Gameplay - NCAA Football 14 Wish List & Feedback

[cdj]

http://www.thegamingtailgate.com/images/NCAA11/NCAAFootballLogo.jpg

Gameplay

Use this thread for wish list & feedback items relating to changes or improvements you would like to see in NCAA Football 14.

Be clear, but concise in making your wishes. Any off-topic posts will be deleted.

[souljahbill]

Better blocking logic

[Jayrah]

OMG I am so sick of trying to switch defenders to the closest guy and getting the safety, only to take him out of the play. Change the switching logic to closest defender PLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEASE!

[OSUCowboyofMD]

Can some offenses chill with the no-huddle?! Like seriously! Every team runs the no huddle and I hate playing defense!

[baseballplyrmvp]

line play is one area of the game that NEEDS to have some serious work to it. football games are won and lost in the trenches, so when are we finally gonna see that happen? we need to see partial wins happening on a regular basis. the way that it's set up right now simulates an all or nothing scenario. adding partial wins, gets one player into a better position to make a full win on his counterpart.

another thing that could really impact line play, would be to see 1vs1 and 2vs1 engagements having movement within them. on a run play, if a 300 lb tackle takes on a 170 lb safety (playing d-end), the tackle is going to push the corner downfield about 30 yards. its just like that one scene from the blindside, where michael pushes the one kid off of the field and over the fence. how many times have we seen a monster d-tackle be a force to be reckoned with, as he's constantly getting pressure into the backfield?

[baseballplyrmvp]

how bout a slider to determine the pace at which you come to the line on offense? this could be something that could be set on the fly and be available from the playcall screen?

setting it at 100, would mimic an oregon like pace (30 second offense :D) and would automatically put your player in a dead sprint back to the line as soon as the play ends (think of getting set, in position, at around the 35 second mark on the play clock). there wouldnt be a need to press :360Y:/ps3 equivelant as your players would do it automatically. obviously, the higher the slider is set at, the greater impact on stamina it has (90+ would have an extreme impact on stamina for most players)

setting it at 75 would have your team run an automatic no-huddle offense, however, there's no real hurry to get to the line (22-25 seconds remaining on the play clock?). still enough time to audible to a new play, but still has a slightly increased effect on your team's stamina.

at 50, would be the speed that its at now. your team huddles, and comes to the line at around 15-18 second mark.

at 25, it'd be equivelant to the chew clock pace, breaking the huddle with 12 seconds left and coming to the line at around 6-8 seconds.

at 0, your players stand around, and dont get set into position til about 2-3 seconds left on the play clock. would primarily be used in late game situations

[JeffHCross]

MVP, wouldn't that just be a modification to the existing Chew Clock setting in Adjustments? I realize you've got more choices there than just Aggressive/Balanced/Conservative, but ... yeah.

I agree that it would be nice to have a No-Huddle setting that doesn't require holding :ps3tri:

[baseballplyrmvp]

MVP, wouldn't that just be a modification to the existing Chew Clock setting in Adjustments? I realize you've got more choices there than just Aggressive/Balanced/Conservative, but ... yeah.

I agree that it would be nice to have a No-Huddle setting that doesn't require holding :ps3tri:

basically ya. it'd give you 5 distinct options instead of 3. it'd make the no huddle aspect automatic when its set above 70, however, the different "pace settings" would modify the speeds at which the players get to the line.

[souljahbill]

So 75 becomes no-huddle (going by the original proposition) but 74 is a really fast normal with 74 being slightly faster then 73?

What about super conservative, conservative, normal, aggressive, super aggressive? Same thing but without numbers.

[baseballplyrmvp]

So 75 becomes no-huddle (going by the original proposition) but 74 is a really fast normal with 74 being slightly faster then 73?

What about super conservative, conservative, normal, aggressive, super aggressive? Same thing but without numbers.in this case, going by incriments of 5 would be good enough. but super conservative, and super aggressive would work just as well. its just 2 more tempos they could add

[psuexv]

I wish the no huddle, especially for the CPU offense and user on defense was really looked at. I can't stand when a team that runs the no huddle comes out in 5 wide and then goes no huddle to run a Big set and have WRs at positions they would really not play at. Most teams that run a true no huddle actually do make substitutions on the fly.

Also with that, when a defense is playing a true no huddle team they also make some substitutions. It would be nice to be able to make the no huddle more realistic.

[gigemaggs99]

This is something simple but it's about the details right?

