to do it and make it work, alright, I'm willing to try it out and see how it does in a future edition.

JeffHCross

07-23-2010, 11:07 PM

It seems like every usage of R3 in Dynasty Mode in NCAA 10 has been swapped with Triangle this go around. Personally, I find it more likely that I'm going to be wanting "More Info" on players and recruits than switching teams ... and I find R3 to be much easier to hit than triangle. I'm sure I'll get used to it, but I don't see a reason for the swap.

Boucher

07-23-2010, 11:14 PM

I remember in NCAA 08 you had the option of choosing medical red shirt or something else

E: It was summer drills, lead blocking controls or in game saves

ebin

07-24-2010, 01:11 AM

baseballplyrmvp

07-24-2010, 07:53 PM

i'd like to see more slots available for setting your depth charts. like 5 slots for qb's, 5-6 for runningbacks, 10 for wr's and corners, 5-6 for d-ends and d-tackles. we dont even need to have every slot filled but i think it'd be nice so that you could be able to sub more players in.

or instead of adding more spots to the depth chart, it'd be better if we could assign certain players to sub in for certain starters.

JeffHCross

07-24-2010, 09:41 PM

i'd like to see more slots available for setting your depth charts. like 5 slots for qb's, 5-6 for runningbacks, 10 for wr's and corners, 5-6 for d-ends and d-tackles. we dont even need to have every slot filled but i think it'd be nice so that you could be able to sub more players in.This would be very cool for Dynasty players, especially those of us who occasionally use Mass Subs.

JeffHCross

07-31-2010, 12:35 PM

Best "Television Exposure" feedback ever: "Yeah, I think I've seen some of your games on the Ocho". Lmao.

Rudy

07-31-2010, 12:57 PM

The coaches names should be in the roster file. List head coach as a position for all I care. That way I can download the roster names and get coaches. Coaching carousel would be nice.

Discipline is the thing I miss most. I liked seeing guys get in trouble and I liked having the ability to punish them or not. But there should be NO point system. I should be as hard or lenient as I want at any time. In no way should I have to go soft on a guy to conserve a mythical set of points. It should only affect a coach's reputation (loose, moderate, tough) which can affect recruiting. Conversely, if a kid gets in a lot of trouble, a steep punishment shouldn't automatically keep the NCAA away. If you recruit too many hoodlums and 5 of those guys break the law then the NCAA may come down with some punishments (reduced scholarships, not necessarily bowl bans) no matter how hard I punish a kid.

I understand the medical redshirts and spring game but I really didn't care for them that much on the PS2. I don't care either way if they come back.

Rudy

07-31-2010, 01:09 PM

JeffHCross

07-31-2010, 01:23 PM

Rudy, I absolutely agree with your thoughts on discipline, except for how hard you come down on a guy not affecting the NCAA. We've seen time and again that schools that self-impose punishments are given lighter sentences by the NCAA. And that's how it should be. If I'm constantly having to suspend guys, yes, I should probably be looked at pretty closely, but how much punishment I deal out should also be an influencing factor.

What I'd really like to see, related to discipline, is if I'm coming down hard on a guy and he can't hack it, he leaves the program.

ebin

07-31-2010, 04:21 PM

I'd love to have the ability to export box scores and stats from a dynasty so I can post it online. Dynasty wire is cool but it's only for online dynasties. I'd love to be able to have stats e-mailed to me for offline games or exported to text files. If they don't want to do that, at least do a screenshot capture like the Show has. At any time let us take a screenshot of where we are which could be standings, individual stats, team stats, etc. That was a great feature for the Show. MLB 2K10 had a dynasty blog where I could load the box score of every game to an online server. I could also load screenshots and videos and blog about the game. It was really simple and you didn't have to be in an online league to use it.

Completely agree! I was so stoked for Dynasty wire, and while its definitely cool (especially the ability to recruit online), it doesn't provide nearly enough detail or customization. Full game stats automatically emailed after every game would be great. I can't understand why EA won't give us the information from our dynasties (rosters, stats, etc.) in a usable format.

I'd also like to see the ability to promise somebody playing time outside their natural position. If I've got three guys returning at free safety and only one strong safety, I should be able to pitch playing time at SS to that 3* FS who has me at #2 overall, rather than having to settle for a worse player just because his natural position is SS.

Rudy

07-31-2010, 06:04 PM

What I'd really like to see, related to discipline, is if I'm coming down hard on a guy and he can't hack it, he leaves the program.

Absolutely. And if you develop a reputation as a hard ass it should potentially hurt recruiting in some areas while possibly helping a little with good kids. Overall I think it would be awesome if the dirty coaches could recruit a little better but risk NCAA sanctions more often. A random big scandal for a loose coach (like USC's program under Carroll) to punish those guys would be great. True risk and reward.

jaymo76

07-31-2010, 07:07 PM

Absolutely. And if you develop a reputation as a hard ass it should potentially hurt recruiting in some areas while possibly helping a little with good kids. Overall I think it would be awesome if the dirty coaches could recruit a little better but risk NCAA sanctions more often. A random big scandal for a loose coach (like USC's program under Carroll) to punish those guys would be great. True risk and reward.

Excellent ideas!!!

Davidmj444

08-02-2010, 04:27 PM

My only wish. Have been asking for this for 3 years.

Custom Schedules

1.)Being able to schedule anyone you want in any week. Let's say I have Troy on my schedule and I want to also play Auburn. Sometimes it wont let me play those teams together, but if I schedule somebody else like let's say WKU, it will let me, but then it wont let me play Troy.

2.)Re-arranging Conference games. Let's say I'm Clemson and over the years of a dynasty, Boston College becomes a big game each year that could decide the Atlantic Division. Every year the game is in the first few weeks of the season. I would like to be able to re-arrange the game to be late in the season. This also goes for other late season games. The FSU game is always late in the season. Maybe I want to open the season against them like 2007.

3.)Set times and dates for games. This is my most wanted thing. Maybe have a little ticker to scroll (up/down) through times (12:00,1:00,2:00,3:30,4:30,5:00,6:00,7:30,8:00,10: 00) and dates (Sunday-Saturday). Maybe I want a Thursday night matchup against a big rival late in the season at 7:30. Or maybe I want a labor day matchup. This includes 3 of the inevations so far.

4.)Specifications for games. I would like to be able to set Homecoming, Family Weekend, Military Appreciation Day/Night, All-(Primary or Secondary Color) Day/Night, Donors Day/Night, etc. The last home game would also automatically be set for Senior Day/Night. This would help bring in more fans and really help with recruiting. A recruit would have a much better grade rating if you brought him in for a Thursday night matchup at 8:00 with a big rival on Homecoming than say a 12:00 matchup with FCS East on Family Weekend.

5.)Neutral Site games. You guys know this and have seen this posted so I wont go into big detail. You guys don't even have to change up the field art. Just have one of those scrolling tickers like the ones I already talked about to let you scroll through all the stadiums in the game.

I hope the developers take note of these. I thank you if you guys do.

jaymo76

08-02-2010, 05:06 PM

Point three ferom above.... YES.... i have also advocated for this for the past few years. For HOME GAMES we should have the ability to schedule the start time. I'n not too concerned about the day because if has zero impact on the game but a least let us choose day or night.

souljahbill

08-03-2010, 07:12 AM

4.)Specifications for games. I would like to be able to set Homecoming, Family Weekend, Military Appreciation Day/Night, All-(Primary or Secondary Color) Day/Night, Donors Day/Night, etc. The last home game would also automatically be set for Senior Day/Night. This would help bring in more fans and really help with recruiting. A recruit would have a much better grade rating if you brought him in for a Thursday night matchup at 8:00 with a big rival on Homecoming than say a 12:00 matchup with FCS East on Family Weekend.