At the end of every game NCAA or NFL the coaches removed their headset prior to walking to midfield to shake hands. It would be cool if in the shot at the end of the game of the coaches shaking hands, it would be nice if they didn't have headsets on.

[psusnoop]

During games in NHL 13 while playing another user you get the occasional replay of certain plays. They can be skipped by both users pressing a button but it would be nice if NCAA would do this as well. I like seeing some big plays once in awhile.

[psusnoop]

I know that challenges are hard to implement but it would be very very nice in OD games and leagues that this would be an option that could be turned on. There are times where fumbles should be reviewed, catches should be reviewed ect..... But since it's online it doesn't happen. I wouldn't care f it was all generated by the CPU since these days it's all handled mostly through upstairs anyways. It would be nice to have the one challenge also, but I'd settle with it just being in there.

[baseballplyrmvp]

i was watching the high school showcase the other night with don bosco prep vs st thomas aquinas, and although i didnt watch the whole thing, i saw the two blocked punts that bosco forced in the first quarter. the first one happened due to a high snap and the second occured on an under-thrown/under-powered snap.

what would it take to get the perfectly done shotgun and special teams snaps to be based on snap power and accuracy ratings? this would add another dimension to recruiting for the o-line/special teams and position changes. and if a bad snap did occur, it'd help the pass rush somewhat, along with the greater possibility of blocking punts/ep's than what is currently in the game.

[TIMB0B]

i was watching the high school showcase the other night with don bosco prep vs st thomas aquinas, and although i didnt watch the whole thing, i saw the two blocked punts that bosco forced in the first quarter. the first one happened due to a high snap and the second occured on an under-thrown/under-powered snap.

what would it take to get the perfectly done shotgun and special teams snaps to be based on snap power and accuracy ratings? this would add another dimension to recruiting for the o-line/special teams and position changes. and if a bad snap did occur, it'd help the pass rush somewhat, along with the greater possibility of blocking punts/ep's than what is currently in the game.

That would be a great addition. I also think kick trajectory is a large part of why FGs get tipped, deflected, or blocked. The kick "arrow" on the game should go lower (to the top of the OL's heads), and the incentive needs to be a lot more power/distance on the kick, but there's the risk of blocks. I'm thinking the trajectory arrow should be related to the kicker's KPW rating (which it probably already is). With the arrow all the way down for the lowest kick trajectory is that kicker's maximum KPW, but the default arrow is only 75% of his KPW. Say you have a 99 KPW. His distance with the trajectory all the way down is 66 yards (no wind). With the arrow at the default position (75% of 99 KPW), his max distance is 49 yards. Anyway, 99 KPW's would be rare, so you'd have a lot of kickers lowering their trajectory a little to get enough power.

Another thing, not snap or special teams related, but the read/draw, read/dive exchanges; there should be bad exchanges. It could simply be timing based. If you try to hand-off too late, the RB/FB will not be looking for the ball as they advance up field, therefore a fumble occurs...or somesuch.

[baseballplyrmvp]

cpu clock management nearing the end of a half/end of game could use some better logic to it. i had a 48-37 lead over texas tech in this site's 360 od (i'm the OC of arizona state). i had the ball in the final 2 minutes in texas tech's redzone. 4th down comes along (with a running clock) and had the play clock entirely run out, there would have been only 1 second left on the clock. HOWEVER, for some reason, the cpu decided to kick a field goal with 26 seconds remaining in the game (25 on play clock).

this allowed the cpu controlled texas texas tech to run 2 plays, the final of which, went for a 60 something yard touchdown pass...ending the game at 51-44.

[baseballplyrmvp]

everyone's been complaining about piss poor blocking by fullbacks, linemen, and tight ends; well it applies to runningbacks as well. here's a pic taken from my rtg player (i'm the qb)

http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn284/baseballplyrmvp/422A0001_1_JPEG_SCREENSHOT_TXL.jpg

my rb had a choice between which one of the two free rushers to block. anyone think he actually chose to block one? :smh: nope.


there either need to be more slide protect options or they need to be changed in how they work. slide protect left and right dont work all that well, in that if you do SP one direction, you're often faced with a free rusher coming from the opposite side that you SP to. imo, what would work better would be some kind of spotlighting feature in which you could highlight individual defensive players (or maybe just non d-linemen?) who are blitzing. it would automatically clue your blockers in to who and where the blitz is coming from, much better than the current SP mechanic. as for SP aggressive and pinch, i havent noticed a real advantage in using them .

thinking about this further....obviously, correctly pinpointing out to your o-line + any other blockers who is blitzing will put them in a better blocking position from the start. this could also be a way of raising/lowering a qb's awareness over the coarse of the season and composure in game. the benefit is self explanatory: better blocking and possible ratings boost.

the downside would be when it comes to incorrectly identifying blitzers. it would pull linemen out of position and you'd risk having a missed rusher come at you. this would also cause your qb to get rattled easier (depending on his current awareness), which would, in turn, also affect how accurate his throws are, leading to more inaccurate passes.

the defensive counter to having blitzers identified would be show blitz. they could possibly add in another look or two or even going with a show position group blitz (safety blitz or lb blitz). showing blitz slightly pulls players out of position and so you wouldnt have total coverage over everyone, yet it'd be a way at possibly confusing opponents.

[Aglemar]

Personally, I wish that the underdog effect (or Mo as we call it) was a slider. Hopefully to tone down the upsets as well, but mostly for those of us who like to play D/D- teams and turn them into quality organizations. Anyone who has used a D team in dynasty mode against an AI opponent who is an A-rated team, but with a losing record probably knows what I mean. You might as well be playing against a team full of jedi from Star Wars (play recognition, warping defenisve players, rubber banding and suction blocking go from bad to unbelievably so).

[PDuncanOSU]

A couple of roster management, and playcalling changes that I think would improve gameplay:


Customizable formation audibles

As a spread-to-run team, I want to be able to set my constraint plays (bubble screens etc.) as quick audibles in each formation. A triple-option team probably doesn't care to have a deep and short pass audible. A Mike Leach style air-raid coach might not want a run and a play-action audible.
Team or formation specific depth charts

Let triple-option teams set A and B backs. Let spread teams set outside and slot receiver positions. On defense let us set nose tackle and 3-technique tackles separately.
Allow defenses to set their positions as strongside/weakside instead of left/right.

In many defenses, the strongside and weakside DEs and OLBs have very different responsibilities and require players with different skill sets.

[PDuncanOSU]

everyone's been complaining about piss poor blocking by fullbacks, linemen, and tight ends; well it applies to runningbacks as well. here's a pic taken from my rtg player (i'm the qb)



I would add WR blocking to this list. It's very frustrating to watch my receiver run downfield without blocking the corner guarding him, or the safety further downfield, while my bubble screen or outside run gets blown up in the backfield.

[baseballplyrmvp]

I would add WR blocking to this list. It's very frustrating to watch my receiver run downfield without blocking the corner guarding him, or the safety further downfield, while my bubble screen or outside run gets blown up in the backfield.

:+1:

wr's and te's lined up out wide dont have the assignment based blocking that o-linemen have. if they did, the blocking for bubble screens and outside run plays would be much better.

[blkkrptnt819]

*Weight and Momentum Matter
*Improved Fatigue (Would love to have a team that swaps in and out but can't because fatigue never really happens)
*Receivers that fight for the ball
*Better Blocking
*Better CPU Offensive Play Calling
*Improved Human Reaction to Running QBs
*Better way of doing difficulty (No more make human controlled players slow and dumb and boosting cpu player abilities)
*Remove DBs reacting to balls they can't see (There is no way a DB chasing a wide open receiver will react to a ball thrown underneath)
*Better Special Teams Blocking
*Animations ALWAYS play out at the same speed (ABSOLUTELY does not happen in real life)
*CPU DB NEVER run with a WR if a run play is called. No matter how much they are getting torched thru the air.
*Remove "up to speed" animation the option player has to go through and have the acceleration stat dictate how fast it happens
*Different throwing animations for QB
*player tendencies
*CPU QB that run and look to throw
*A Improved read option system (To hand you push A, to run as QB you must push turbo, but this allows you to move the mesh to get a better read i.e. QB moving a couple steps with the RB)
*The ability to select a defensive play THEN select the DL action (i.e stunt, rush left, rush right or make this a pre-play adjustment)
*Remove any and every uninterruptible animation and replace with one that can be (i.e. Sideline catch, push out of bounds)
*Bring back High/Low Hit Stick
*Remove any and all forced movement

[ryby6969]

Do something with the read option. I am fine with the DE crashing sometimes, but they crash almost every time and if I have a OLB blitzing to that side he follows the DE most times causing a big play when I had it played perfectly. It is just way over exaggerated to get it to work and it is somewhat frustrating when 2 or 3 guys run right by the QB with the ball to get the HB.