I said this too in another thread.
(http://www.thegamingtailgate.com/forums/showthread.php?422-Homecoming-amp-Senior-Day)

Davidmj444

08-03-2010, 11:20 AM

I didn't see this. I only come on here every few months or so.

souljahbill

08-05-2010, 01:53 PM

I didn't see this. I only come on here every few months or so.It's not a big deal. I was just showing you where we both agree on the same idea, that's all.

Jayrah

08-13-2010, 11:05 PM

Something cool in addition to a possible AD Mode, via all the changes in the ncaa landscape recently, would be a 'Conference President'. This would allow you to also set or be the conference president in charge of lobbying teams into/out of your conference during the offseason. Could be lobbied for 2 seasons down the road or whatever, so that other conferences have a chance to match their conference back up due to a loss or gain in conference. The ability to set 8/10/12 or 16 team conferences would be cool as well.

cdj

08-17-2010, 01:11 PM

4) Dynamic rivals or the ability to change/set rivals

I really like the idea, but would you (or anyone else who wants this) also want something in the game to make Rivalry Games seem bigger or different? If so, what?

Right now, there's a few text references to games being a Rivalry Game, but nothing physically different that I can tell or remember.

Sinister

08-17-2010, 01:42 PM

the fans should be louder if that's possible the commentary around the game should be tailored to the rivalary

ebin

08-18-2010, 02:24 AM

I really like the idea, but would you (or anyone else who wants this) also want something in the game to make Rivalry Games seem bigger or different? If so, what?

I'm all for dynamic/custom rivalries, and I definitely think rivalry games should feel different from regular games. I'm not exactly sure how to accomplish that, but something that seems relatively simple to add is rivalry-specific commentary (things like how many times the game has been played, records, maybe highlighting one or two specific games where the stakes were high for both teams and what the outcome was). Another thing that would be cool (that somebody else mentioned somewhere) is if the cut scenes were more "chippy" during a big rivalry game.

jaymo76

08-18-2010, 07:35 PM

JeffHCross

08-27-2010, 11:52 PM

In Offline Dynasty, if you're doing a multi-week sim, you can Cancel the sim at any point ... if it's during the season. In the offseason, a sim cannot be cancelled once it starts, even a multi-week sim.

morsdraconis

08-28-2010, 01:57 AM

Don't know how much people have been paying attention to their school's pitches, but I just had my teambuilder dynasty school's A+ Academic Prestige drop to A after 5 years of it not moving. Interesting stuff. Never had it go up or down before. Was kinda bummed about it actually...

JeffHCross

08-29-2010, 03:03 AM

I'm all for dynamic/custom rivalries, and I definitely think rivalry games should feel different from regular games. I'm not exactly sure how to accomplish that, but something that seems relatively simple to add is rivalry-specific commentary (things like how many times the game has been played, records, maybe highlighting one or two specific games where the stakes were high for both teams and what the outcome was)On last-last gen (Playstation), when you would start a rivalry game, there was information about the game displayed on screen during the load screen. Series history and stuff like that. I think it was on the PS2 that they went to having text descriptions of historical events in the rivalry. I may have those switched, but I'm fairly confident I'm right. I'd like to see a return of either of those.

One thing I didn't like about the text descriptions though, was they wouldn't identify anyone involved in the game, even if that player had long graduated. Except Spurrier was referred to once as "The Ol' Ball Coach". If you're not going to (or be able to) put in the names of the players involved, I'd rather just see Series history or some numbers.

JeffHCross

09-04-2010, 12:19 AM

For those of us that are nuts about simulation statistics, I'd really like to see a slider to set the simulated length of a CPU game. Many other games have had it over the years, and I'd really like to see it in NCAA.

As others said earlier in the thread, Medical Redshirts would be a very welcome addition.

Rudy

09-04-2010, 05:18 AM

Adjusting the simulated stats would be nice. I keep my quarter length to 7 minutes and I'm a little on the low side.

jaymo76

09-04-2010, 08:25 PM

If Madden 11 is any indication for NCAA 12 Medical redshirts will be a necessity. In my Lions franchise after week four I am already down six starters. Uusally NCAA adopts a lot of madden features so we will see. Regardless though, bring in an injury slider!

Rudy

09-05-2010, 05:35 AM

I'd like an injury slider myself but this area needs a lot of attention really. The only real injuries I see are to offensive players that get tackled or hit. I'll see injuries to running backs, wide receivers and QBs. I don't see many long term injuries although Vincent Smith is out 12 weeks for me (he's chronically getting hurt in NCAA 11). Where are the injuries to the OL? What about the defense? Does anyone ever see injuries to these position groups? This area needs to be a lot better.

JeffHCross

09-05-2010, 01:34 PM

I see the occasional injury to offensive linemen, and defenders get injured a handful of times.

The thing that gets me this year is the number of injuries to players that weren't involved in the play. Like you'll see WRs get injured when they were blocking. I realize it happens in real life, so I'm okay with it, but it is strange to see in the game.

Jayrah

09-10-2010, 12:48 AM

Addition of personal, individual highs. Need to include banners and an asterisk in the stats menu overlay. Also would love to see record highs in different colors on the stats screen

JTynes

09-20-2010, 11:01 PM

1) If generic coaches are going to be used, have a naming file for them similar to rosters that can be shared via EA Locker
2) Have coaches recruit to their style of play
3) Homecoming and Senior Day (http://www.thegamingtailgate.com/forums/showthread.php?422-Homecoming-amp-Senior-Day)
4) Dynamic rivals or the ability to change/set rivals

X2

Rudy

10-07-2010, 05:39 AM

Adam Thompson is on OS looking for Cheerleader Chants to be used in NCAA 12. He started a thread about it.

I would much rather they focus on halftime shows and a weekly wrap up college show (College Gameday perhaps?) instead. If they do it all I'd be happy.

psuexv

12-09-2010, 10:55 AM

Ability to offer a scholarship on a Quick call like last year's recruiting.

duckfan4

12-09-2010, 11:51 AM

1.) I really hope that they put in medical redshirts. I hate when one of my best players gets hurt week 1 and is lost for the rest of the season.
2.) I agree that the rivalry games need to be revamped so that they feel special/meaningful. It just feels strange to play against Oregon State and the crowd be silent the whole game.
2a.) The ability to choose/create your own rivalries. Could be easily done by playing home and home games with a specific team for numerous years, having some really close games, or running up the score one year that upsets the other team. I know that my explination isn't great but you get the jist.
3.) I'd love to see an expanded roster! I'm not talking about 100+, but something more than what we have now. It sucks when you have to cut some really good players bc you have such a small cap on roster size. I'm thinking something like adding 10 or so players per team?
4.) The ability to change the order you play conference games, the ability to change dates (Example- Moving a noon Saturday game into a primetime Thursday or Friday night game), and the biggest one, the ability to change gametimes! I play with Oregon exclusively and we're obviously on PST and our 3:30/4:00 games are the equivalent to 6:30/7:00 games EST. That means that during the game the sun should be going down and it being a 'night game'. Everytime I play a 3:30 game it always stays sunny. I personally would like to have the ability to choose more night games.

Just my two cents

Davidmj444

12-09-2010, 03:29 PM

I play with Oregon exclusively and we're obviously on PST and our 3:30/4:00 games are the equivalent to 6:30/7:00 games EST. That means that during the game the sun should be going down and it being a 'night game'. Everytime I play a 3:30 game it always stays sunny.

No, 3:30/4pm games are equivalent to 12:30/1pm games.

duckfan4

12-10-2010, 09:30 AM

No, 3:30/4pm games are equivalent to 12:30/1pm games.

I live on the east coast. So when Oregon plays at 12:30, 4:00, or 7:15 PST it's the equivalent to 3:30, 7:00, or 10:15 EST. We are 3 hours ahead of the west coast.

JeffHCross

12-10-2010, 09:22 PM

It depends on what the time in Dynasty mode means. I can't say I've taken a glance at it this year in Dynasty mode (I use the main tab for all my games). Is there anything that indicates whether the time it shows is "local" time or all Eastern time? That would decide whether David is right or duckfan is right ... at least in terms of the time difference between Eastern and Pacific.