Also, I wish they would go with what Madden has online when playing defense. You do not know who the other person is using on defense until the ball is snapped. Will help in covering up blitzes if I want to bring a corner or LB and they do not know who I am controlling.

[blkkrptnt819]

Also, I wish they would go with what Madden has online when playing defense. You do not know who the other person is using on defense until the ball is snapped. Will help in covering up blitzes if I want to bring a corner or LB and they do not know who I am controlling.

That's a good idea!!!

[baseballplyrmvp]

change the gameplanning feature from an every play accessibility to just a pregame and halftime adjustment, as well as making changes during timeouts. this makes it more of a risk with strategy, in that you're forced to live with your gameplanning until a quarter/half/timeout occurs.

additionally, way more options should be available; several for each position group could be created, as well as global changes to offense/defense, like what we have now.

[JeffHCross]

If they made it a pregame/halftime adjustment (which I wouldn't mind), I think they'd have to completely overhaul the system (which I also wouldn't mind). The current system wouldn't work well as a half-long system.

[baseballplyrmvp]

If they made it a pregame/halftime adjustment (which I wouldn't mind), I think they'd have to completely overhaul the system (which I also wouldn't mind). The current system wouldn't work well as a half-long system.completely agree.

the positional group gameplanning would bring more of a philosophical approach to the game, rather than a play by play basis; and would also change how your players play accordingly.

ie: i would change the d-line aggressive/conservative approach to a speed rush vs bull rush vs contain vs balanced (gasp! more options :o). speed rushing would see your d-line rush straight up field and run around the tackles at the risk of opening up bigger running lanes inside and having a bigger pocket for the opposing qb. they'd also tend to favor finesse moves over power moves in line battles. bull rushing would have your d-line try to collapse the pocket by rushing in the direction of the qb, at the risk of allowing the outside run. they'd tend to favor power moves over finesse moves. containing, would feature your linemen locking up with an o-linemen, not really attempting to rush the qb. this would give the qb slightly more time to throw, but the linemen would also be slightly more successful in shedding their blocks (regarding scrambles and the run game). balanced would be a combination of all 3.


thats just a rough example of one position group, and what it could be like. it needs some work, but it'd be better than the current options.

[baseballplyrmvp]

how bout a new way to change up the zone defense bubbles that would be entirely based on your players' ratings?

the game has used the same plays, same looks, and same size of zone bubbles for almost 10 years now. i think they should change this, so that the size and shape of the zone bubble would be dependant on your players' speed, acceleration, and agility. the speed would affect the size globally, acceleration would affect the shape vertically, and agility would affect it horizontally.

this would be a great way of updating zone defenses as now every team would play zones differently. you'd be forced to know more about your team's abilities and also where the holes in your zone defenses would be. i think the greatest argument for this, would be that you're now making every team's defensive play art unique.

[blkkrptnt819]

I like this idea though I believe zone rating should play some part. Could you imagine looking at a freshman's zone bubble in your play art? You would have to find all kinds of ways to cover that up. It would dictate scheme and I like it.

[baseballplyrmvp]

I like this idea though I believe zone rating should play some part. Could you imagine looking at a freshman's zone bubble in your play art? You would have to find all kinds of ways to cover that up. It would dictate scheme and I like it.

ya i was trying to think of a way to include the zone coverage rating, last night, but couldnt think of anything "good". the only thing that i could come up with would be a two color shaded system, where the base color (lighter shade) would signify the player's range, and the second color (darker shade) would go over top of it and signify the player's ability to make a play on the ball. it'd be like simply getting to an area is one thing, but being able to get your body into a position to make a play on the ball is another.

[Rudy]

it'd be like simply getting to an area is one thing, but being able to get your body into a position to make a play on the ball is another.

This is an area where we used to have control until they took away the knockdown slider. NCAA 09 was the last game to have this. Awareness/coverage dictated how tight the actual coverage was and the Knockdown slider determined how well they could play the ball. Raise the knockdown slider and they could swat 10 foot passes away. Drop it to 0 and they barely made any plays. It was great. On the PS2 versions you had to crank it to the max. In NCAA 06 you could throw too easily into coverage so you had to raise it to make it better. It was the exact opposite on the PS3 due to the super leaping LBs. So I would drop it to 0 to fix that issue.

Both EA football games could really benefit by adding some key sliders and even attribute sliders to tweak things. If they refuse to use their tuning files then give us those tools to fix some things. Sliders for QB awareness (cpu QBs on lower levels are idiots), Man vs Zone coverage, Knockdown/Play the Ball slider, kick return blocking, fatigue, fumbles and injuries are greatly needed imo. If we could get attribute sliders to adjust things like agility, acceleration, RB special moves like stiff arm or truck, that would be fantastic as well.