Option 1: "3:30" means "3:30 pm Eastern"
Then the game is actually simulated as a 12:30 pm Pacific game, which is what David was suggesting. This would explain why you're seeing conditions where the sun is out throughout the game, since it would be a 12:30-5:00-ish game.

Option 2: "3:30" means "3:30 pm local time"
For most northern cities (i.e. including Eugene, Oregon), 3:30 pm college football games would mean sunny conditions at the beginning of the season, and sun -> dusk conditions nearing the end of the season. But many 3:30 local football games are sunny throughout the game. Or, at least the sun doesn't start to set to the end. So that could still explain what you're seeing.

The quickest way to figure out this answer would be the look at the noon games. If there are no games on the west coach listed as "noon" game, then it's reasonable to assume that all times are Eastern.

Either way, I'm a little confused by what you posted. You said "I play with Oregon exclusively and we're obviously on PST and our 3:30/4:00 games are the equivalent to 6:30/7:00 games EST. That means that during the game the sun should be going down and it being a 'night game'." The fact that 3:30 PST is 6:30 EST means nothing to the game. Whether it's Option 1 or Option 2, "3:30" is not going to mean 6:30 pm EST. Either the game is played at 12:30 local or 3:30 local.

duckfan4

12-16-2010, 12:21 PM

To save everyone (myself included) a headache, I'd just like to see some clarification on whether the game times on the game are Eastern or local time. I was trying to hint at if a 3:30 start time Eastern, that would be equivalent to a 12:30 Pacific start time. That would mean a day game with the sun out the entire game. But if a 3:30 start time was local (Pacific) then it would be the equivalent to a 6:30 Eastern time, that would mean that around halftime or the second half the sun would start going down, turning into a 'night game' so to speak. Because we all know that 6:30 start times on the east coast NEVER end with the sun being up, same on the west coast.

But back to my main point: I'd like the ability to pick and choose start times for my games instead of having them predetermined for me. I know most of you don't understand my logic for all of this but for some reason it seems as if I NEVER play any night games. (That's where my time start confusion comes into play.)

JeffHCross

12-18-2010, 01:06 PM

But if a 3:30 start time was local (Pacific) then it would be the equivalent to a 6:30 Eastern timeNot so.

First, I'll go ahead and say that I think times are all Eastern. I'm in the Conference Championship Week, and the latest game is the Big 12 championship starting at 8:00 pm. There's no way they'd start a game at 9:00 pm Eastern ... so I think it's reasonable to assume that's 8:00 pm Eastern. (FWIW, I advanced to the bowl season, and the Fiesta Bowl is listed as 8:00 pm. If that was local, it would be 10:00 eastern ... no way the Fiesta starts that late.)

But going back to the local thing ... you're thinking about it a tad too far. A 3:30 pm local start time is just that ... local. There's no converting that to Eastern time ... a 3:30 pm home game for the Oregon Ducks would be 3:30 Pacific. And 3:30 games, depending on what time of year it is, can end with the sun still in the sky.

jaymo76

12-19-2010, 07:15 PM

How about giving the user the ability to schedule times for home games. Give us the choices of 10am, 1pm, 4pm and 7pm. This would make life a lot easier

duckfan4

12-20-2010, 02:14 PM

But going back to the local thing ... you're thinking about it a tad too far.

Agreed. I've out of my mind these past two weeks and I wasn't thinking straight:smh: Sorry about that. I'll try to keep myself from posting bone-headed comments.

Anyways, back to topic: The ability to choose your starting times or the ability to change times before the game like ABC/ESPN did this year to some games would be nice. (Ex. Stanford-Oregon was supposed to be a 7:15 Pacific start time but ABC changed it to 5:00 so they could show it during the primetime window.)

JeffHCross

12-20-2010, 10:24 PM

Agreed. I've out of my mind these past two weeks and I wasn't thinking straight:smh: Sorry about that. I'll try to keep myself from posting bone-headed comments.Haha, don't worry about it. I can see why you went down that direction, mentally.

baseballplyrmvp

01-12-2011, 01:59 PM

what about some kind of visual that shows what kind of offense/defense your recruit plays in? recruiting players coming from similar offensive/defensive styles could have them progress more/faster than recruits from other styles.

also, ability to recruit kids for a position other than what they're listed as. since the recruits technically have access to where they stand on our recruiting board, they should also be able to see the depth chart (if they dont already). if being recruited at a different position is one of need, you could get a slight bonus. if you have tons of depth though, he'd might not like switching. staying at his current position wouldnt grant any bonus. recruiting a player as a different position would be a one time offer- meaning you couldnt recruit the kid as a defensive end one week, defensive tackle the next, outside linebacker the third week etc. once you decide on a position to recruit him as, you wouldnt get an opportunity to change his position until the position changes screen in the offseason.

baseballplyrmvp

01-15-2011, 04:28 PM

applies to both offline and online dynasty

either eliminate the in-season hard commit or make it so that recruits can de-commit from a school and go to another one. this would bring in a new kind of challenge to recruiting, as you would have to continue to talk to your verbally committed players in order to keep their commitment to your school. this also prevents the 10 player recruiting board strategy that some people use.

a possible way to make decommitments happen would be to establish some kind of average minimum point requirement, once a player has decided to verbally commit. this average minimum is exactly like what the name says. if you're able to stay above this average requirement, obviously the recruit is yours. if you drop below this average point requirement, the recruit decommits from a school and opens his recruiting back up. from this point, if the recruit decommits and opens his recruiting up again, it could take 1000? or 1500? or more points in order for his new commitment to take place, in which case, the average minimum point requirement would have to be fulfilled in order to keep his verbal commitment. these average minimums would be different for every recruit and completely random. there also should be some kind of graphic on the recruit, in order to give the user some kind of idea when the recruit is close to possibly decommitting. (old football face from ncaa 08?) appear on the recruit, ie: solid verbal (very happy face), thinking about wavering (kinda happy face), close to wavering (average face), wants to decommit (angry face).

JeffHCross

01-15-2011, 04:54 PM

Well, I can say with confidence that we won't ever see the Sad Happy football return. Otherwise, good idea mvp. I've been trying to think for a while how to get de-committments, and that's a solid way to do it. The problem there would be communicating all of that information to the user, as you said.

Recruiting is enough of a black box. Wouldn't want to add to that.

Rudy

01-15-2011, 05:56 PM

baseballplyrmvp

01-15-2011, 07:40 PM

Recruiting is long enough. I don't want to keep spending time on hard commits. Decommits is a good idea but maybe we can kill two birds with one stone. Each team has 3 goals at the beginning of the year. Get all 3 and nobody leaves. But every goal missed adds to a probability that a hard commit re-opens his recruiting after the bowls. All of the decomits become the "new" recruits in the off-season instead of new kids out of thin air.

I'd still like to see prospects ratings fluctuate a bit over time.i disagree. recruiting isnt and shouldnt be a process in which someone could have large amounts of success in, while only spending 5-15 minutes of real time on.

maybe, recruits shouldnt be able to hard commit until after the season is over? that would mimick real life, and could keep every recruit open until the offseason starts. then they wouldnt even need to do what i described above.

JeffHCross

01-15-2011, 08:39 PM

i disagree.The problem is, as this sequence of posts exemplifies, there is a lot of disagreement about recruiting, even among the hardcore audience. I've seen a lot of posts saying that recruiting is too long ... a lot more this year than year's previous. TGT's Wishlist Tournament had Deeper Recruiting, and it put up a good fight, getting to the Final Four of the 2nd chance tourney.

The problem is, for all of us that want deeper recruiting (personally I'm on the fence about it), there are an equal or larger amount that don't want it to go any deeper than it currently is.

The easiest answer would be for de-committments to be put in the game, but as an option that's set in the House Rules (like Dynasty Accelerators). The bad part about that is that it would be a significant investment to program into the game for an "option".

RussellWilson

01-21-2011, 12:57 PM

1. All Nike Pro Combat Jerseys from this year. Plus Adidas TechFit for teams with adidas.
2. coaches on sidelines.
3. more helmets and facemasks and more accessories.
4. Bowl patches on the jerseys. idk why they even took that out.
5. neutral sites when like VT played Boise State

hillbill

01-21-2011, 03:24 PM

I would love the ability to be able to move conference games up and down the schedule. I realize they probably should stay locked, but I hate not having the ablity to always make "rival X" the last game of the year if I want to.

I too would love the ability to adjust the time of my games. It seems like when I play a Thursday night game it's always at 6:00 PM. What the heck?

baseballplyrmvp

01-24-2011, 07:54 PM

what about a bragging rights bonus for beating other schools in a recruit's top 10? if your team wins a big matchup against another school fighting for the same recruit, and you go to negatively recruit against them, you should get some kind of bonus since your team won the head to head battle....this would make negative recruiting more appealing, especially against elite schools and in any team online dynasties, because there's currently no point in trying to bad mouth the top schools. you're better off touting your own school.

JeffHCross

01-24-2011, 08:41 PM

baseballplyrmvp

02-03-2011, 02:08 PM

maybe, recruits shouldnt be able to hard commit until after the season is over? that would mimick real life, and could keep every recruit open until the offseason starts.i still think this is something that needs to be added into recruiting, especially after what we saw yesterday.

deanthony thomas, a 5* athlete from los angeles, was committed to the usc trojans for over 6 months, before taking a surprise visit to oregon and then signing with the ducks last night. another example is christian westerman. he was committed to texas for over a year, and then switched his commitment to auburn at the army all american game. i'm sure there are a hundred other stories like these too.

idk, i just dont like the "sign em and forget em" strategy that the game currently uses or how the hard commit is treated as a signed LOI.

JeffHCross

02-04-2011, 09:27 PM

The simple answer to that, I think, is have Soft Commits last longer. The only real "hard" commitments in real life are guys like Braxton Miller who get big ass Ohio State tattoos and enroll early. Everybody else, until they sign that LoI, is a Soft Commit.

That said ... I hate Soft Commits in the game and certainly don't want them to last longer. But that's better that decommits, in my eyes.

Pantera1968

02-07-2011, 10:30 AM

i disagree. recruiting isnt and shouldnt be a process in which someone could have large amounts of success in, while only spending 5-15 minutes of real time on.

maybe, recruits shouldnt be able to hard commit until after the season is over? that would mimick real life, and could keep every recruit open until the offseason starts. then they wouldnt even need to do what i described above.

I agree with this ONLY if it becomes a little easier to recruit certain players. For instance, I don't care how much someone wants to go to a big time school, no 4 or 5 star recruit is going to walk on at Auburn when they have offers from Notre Dame, Ohio State and Clemson. Just NOT going to happen.

Also, it is entirely too difficult to snag less talented recruits. If a 3 star prospect is in his top 3 which are 3 MAC teams and Ohio State comes along and offers, Ohio State should IMMEDIATELY jump into the top 3 almost always. In fact, sometimes that recruit should commit to OSU simply on the offer. It just seems that sometimes in '11 it is just as difficult to recruit a mid-level 3 star recruit as it is a top-level recruit.

Finally, in some years there is a SERIOUS problem with the position distribution and the number of 5 stars that attend only a few schools. I have seen years where out of all the 5-star recruits available, 3 teams have 90 percent of them. I just don't think that is realistic. Also, as tough as it can be to recruit punters, last night I saw that one team in my offline dynasty had recruited THREE punters in the same recruiting class! Come on man!

I think decommits could be a good idea but EA MUST balance this with making it a little easier to fill your absolute needs if they do this.

JeffHCross

02-07-2011, 07:33 PM

I agree with most of your thoughts except the Ohio State / 3-star example. There are some real life examples of players that willingly chose the lesser-tier school and had a reason to do it.

Now, along those lines ... I don't like when a player had Early Playing Time as a Most, and I have it as a D, yet I'm still able to get him to come to my school. Yes, on the one hand, I clearly put more effort into him than I would otherwise. But if a player is most concerned with getting playing time ... he's not likely to choose a school where he's not going to get that playing time. That's something I think the team should think about in the future, though I wouldn't put that high on the list.

Pantera1968

02-08-2011, 08:49 AM

I'm not saying that Ohio State should always end up signing the player I'm just saying that if Ohio State is, say 8th and the player is in his top 3, if Ohio State offers they should SHOOT up into the top 3. He may still go to Miami (OH) or whatever but it shouldn't be the same up hill battle for Ohio State that it would if the player was a 5 star with offers from every major school in the country.

I agree with you on the pitches too but, again, I think it would have to work the same against the computer school that is recruiting that prospect as well.

JeffHCross

02-08-2011, 06:50 PM

I'm not saying that Ohio State should always end up signing the player I'm just saying that if Ohio State is, say 8th and the player is in his top 3In the case where Ohio State is also in his Top 10, I agree. I thought you were talking about those rare prospects (or maybe not as rare as they should be) that have MAC schools but no Big Ten schools.

I agree with you on the pitches too but, again, I think it would have to work the same against the computer school that is recruiting that prospect as well.Oh, absolutely, I think anything should work for/against the CPU just as it does for the user.

psuexv

02-11-2011, 12:15 PM

Now, along those lines ... I don't like when a player had Early Playing Time as a Most, and I have it as a D, yet I'm still able to get him to come to my school. Yes, on the one hand, I clearly put more effort into him than I would otherwise. But if a player is most concerned with getting playing time ... he's not likely to choose a school where he's not going to get that playing time. That's something I think the team should think about in the future, though I wouldn't put that high on the list.

You should be able to sway him down in this case. If he has Early playing time as Most and I'm a D, I should be able to sway him down from the Most to maybe average as a real life coach might be able to talk a recruit into realizing early playing time isn't that important.

Now to make this worth while you need to be able to get more recruiting points for matching up with a prospects interests, not just matching with his highly rated ones. In your example about the 3 star not opting to go to OSU, I completely agree with. But if that recruit has program prestige Low because he just doesn't want to go to that high end school and I'm a MAC school and my program prestige is C or B- I should be able to pitch that to him and get a significant amount of points.

The way the engine is right now you get more points based on how high the ratings are when that shouldn't be the case. It should be based more on matching ratings to the recruits ratings. Right now if I'm a A+ in something and the recruit has it at low I can still pitch it and get 50ish points, but if say Early PT is D and the recruit is low I get like 15.

JeffHCross

02-11-2011, 11:30 PM

You should be able to sway him down in this case. If he has Early playing time as Most and I'm a D, I should be able to sway him down from the Most to maybe average as a real life coach might be able to talk a recruit into realizing early playing time isn't that important.Not if it's a Most. I get what you're saying, but if I, as a football recruit, am saying that the absolute most important thing to me is Early Playing Time ... that should be a dealbreaker. And deal-breaker's don't exist in NCAA recruiting.

The way the engine is right now you get more points based on how high the ratings are when that shouldn't be the case. It should be based more on matching ratings to the recruits ratings. Right now if I'm a A+ in something and the recruit has it at low I can still pitch it and get 50ish points, but if say Early PT is D and the recruit is low I get like 15.Agreed that it needs looked at, but not your exact example. The problem there is the differentiation between "Low" meaning "It's not that important to me" and it meaning "I want a school with Low Prestige". If you look at the responses the recruits give, it seems like it means either one.

Actually, the real problem is balancing this without making it a nightmare for the casual player.

psuexv

02-14-2011, 09:54 AM

Actually, the real problem is balancing this without making it a nightmare for the casual player.