Of course making the sliders so they actually work would be nice. The Madden team's pass reaction slider is useless. Other sliders don't have enough power either.

[JeffHCross]

how bout a new way to change up the zone defense bubbles that would be entirely based on your players' ratings?I think the intention of locomotion and similar systems is to make ratings important to whether or not your defender can actually make a play. So are you talking about the actual appearance of the zones (like on a coach cam) should change based on ratings, or just that Joe Average can't cover the same size zone that the Honey Badger can? Because I'm pretty sure the latter is already true, though not as readily apparent as it is in real life.

[baseballplyrmvp]

I think the intention of locomotion and similar systems is to make ratings important to whether or not your defender can actually make a play. So are you talking about the actual appearance of the zones (like on a coach cam) should change based on ratings, or just that Joe Average can't cover the same size zone that the Honey Badger can? Because I'm pretty sure the latter is already true, though not as readily apparent as it is in real life.

both. obivously the average joe cant cover the same ground that a troy polamalu can.....however, it'd be extremely nice if the play art updated accordingly to reflect how much space a player can actually cover (on coach cam). i know that average joe isnt capable of covering the current zone assigned to the FS on a cover 2 play, but it'd be nice to know what he's capable of....which will alter my playcalling, as i'd be more aware of what he can and cant do.

[JeffHCross]

Yeah, I agree, it'd be nice. Trying to wrap my head around (potentially) how complicated the code might be though, unless they kept it incredibly simple (which would probably suffice).

[baseballplyrmvp]

Yeah, I agree, it'd be nice. Trying to wrap my head around (potentially) how complicated the code might be though, unless they kept it incredibly simple (which would probably suffice).

ya, it could be really complicated. i think the easiest way to go though, would be to take the current zone bubble sizes and set them equal to a certain speed/accel/agility model. then every increase/decrease in speed/accel/agility from that model affects the size and shape of the zone, accordingly. still, thats easier said than done. lol

i just look at your basic cover 1 play in a 425 defense for example, and see such a tiny zone that the FS is assigned to. its the same size for every safety in the game, regardless of physical skills.

[JeffHCross]

ya, it could be really complicated. i think the easiest way to go though, would be to take the current zone bubble sizes and set them equal to a certain speed/accel/agility model. then every increase/decrease in speed/accel/agility from that model affects the size and shape of the zone, accordingly. still, thats easier said than done. lolYeah, but that's much, much easier than my head began to think of.

Only problem I see is that the current mechanism displays Cover 4 zones are "smaller" versions of Cover 2 zones. So you'd have to come up with some way to differentiate assignment versus ability. Or range of coverage ability versus range of responsibility. You could possibly do it with some combination of opacity and overlap, but it could get overly difficult for Joe Average to be able to understand it on Coach Cam.

Certainly a good idea though. Wish I'd thought of it :D

[baseballplyrmvp]

right.....something to think about for the future i guess. :D

its just funny though, because it doesnt affect the gameplay at all.....merely just a dynamic defensive play art. but the difference it could possibly make are substantial, especially when a play/formation editor gets involved.

[JeffHCross]

Yep. Plus it might help with all of those "my safety can't make a play on this route, it's a money play" discussions. Sometimes it's the game, sometimes it's your team.

[ryby6969]

They had something similar for the QB's with the vision cone. It was larger or smaller based on their awareness so I am sure it is doable.

[JeffHCross]

Playing Heisman Challenge (relevant to gameplay because it's CPU clock logic), tie game, we're on offense with less than 70 seconds in the game. We've driven down to inside the opponents 20. Not only does my CPU coach call a timeout with 1:00 to go (as the CPU always does), but he then calls timeout immediately after a 3rd down play, with 56 seconds to go. The opposing defense is left with all three timeouts, in a situation where we should have at least been able to get them to call one, if not two, timeouts to save time for their offense. No real coach would call timeout, in that situation, with a 4th down coming and a full playclock left to run.

[Rudy]

Playing Heisman Challenge (relevant to gameplay because it's CPU clock logic), tie game, we're on offense with less than 70 seconds in the game. We've driven down to inside the opponents 20. Not only does my CPU coach call a timeout with 1:00 to go (as the CPU always does), but he then calls timeout immediately after a 3rd down play, with 56 seconds to go. The opposing defense is left with all three timeouts, in a situation where we should have at least been able to get them to call one, if not two, timeouts to save time for their offense. No real coach would call timeout, in that situation, with a 4th down coming and a full playclock left to run.