Well I think this is were your difficulty recruiting levels come into play. Heisman recruiting should be all in intensive, not necessarily the CPU is better(like it is now)

psuexv

02-14-2011, 10:01 AM

Agreed that it needs looked at, but not your exact example. The problem there is the differentiation between "Low" meaning "It's not that important to me" and it meaning "I want a school with Low Prestige". If you look at the responses the recruits give, it seems like it means either one.

I think the main problem is that each pitch cannot be viewed the same. I don't think a recruit actually ever says - I want to go to a less prestigious school - They probably don't care more than anything. So them being a Low and me being a D or C shouldn't really have that much weight(now I know there are those kids that want to go to a "smaller" school but does that really relate to prestige). Now if Early PT is low and my rating is D or C, I should be able to pitch the heck out of that as a huge benefit.

JeffHCross

02-14-2011, 08:47 PM

Well I think this is were your difficulty recruiting levels come into play. Heisman recruiting should be all in intensive, not necessarily the CPU is better(like it is now)Yeah, that's one way. But I was just thinking in terms of interface. How do you convey the difference between Deep recruiting and Simple recruiting without a 20 page manual? Explaining the interface is something sports games struggle a lot with.

I think the main problem is that each pitch cannot be viewed the same. I don't think a recruit actually ever says - I want to go to a less prestigious school - They probably don't care more than anything.Well, there are some. Maybe not "low prestige" for school, but there are probably some kids who "aren't ready" for the big schools, or would prefer to build a tradition. Those are obviously rare though.

Now if Early PT is low and my rating is D or C, I should be able to pitch the heck out of that as a huge benefit.Yeah, and that's kinda what I'm meaning. There's a difference between "Neutral" (I don't give a damn) and "I want to redshirt". If it's the latter, you're right about being able to pitch it. But, going back to the earlier quote ... how in the hell would you convey that without this turning into a Management Sim?

It's something worth thinking about though. At the very least, I think there should be a "Dealbreaker". Where if I pitch a D to a Most+Dealbreaker, I actually get Negative points rather than just very few.

souljahbill

02-16-2011, 11:33 AM

What I see a lot of is that as I go about finding what the recruits want, everything is Low or Very Low and I end up wasting weeks trying to get pitches to move up in importance. I don't know how many times I've targeted a recruits and asked, "Man, do you care about anything?"

psuexv

02-24-2011, 08:23 AM

Not sure if this actually has any impact but it's kind of troubling when you get a recruit who is ready for a visit and you schedule that week and he makes a comment that you didn't schedule him soon enough or that he was ready last week...etc.

jaymo76

02-27-2011, 07:48 PM

psusnoop

03-07-2011, 12:56 PM

Yeah, that is annoying. There are a lot of repetitive lines in recruiting.

There are too many, but the one psuexv mentions bothers me the most I think.

JBHuskers

03-07-2011, 02:24 PM

In my opinion, I think they should just take out the lines completely. They have horrible grammar as it is. I know CDJ submitted a doc of corrections for them. Either a re-write or completely scrap them, I'd be fine with either.

JeffHCross

03-07-2011, 09:49 PM

If scrapping them would mean the happy/sad football, I'm willing to forgo the bad grammar. There's gotta be feedback of some type.

steelerfan

03-07-2011, 09:56 PM

They have horrible grammar

Have you ever heard an actual athlete speak? :smh:

I thought the grammar was actually pretty good. :P

HawkFan

03-07-2011, 11:04 PM

If scrapping them would mean the happy/sad football, I'm willing to forgo the bad grammar. There's gotta be feedback of some type.

This +1000, I could not stand the happy/sad/angry football. It's gotten to the point for me that I hardly ever look at what they say anymore anyway because they repeat themselves so much.

jaymo76

03-08-2011, 12:09 AM

Maybe one day they will add lines like: "how much are you willing to pay me?" and "if anyone asks my dad didn't tell me anything..." :) :Auburn:

psusnoop

03-08-2011, 08:00 AM

Have you ever heard an actual athlete speak? :smh:

I thought the grammar was actually pretty good. :P

LOL Steelerfan, this is spot on. At times, I think their grammar is too good.

They should have audio for some, now that would add some spice to it.

psuexv

03-08-2011, 09:49 AM

There's gotta be feedback of some type.

Why does there have to be some sort of feedback if it's completely useless? If a recruit tells me he's pissed that I didn't schedule him earlier but he wasn't ready earlier and it's just random sentences being generated then I don't want to hear any of it.

Now if it's actually reflecting his mood/attitude then there needs to be something fixed.

JeffHCross

03-08-2011, 08:59 PM

Why does there have to be some sort of feedback if it's completely useless? If a recruit tells me he's pissed that I didn't schedule him earlier but he wasn't ready earlier and it's just random sentences being generated then I don't want to hear any of it.So you'd rather just see "+50" and absolutely nothing else? No thanks. At least give me something, even if it's crap.

If nothing else, I like that the occasional item makes me laugh. "Well played, coach, well played" on a sway was awesome (and, interesting enough, one I've only seen once).

psuexv

03-09-2011, 09:23 AM

So you'd rather just see "+50" and absolutely nothing else? No thanks. At least give me something, even if it's crap.

If nothing else, I like that the occasional item makes me laugh. "Well played, coach, well played" on a sway was awesome (and, interesting enough, one I've only seen once).

Yeah that's exactly what I would like to see. For me the random quotes that usually don't make sense are pointless and the only thing they add to me is doubt that this recruit is starting to sway - For example when he has coach prestige as Most and I have it A and I pitch it and I get the "shouldn't you be talking about me?" What value does that add? Comical...no

morsdraconis

03-09-2011, 09:34 AM

I agree with Jeff on this one. Having just the score for the recruiting would make recruiting even more lifeless than it already is.

HawkFan

03-09-2011, 10:43 AM

I can definitely see where both PSU and Jeff are coming from.

On one hand I would love to see them have something more than just a +50 when it comes to recruiting, as I said earlier I have gotten to the point where I pay very little attention to what a recruit says anymore and focus on the number. Basically I skim what they have to say because let's face it they say pretty much the same thing all the time and they tend to make very little sense. So having something there with some substance would be a very welcome addition, I mean if you actually has to pay attention to it it would make recruiting a whole lot more interesting.

I mean come on Jeff you have to agree with Mors and I on this. Some of the stuff that is on there now makes no sense. Let me give you some examples, I believe most of them have been mentioned already.

Recruit X is ready for a visit, I go ahead and schedule the visit and he says something to the effect,

"I was ready last week, why did you not schedule me then."

Decent comment except for the fact that he was not ready last week and I scheduled him as soon as he became ready. I mean does that make any sense?

Recruit X has coach experience rated as most, I have an A+ rating in it, the second team on his list has an A+ as well, make a pitch for coach experience button and he says...

"I get what your saying coach, it's just not that important to me."

Really it's not that important to you, you only have it rated as the most important thing you are looking for in a school. And there is no sway option, and next week after he said that it's still going to be the most important thing he is looking for, so why in the world would he say that.

Now let's talk about school pitch ratings. I have noticed over four or five years each in two separate online dynasties that I am currently in that these do change but it's strange on how they change. I will use the dynasty that I play as Duke in for an example with two different pitch ratings.

Athletic Facilities -- B- or C+ to start
Program Stability -- C+ to start

So 3/4 of the way through our fourth year I am 44-7 with Duke, I have won 3 conference titles, won the Orange Bowl twice, have a 12-5 record against top 25 teams, and a perfect 10-0 record against rivals. Here is where those pitches currently stand.

Athletic Facilities -- A+
Program Stability -- C+

Now I do not get either of those. I understand that a program after a few seasons of winning would make upgrades to their facilities but they would not go from Dukes current facilities to the best or one of the best in the entire country in three years.

Secondly, my program stability has not changed. Why is that? I have had no one transfer out, I have made no, and broken no promises, my approval rating is all the way full, etc. I mean in real life I would have been given a long contract extension and would be in no hurry to leave the school I am at if I had that type of success. But yet on the game my program is no more stable today than it was when I started.

Do not get me wrong I in no way want the angry/sad/happy football back. And I do believe that recruiting has come a long way in the game, it's no longer easy to get the #1 class in the game as long as you challenge yourself with the recruiting slider. But with that said it still needs a lot of work to make it anywhere perfect. I would start with the feedback the recruits give and the way that your programs pitches changes and how fast, etc.

Just my thoughts.

psuexv

03-09-2011, 10:47 AM

I completely agree Hawk. In an ideal world I would love to have feedback that I had to actually pay attention to. But if it's going to be pointless gibberish then just give me the +50 as I sim through it also.

Now I know people didn't like the football face from last year but at least you had to pay attention to the mood of the recruit. I can't remember exactly what '09 had, but I know it wasn't a football I think it might have been a face but it was decent with determining the mood.

steelerfan

03-09-2011, 11:47 AM

HawkFan

03-09-2011, 02:17 PM

Just to clarify for you Hawk, the Program Stability pitch has a major tie to your contract length. In an OD, there are no contracts (would be great to have in 12). Therefore, in an OD, your Stability is going to progress MUCH slower than it would offline.

interesting, with it tied to contracts is it going to move at all in online dynasty since it has nothing to base itself off of?

morsdraconis

03-09-2011, 03:32 PM

interesting, with it tied to contracts is it going to move at all in online dynasty since it has nothing to base itself off of?

I'm thinking that's a no. Pretty much every school after a year of User control drops down to a C+.

HawkFan

03-09-2011, 04:04 PM

I'm thinking that's a no. Pretty much every school after a year of User control drops down to a C+.

Wow, I know the game came out over 8 months ago and to find that out now is kind of disappointing.

morsdraconis

03-09-2011, 04:45 PM

Wow, I know the game came out over 8 months ago and to find that out now is kind of disappointing.

Yeah. It's even worse because it's been pretty much proven that Program Stability is one of those things that gets high star rated recruits to like your school more than others.

A really interesting experiment (and one I think I'm going to do now) would be whether or not other teams' ratings change over the course of a few seasons if they are CPU controlled.

HawkFan

03-09-2011, 04:50 PM

Yeah. It's even worse because it's been pretty much proven that Program Stability is one of those things that gets high star rated recruits to like your school more than others.

A really interesting experiment (and one I think I'm going to do now) would be whether or not other teams' ratings change over the course of a few seasons if they are CPU controlled.

You know if you want some help with that I would be willing to look as well, is there a way to look at each teams pitches if they are CPU controlled? I mean I guess we could make a certain amount of teams that are user controlled. Write them down and change teams to others. Sim and check them out.

JeffHCross

03-09-2011, 08:00 PM

I mean come on Jeff you have to agree with Mors and I on this.You could have stopped right there, lol. Of course I agree. Ideally, I'd want feedback that's semi-intelligent and makes sense to the context. However, given the choice between laughable grammar and the sad/happy football, I'll take the laughable grammar.

Secondly, my program stability has not changed. Why is that?Is that an OD? Then it's because Program Stability is inexplicably tied to our program prestige, and for any school under 6-stars, it's a C+ rating. It's a bug and it's been reported to EA.

I'm thinking that's a no. Pretty much every school after a year of User control drops down to a C+.6-stars go to B, 5-stars and 4-stars go to C+. Can't say for anything lower.

JeffHCross

03-09-2011, 08:12 PM

Now I know people didn't like the football face from last year but at least you had to pay attention to the mood of the recruit. I can't remember exactly what '09 had, but I know it wasn't a football I think it might have been a face but it was decent with determining the mood.It was the same annoying football.

I agree with you that the football was a more strategic way of doing it, and I'd rather go back to that. But with the Russian Roulette system of recruiting, there's no place for a mood indicator. It's not our fault if they keep bringing up Lows and C+ rated pitches.

steelerfan

03-09-2011, 08:33 PM

In the TGT PS3 OD, I am PSU and my Program Stability is a B+. Program Prestige is certainly the other factor (besides contracts).

JeffHCross

03-09-2011, 09:30 PM

In the TGT PS3 OD, I am PSU and my Program Stability is a B+. Program Prestige is certainly the other factor (besides contracts).You know, that's interesting. Our PSU coach in the Powerhouse OD is also B+ and 6-star, while all of the other 6-star programs are B.

steelerfan

03-10-2011, 12:29 AM

You know, that's interesting. Our PSU coach in the Powerhouse OD is also B+ and 6-star, while all of the other 6-star programs are B.

We are.....Penn State! ;)

MCdonnieG

03-10-2011, 03:21 PM

Is this real or just another false alarm? I need some clarification....

here's the link----->http://www.operationsports.com/news/472695/a-few-more-ncaa-football-12-features-revealed/

For those who don't feel like clicking the link this is what was said....pretty much Op Sports wrote a blog revealing vague yet new features....

Features

* Feel the hits, experience the thrills and revel in the glory of college football

* Suit up in the college colors of your choice and take the field as an NCAA athlete in the most authentic college football experience to date

* Enhanced in-game presentation brings the excitement of Saturday's game to life with all-new traditions and school-specific crowd celebrations

* Take on your school's most heated rival in intense matchups

* Go for the glory on the road to the National Championship

JeffHCross

03-10-2011, 07:47 PM

Is this real or just another false alarm? I need some clarification....Probably better to go post that here (http://www.thegamingtailgate.com/forums/showthread.php?1640-Any-timeline-for-NCAA-12-news), McdonnieG. It's kind of out-of-place in the Dynasty Wishlist.

MCdonnieG

03-11-2011, 11:13 AM

Thanks for the heads up Jeff...

steelerfan

03-13-2011, 09:52 PM

As 2012 winds down in the TGT PS3 OD, I decided to look back at my first recruiting class to see how much weight they've put on with 2 years in the system. I was surprised to see that a handful had gained 9-11 pounds. My FB, a 4* recruit and the #1 FB in his class, is now a RS Fr and weighs in at 257 lbs. He was 235 when I recruited him, a gain of 22 lbs. in 2 years. Wow.

Anyone else have any data on this?

Jayrah

03-21-2011, 12:45 AM

I think this is a dynasty thing. It could also be an overlay thing I suppose.

Anyways, I would REALLY love to see Zone and Man packages in each of the defensive substitution packages during play added. Give more options to get better personnel on the field for the play you're picking.

Would also love to see the ability outside of the game to set up these packages the way you want. So that you can put your specific packages together for quick in game navigation and use, along with the auto subs from last year. Give even MORE power to the "coach" to set up defense the way he wants.

JeffHCross

03-21-2011, 06:51 PM

Yes. Custom packages FTW. Would have preferred that over Formation Subs, honestly.

Kwizzy

03-22-2011, 10:31 AM

Yes. Custom packages FTW. Would have preferred that over Formation Subs, honestly.

I personally wouldn't go that far Jeff but I definitely would like to see custom packages added. Those combined with formation subs and more spots on the depth charts would allow for complete personnel control throughout the game.

JeffHCross

03-22-2011, 05:57 PM

I personally wouldn't go that far JeffWhy not? If I'm allowed to customize "Normal", then it's essentially formation subs. Formation subs is basically 1/10th of what I want, since I can only customize one package that way.

Note, when I say custom packages, I'm talking about customizing, not just adding my own created package. I'd rather edit the existing packages than be able to create new ones (though give me the ability to edit personnel and names and you essentially have both worlds).