If it makes you feel any better, late game clock management and AI in Madden 13 is the worst I have seen in a long time and they never patched it. The logic is AWFUL this year and inexcusable imo. Nobody can justify the cpu bringing in 3 TEs to run a power run up the middle with two seconds left on the clock and 20 yards out (needing a TD).

[JeffHCross]

Yeah, NCAA isn't much better. I assume it's shared code.

[Rudy]

Yeah, NCAA isn't much better. I assume it's shared code.

Somehow it got a lot worse in Madden 13. Made late game management in Madden 12 look like geniuses. Does the cpu actually try to score a TD at the end of a game in NCAA? If so, they didn't share the code. In Madden 13 with no time outs, the cpu will run draws and running plays instead of throwing the ball down the field in order to score.

[Rudy]

Do LEs still dominate the sack department in NCAA? This is a problem still in Madden 13. LEs get sacks way too much compared to REs.

[JeffHCross]

Somehow it got a lot worse in Madden 13. Made late game management in Madden 12 look like geniuses. Does the cpu actually try to score a TD at the end of a game in NCAA? If so, they didn't share the code. In Madden 13 with no time outs, the cpu will run draws and running plays instead of throwing the ball down the field in order to score.I see plenty of draws from NCAA teams too, even with timeouts. Even in RTG/Heisman challenge, I see plenty of running calls late while driving to win. While Madden may be worse (I'll take your word for it), it's not by much.


Do LEs still dominate the sack department in NCAA? This is a problem still in Madden 13. LEs get sacks way too much compared to REs.I had two very similar DEs on my Florida State team this year, and they were about even for the year, though there would be certain games where one of them would dominate or the other would.

[Rudy]

Odrick destroyed Cam Wake on my team in sacks. Cam maybe had 6 sacks in my first year. Odrick was injured for 3-4 weeks and still ended up with around 14. He got 4 sacks in one game once. The LE just seems to get by the RT too easily. Maybe it's a ratings thing but it's lousy.

[blkkrptnt819]

I will say when controlling my DEs I have a harder time getting past the LT no matter how much worse he is than my DE or the RT. I get past the RT just fine.

[baseballplyrmvp]

DPP is a must have next year. i'd love to see a way for your on-the-field performances impact the ratings of your players. the way the game is right now, its impossible to feel the difference between a player on a major hotstreak and a player who's really struggling.

also, line interactions need to get a major focus sometime soon. line battles are not static engagements and are not a situation that always offer a clear winner/loser. this is one of the primary reasons as to why qb rollouts, bootlegs, outside runs from the gun, etc are all busted plays....there's zero line movement. this affects both the passing game and the running game.

[JeffHCross]

MVP, this is going to sound awfully strange ... but try a game or two at default sliders on Varsity. See if you think there's more line play then. I may have been seeing things, but I sure thought so ...

[baseballplyrmvp]

MVP, this is going to sound awfully strange ... but try a game or two at default sliders on Varsity. See if you think there's more line play then. I may have been seeing things, but I sure thought so ...

i'm seeing it a little bit, but its no where near where it should be. i see o-linemen pushing d-linemen back maybe 1-2 steps and thats it. other than that, linemen just engage each other and do nothing until the ball carrier has passed them by.

even if the change is purely cosmetic, i want to be seeing d-linemen trying to get off the blocks of the o-linemen; not just standing there with their arms on each others' shoulders. additionally, not every engagement is straight up either. IRL, speed rushers never try to match an o-tackle in a strength for strength shoving match; they try to beat the tackle by getting around them, not through them. this happens all of the time in the game. its frustrating beyond all belief. i'm not even through the first quarter yet, and after going into instant replay after every play to analyze it, i have to quit this game (even with a 21-0 lead as USC over georgia), as its making me mad.

whats the best way to go about having certain issues fixed, regarding blocking logic and defensive ai logic (in terms of who's covering who)? post pictures and then give an analysis of who should do what?

[JeffHCross]

whats the best way to go about having certain issues fixed, regarding blocking logic and defensive ai logic (in terms of who's covering who)? post pictures and then give an analysis of who should do what?It's been done before. I'm not sure how to go about it now. I don't think it's a knowledge hurdle, but a technical one.

Now, one thing you mentioned is that you're talking about the ball carrier. There's more line play, than I expected, in the pass game. But I agree it's not there, pretty much at all, in the run game.

[ryby6969]

Hopefully they can fix how DB's react to the read option. It has been terrible for two years now.

[psusnoop]

Hopefully they can fix how DB's react to the read option. It has been terrible for two years now.


This must get fixed. Seeing it more and more lately. It's really frustrating to see a DB back peddling faster then the HB is running :smh:

[ryby6969]

Either that or running away from the ball carrier to the sideline. :(

[baseballplyrmvp]

This must get fixed. Seeing it more and more lately. It's really frustrating to see a DB back peddling faster then the HB is running :smh:

db's also dont react until the ball carrier has passed the line of scrimmage.

[baseballplyrmvp]

while the aggressive zone coverage bug bit me on this play, the even bigger facepalm is the playcall by my cpu controlled DC.

http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn284/baseballplyrmvp/uscgame1-1.jpg
http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn284/baseballplyrmvp/uscgame2.jpg
http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn284/baseballplyrmvp/uscgame3.jpg

imo, an easy situation to set up that would solve a lot of problems would be: if there are 10 seconds left in the game, and if the losing team is more than 25 yards from the endzone, the winning team's defensive playcall is ALWAYS a prevent from the quarters defense. no more underneath zones or corners blitzing....just put 8 damn guys in the endzone. :smh: this just pisses me off

[JeffHCross]

Since we don't have the ability to use Mass Subs in an Online game, I'd like to see a "Backups" package added to every formation. That would allow us to do Mass Subs without pausing (in a CPU game), or do it at all in an Online game.

[Longhornfan]

How about on field goal attempts & extra point kicks, the camera view switches from behind the kicker to elevated behind the goal posts.

[Jayrah]

How about on field goal attempts & extra point kicks, the camera view switches from behind the kicker to elevated behind the goal posts.Interesting idea. Would make the angles more difficult on longer field goals, as long as the arrow stayed over the center and got smaller with the players. Basically, the longer the field goal, the more difficult it would become to see the arrow. In fact, they could use the fading numbers incorporation with the field goal arrow. Another idea would be to incorporate a short range/long range kick accuracy rating.

Might make kicking a field goal fun again.

[Jayrah]

I really wish EA would add the position of Slot Receiver and place bigger emphasis on certain attributes like agility and catch in traffic for these players. It would make the entire game a little more dynamic, from recruiting to actual gameplay.

[Rudy]

I really wish EA would add the position of Slot Receiver and place bigger emphasis on certain attributes like agility and catch in traffic for these players. It would make the entire game a little more dynamic, from recruiting to actual gameplay.

Slot WR, 3rd Down Back (been in Madden for awhile), Short yardage back (3rd or 4th down and 1 or inches to go), 3rd Down DL (3rd and long passing situations) that would make many formation subs unnecessary as well.

[JeffHCross]

I really wish EA would add the position of Slot Receiver and place bigger emphasis on certain attributes like agility and catch in traffic for these players. It would make the entire game a little more dynamic, from recruiting to actual gameplay.

Slot WR, 3rd Down Back (been in Madden for awhile), Short yardage back (3rd or 4th down and 1 or inches to go), 3rd Down DL (3rd and long passing situations) that would make many formation subs unnecessary as well.I can't remember if this was only in Head Coach 09 or also made its way to Madden, but at least one of them had a feature where, for every major position (i.e. WR, DE, DT), you identified what was important to you (e.g. Possession receiver, 3-4 rush end, 3-4 rush OLB), and the game would dynamically change the OVR rating of the players on your team to match those philosophies.

I think Madden must have had it too, because I can remember seeing more than just WR ... I swear I did it for WR #1, WR #2, and Slot Receiver as well. But I may be wrong about that.

[Rudy]

I can't remember if this was only in Head Coach 09 or also made its way to Madden, but at least one of them had a feature where, for every major position (i.e. WR, DE, DT), you identified what was important to you (e.g. Possession receiver, 3-4 rush end, 3-4 rush OLB), and the game would dynamically change the OVR rating of the players on your team to match those philosophies.

I think Madden must have had it too, because I can remember seeing more than just WR ... I swear I did it for WR #1, WR #2, and Slot Receiver as well. But I may be wrong about that.