Jayrah

03-24-2011, 03:29 AM

Little thing but I would also like to see the soft commit become an "LOI". And a hard commit become "Signed"

JeffHCross

03-24-2011, 08:36 PM

Little thing but I would also like to see the soft commit become an "LOI". And a hard commit become "Signed"Would be a nice touch, except it would be wrong. You can't sign a LoI until Signing Day, and Signing Day is after Week 5 of Offseason recruiting inside the game. Both Soft and Hard are "verbal" commitments ... just only one of them might waver.

steelerfan

03-25-2011, 10:45 AM

I mentioned this a looooooong time ago, but I saw it again last night.

Notre Dame went 11-2 and was #9 in the BCS and they played in the GMAC Bowl. That shouldn't happen.

psusnoop

03-25-2011, 11:44 AM

I mentioned this a looooooong time ago, but I saw it again last night.

Notre Dame went 11-2 and was #9 in the BCS and they played in the GMAC Bowl. That shouldn't happen.

Your right it shouldn't, but it does bring a smile to my face :D

steelerfan

03-25-2011, 11:48 AM

Your right it shouldn't, but it does bring a smile to my face :D

I've seen it at least 3 times.

JBHuskers

03-25-2011, 02:17 PM

Hell in our PS3 OD Central Michigan got a BCS Bowl bid :D WITH one loss.

Kwizzy

03-25-2011, 03:26 PM

Why not? If I'm allowed to customize "Normal", then it's essentially formation subs. Formation subs is basically 1/10th of what I want, since I can only customize one package that way.

Note, when I say custom packages, I'm talking about customizing, not just adding my own created package. I'd rather edit the existing packages than be able to create new ones (though give me the ability to edit personnel and names and you essentially have both worlds).

Well If you are allowed to customize the normal formation that's one thing and I'd agree. But I definitely don't want to lose that ability. Ideally I'd like to see you be able to set a 2 deep for the normal package as well.

steelerfan

03-25-2011, 03:39 PM

Hell in our PS3 OD Central Michigan got a BCS Bowl bid :D WITH one loss.

Don't hate on the Chippewas!! :D

zacattak

04-22-2011, 05:37 PM

I like Souljahs number 4(on page 1). I always enjoy taking a randon terrible team(1 star) and making them a 6 star, but rivals are hard to come by one you get invited to better conferences and such. addition of rivals would be awesome, maybe by the fact of playing close games with a team, or beating someone of higher rank later in the year might earn some "rival points" or something?

zacattak

04-22-2011, 05:43 PM

zacattak

04-22-2011, 06:01 PM

I really like the idea, but would you (or anyone else who wants this) also want something in the game to make Rivalry Games seem bigger or different? If so, what?

Right now, there's a few text references to games being a Rivalry Game, but nothing physically different that I can tell or remember.

cdj,

what about a non rival you play close every year, you win or lose it has big implications on a big bowl game, national championship, or even winning your division. earn "rival points" or soemthing against that opponent. and they go up or down depending on the game. after so many you have a rival? its an idea. could also cause for tougher games on the schedule.

i like taking a 1 star school into a 6 star powerhouse, but you have terrible rivals after you have changed conferences numerous times, and no longer want to play other terrible 1 star school. also i like the fact of taking a school from 1 to 6 stars, but ti seems they become a 6 star too quick. or 6 stars become terrible too quick. why not have some dynasty implications over a 3 year term. for example: win 10 games 2 out of 3 seasons, beat "so and so rival" 2 out of 3 years. then you earn a star. just seems too easy to play 6 years and already be a 6 star school.

it would alsp help to upgrade the stadiums of one of those teams. attract more fans for bigger games, helps with recruiting. stadium add on's things of that nature. maybe certain prospects wont play for a school under a certain attendance.. just some ideas i have on rivalry and dynasty.

cdj

04-22-2011, 06:11 PM

zacattak

04-22-2011, 06:37 PM

I agree with this ONLY if it becomes a little easier to recruit certain players. For instance, I don't care how much someone wants to go to a big time school, no 4 or 5 star recruit is going to walk on at Auburn when they have offers from Notre Dame, Ohio State and Clemson. Just NOT going to happen.

Your kidding right... why wouldnt they leave for auburn? SEC school, good team year to year. only school i could see him changing for in your statement is Ohio State.. Notre Dame has been long out of championship limelight. and are trying to work their way back. and clemson... enough said right there. they are good, but dont start playing auburn down until clemson wins against them(even if it was an overtime win)

zacattak

04-22-2011, 08:05 PM

I like those ideas, zacattak. It's a pretty good idea to have goals or tasks the user must meet in Dynasty Mode. That would definitely make certain games feel more important.

Thanks for joining the site!

Thanks, i didnt know this site existed until i was looking for the features to the new updated NCAA game. All the sites are blocked at work, and i ran across this one.

I have something else to add to my last statement i made before you replied.

What about the ability to go up and down in all recruitment catagories. Academics, Coach and Conference Presige(usually accurate), Fan base? (never has a chance to increase or decrease( goes with stadium upgrades, along with workout facilities etc.) i think you get what im saying. just someother ideas i have. and what about a style of play where you start off as a new coach, at a bad school(possibly d2), and you have to earn your way to a better program, by winning games, recruiting skill( would be a good NCAA addition), etc...

Kingpin32

04-23-2011, 12:09 AM

Thanks, i didnt know this site existed until i was looking for the features to the new updated NCAA game. All the sites are blocked at work, and i ran across this one.

I have something else to add to my last statement i made before you replied.

What about the ability to go up and down in all recruitment catagories. Academics, Coach and Conference Presige(usually accurate), Fan base? (never has a chance to increase or decrease( goes with stadium upgrades, along with workout facilities etc.) i think you get what im saying. just someother ideas i have. and what about a style of play where you start off as a new coach, at a bad school(possibly d2), and you have to earn your way to a better program, by winning games, recruiting skill( would be a good NCAA addition), etc...

Your last idea is basically what you do on College Hoops 2K8. Which is really the best and only way to do a "coaching" career mode IMO. But in order for that to be real successful, we need a coaching carousel.

zacattak

04-27-2011, 02:02 PM

Your last idea is basically what you do on College Hoops 2K8. Which is really the best and only way to do a "coaching" career mode IMO. But in order for that to be real successful, we need a coaching carousel.

Agreed, Maybe it will eventually happen. Im tired of naming all the coaches. Not to mention they never get fired... ironic...

ram29jackson

05-13-2011, 10:56 PM

Jayrah

05-14-2011, 12:52 AM

I dont remember trying to do it this past year..?

can you put an athlete at multiple offensive and defensive positions ? i know people complain about people putting players in unrealistic positions but college still has an -Ironman/men- old school appeal and I would want an all everything player to use like the 1940s and such .

No you can't. But you're right. And there's still plenty of players that play multiple positions. Owen Marecic of Stanford played something like 85 or 90% of all snaps last season. I know there were several others that played multiples.

SmoothPancakes

05-14-2011, 05:59 AM

No you can't. But you're right. And there's still plenty of players that play multiple positions. Owen Marecic of Stanford played something like 85 or 90% of all snaps last season. I know there were several others that played multiples.

Oh yes, Owen Marecic. I will never forget that Notre Dame-Stanford game. Scored a touchdown as the fullback, then a mere 13 seconds later, returned an interception for a touchdown. That was incredible to watch on TV.

JeffHCross

05-14-2011, 10:46 PM

No you can't. But you're right. And there's still plenty of players that play multiple positions."Plenty" isn't the word I would use. I'd go for "some". Charles Woodson, Chris Gamble, and Champ Bailey are really the only ones beside Owen Marecic to do it a a high level.

Jayrah

05-15-2011, 04:58 AM

"Plenty" isn't the word I would use. I'd go for "some". Charles Woodson, Chris Gamble, and Champ Bailey are really the only ones beside Owen Marecic to do it a a high level.

That's superstar players on both sides of the ball that you hear about. There are PLENTY of guys that do it though. WSU had 2 guys play both sides just last year. Their starting TE is now starting DE, and one of their backup WRs played a ton of nickel back cb sets. I believe Arizona has/had a d-lineman/olb that played both sides just last year.

Also don't forget that several players play multiple positions on one side of the ball, which you can do with form subs, but you lose the effectiveness because ratings are screwy when you put a player out of position.

JeffHCross

05-15-2011, 09:08 AM

Their starting TE is now starting DEI think you're overstating things here ...

Andrei Lintz is No. 1 at tight end after Skylar Stormo moved from No. 1 tight end to backup defensive end behind Travis Long.Stormo had 3 career receptions going into this year, according to ESPN. And that's a Position Change -- totally different from being a true Ironman or Two-Way player.

You're right about WR / nickel though, and that does happen (usually when a team lacks depth, though). Troy Brown did that with the Patriots a few years ago. Again, though, it's a far cry from someone like Bronko Nagurski (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronko_Nagurski).

Also don't forget that several players play multiple positions on one side of the ball, which you can do with form subs, but you lose the effectiveness because ratings are screwy when you put a player out of position.Now this I agree with. Position Changes (and just moving guys on the depth chart) are out of whack. AWR doesn't recover nearly as fast as it should in NCAA 11. That would certainly help with the Ironman issue.

Jayrah

05-15-2011, 04:12 PM

I think you're overstating things here ...
Stormo had 3 career receptions going into this year, according to ESPN. And that's a Position Change -- totally different from being a true Ironman or Two-Way player.

You're right about WR / nickel though, and that does happen (usually when a team lacks depth, though). Troy Brown did that with the Patriots a few years ago. Again, though, it's a far cry from someone like Bronko Nagurski (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronko_Nagurski).

Now this I agree with. Position Changes (and just moving guys on the depth chart) are out of whack. AWR doesn't recover nearly as fast as it should in NCAA 11. That would certainly help with the Ironman issue.

Im not talking about true ironmen", just 2-way players...

baseballplyrmvp

05-15-2011, 06:30 PM

i'd like to see more "one sided" mid tier players in recruiting. examples like a corner who excels at zone coverage, but sucks at man coverage. linebackers that can hit, but cant cover to save their lives. big arm qb's who cant hit the broad side of the barn or deadly accurate qb's who have noodle arms. players are too balanced, imo.

JeffHCross

05-15-2011, 07:13 PM

I'm not so sure about that, MVP. I was just looking through some of the recruits that like my school in the Powerhouse OD, and I see plenty of QBs that can't hit the broad side of the bar, DBs that can't do man coverage, and Linebackers that can't cover.

psusnoop

05-15-2011, 07:23 PM

baseballplyrmvp

05-15-2011, 07:40 PM

I have had 4 of my last 6 CB's that are great at zone coverage and terrible at man coverage (93-99 for zone) and a range of (82-88 for man coverage).

I also have had two QB's that were 99 throw power and 86 throw accuracy.82-88 is terrible? thats pretty damn good, imo, especially for starters at >4* schools.

i'm thinking more in terms of 1-3* players here. like cb's with C+ zone coverage and d- man coverage ratings; lb's with b+ hit power but d tackling; qb's with b+ throw power but d accuracy, d-ends with b+ finesse moves but d- power moves, etc.... i want to see more variety in players and think it could be a way of getting the game to feel like not every player is the same.

JeffHCross

05-15-2011, 07:56 PM

82-88 is terrible?Yeah, don't listen to him. He's at a six star school :)

I have seen a couple guys with B or higher THP (that'd be in the 85+ range, I believe) and C- THA (lower than 73, I believe).

psusnoop

05-15-2011, 08:14 PM

I was giving what they were as SR's with redshirts. I should have made that clearer from the start. Those CB's were mid 80's and low 70's as FR, and never saw a big jump till their RS SO year where they got to be competitive for me.

psusnoop

05-15-2011, 08:20 PM

Actually my recently graduated QB was as a FR a 94 throw power and 72 throw accuracy. As a SR he got to be a 99-88.

baseballplyrmvp

05-22-2011, 08:21 PM

the cpu needs to do a better job of managing its recruiting board; specifically removing players from the board with whom they have no shot at signing. i simmed an entire season with lsu, games and recruiting, and took a look at the recruiting board at the end of the season. while lsu was able to sign in about 13 recruits during the season, there were a significant amount of players on the board that lsu had no shot at signing during the offseason. its spending time on guys who, even though have lsu listed as their #2, 3, 4, or 5 team, are 1000 points or more behind the recruits favorite school.

it needs to learn when to cut ties with a recruit, remove them from the board, and move on to the next guy. additionally, the cpu needs to remove players from their recruiting board who have hard committed to other schools. thirdly, the cpu needs to be able to identify when it has fulfilled position needs (there's no need to spend time recruiting additional mlb's when 3 have already committed).

JeffHCross

05-22-2011, 08:29 PM

the cpu needs to do a better job of managing its recruiting board;Hear, hear.

its spending time on guys who, even though have lsu listed as their #2, 3, 4, or 5 team, are 1000 points or more behind the recruits favorite school.Actually, while the players are on LSU's board, it's unlikely they're spending much, if any, time on them. The CPU often devotes a high amount of time to their Top 10 or so, and no time to those beyond, even though they remain on the board.

additionally, the cpu needs to remove players from their recruiting board who have hard committed to other schools.They already do?

thirdly, the cpu needs to be able to identify when it has fulfilled position needs.Well, maybe not just "needs", per se, but there's certainly no reason to go overboard. Minimums shouldn't be enough, but I get what you mean and completely agree.

baseballplyrmvp

05-22-2011, 09:08 PM

Actually, while the players are on LSU's board, it's unlikely they're spending much, if any, time on them. The CPU often devotes a high amount of time to their Top 10 or so, and no time to those beyond, even though they remain on the board.then whats the point of having those players, who rank lsu 1000 points behind their favorite school, on the board for 6 or more weeks if the cpu isnt gonna talk to them once? just cut ties with that player.

They already do? i bet the cpu added them (since cpu recruiting board assistance was set to on), and then the recruit committed to the other team. nvm on this point. lol
Well, maybe not just "needs", per se, but there's certainly no reason to go overboard. Minimums shouldn't be enough, but I get what you mean and completely agree.[/QUOTE]well i mean, one of lsu's recruiting needs was a punter. at the end of the regular season, one punter had already committed, and there were 3 other punters on the board, 2 of which were listed in the top 5 of the recruiting board.
another example, has lsu needing 1 mlb. after i manually took over for the recruiting for the offseason, i removed all the players i didnt have a shot at, cutting the board down to 16 players (13 of which were already committed, 3 of those commits were mlb's) from 35. i forgot to turn the cpu recruiting board assistance off. week 2's recruiting board had 3 more mlb's on it (had they all committed to lsu, there would have been 6 mlb commits). the cpu had already taken care of its need at mlb; why did it try to add 3 more? lol

JeffHCross

05-22-2011, 11:03 PM

then whats the point of having those players, who rank lsu 1000 points behind their favorite school, on the board for 6 or more weeks if the cpu isnt gonna talk to them once? just cut ties with that player.I don't disagree that they should cut ties. But it is worth noting that they aren't wasting time either. It's really the same question I'd have for the human players (and I know they exist) that have a 35 member board even though they only call 15 or less.

i bet the cpu added them (since cpu recruiting board assistance was set to on), and then the recruit committed to the other team.Yeah, the thing to keep in mind is that the CPU board processing takes place as the week advances but before recruit results are in. So recruits that commit to another team won't get removed until after the week advances.

well i mean, one of lsu's recruiting needs was a punter. at the end of the regular season, one punter had already committed, and there were 3 other punters on the board, 2 of which were listed in the top 5 of the recruiting board.Right. But you wouldn't necessarily want a team that's losing 3 LBs, but only "needs" 1 to be content with recruiting only 1, y'know?

the cpu had already taken care of its need at mlb; why did it try to add 3 more? lolDon't disagree with this either. No idea what would trigger that.