Madden has that right now in CCM. When I signed Plaxico Burress in my first year his overall jumped a lot if I set the WR1 philosophy to Spectacular catch/red zone. If I set it to speed he would take a hit. It does have #3 WR. My only beef with that is I don't see a player scheme for second TE. Some offenses that is really important - like SF which use a ton. Both times when I did a CCM they dumped Delanie Walker for a 3rd or 4th rounder and left the cupboard bare at that spot.

[TIMB0B]

Better blocking logic

I've been playing the game recently after a long hiatus. I don't know if it's a universal problem when the running the option from under center (I don't think it is), but trying to run the Flexbone specifically is a huge problem. Aside from the QB-Pitchman relationship being out of sync more often than not, there are too many whiffed blocks to the playside. I'm playing on Heisman, so that may be it, but I can run the read/option out of the shotgun without any blocking logic problems.

[JeffHCross]

Concur. While it's not just under center option that has problems, there is inconsistency between Read Option and other styles of offense, specifically in regard to whiffed and missed blocks. Heisman is a factor, but not the sole cause of poor blocking.

[TIMB0B]

Concur. While it's not just under center option that has problems, there is inconsistency between Read Option and other styles of offense, specifically in regard to whiffed and missed blocks. Heisman is a factor, but not the sole cause of poor blocking.
I ran this offense back in high school. The beauty is in how it's blocked. The playside DE and OLB are duped into believing they can stop it. :D


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q27Vb05cJ8U

[JeffHCross]

Same here. Triple and veer. Though we weren't all that good at it.

[Schauwn]

I've only noticed this problem on Heisman. The DE/OLB shoot up field well before there is any time to diagnose whether to pitch or not before being tackled for a loss. Less likely on AA and Varsity.

[TIMB0B]

Same here. Triple and veer. Though we weren't all that good at it.

Our first year of installing the offense we took our lumps with a soph QB and the OL trying to understand the concept of "Base, Backer, Safety" blocking progression. Two years later, that QB and one of our RBs ended up getting full rides to Air Force, while our FB (didn't make the grades) went to JUCO on scholarship as well. Highly productive offense, however the defense couldn't stop anybody.

[Rudy]

Can we get some more advanced DL moves? My goodness EA's football games are basic in this area. 2K5 had more control. When you look at how NBA 2K13 has a dizzying amount of dribble, post and shot moves due to r-sticks, modifiers and things why are we stuck with only two moves on the r-stick which don't even work well? Heck in Madden the best move is to just run into the player, engage and then try to run around him. There is nothing to this area and it is beyond stale. If I choose an outside rush every time you would think the AI would pick up on that and force me inside. There is no strategy or counter moves. A huge area of improvement is necessary here.

[baseballplyrmvp]

Can we get some more advanced DL moves? My goodness EA's football games are basic in this area. 2K5 had more control. When you look at how NBA 2K13 has a dizzying amount of dribble, post and shot moves due to r-sticks, modifiers and things why are we stuck with only two moves on the r-stick which don't even work well? Heck in Madden the best move is to just run into the player, engage and then try to run around him. There is nothing to this area and it is beyond stale. If I choose an outside rush every time you would think the AI would pick up on that and force me inside. There is no strategy or counter moves. A huge area of improvement is necessary here.

:+1:X:infinity:

visually, it'd be nice to see d-linemen pulling moves and seeing them not be effective. i really hope that the infinity engine lives up to its potential, because after watching the alamo bowl game last night and seeing texas d-end alex okafor just completely manhandle the oregon state linemen, it'd be an awesome touch to finally be able to see one linemen's power and quickness pay off by pushing other guys around.

[TIMB0B]

:+1:X:infinity:

visually, it'd be nice to see d-linemen pulling moves and seeing them not be effective. i really hope that the infinity engine lives up to its potential, because after watching the alamo bowl game last night and seeing texas d-end alex okafor just completely manhandle the oregon state linemen, it'd be an awesome touch to finally be able to see one linemen's power and quickness pay off by pushing other guys around.
Okafor is a great example. Which also reminds me of how the bullrush in the game needs to be redone, and this goes with the OL as well. EA could make use of the :360rt:/:ps3R2: buttons which are used for "sprint." They should have it function specifically as a bullrush button on defense and vice versa a run blocking button on offense after engaging with an opponent.

I should add as a ballcarrier, it should help break tackles i.e. leg drive through a defender's grasp.

Ratings should be universal in this sense. Okafor's bullrush, for example, means he'd be a fundamentally solid run blocker on the OL.


UNIVERSAL ATTRIBUTES


MEASURABLES
ATTRIBUTES
BALLCARRYING
RECEIVING
BLOCKING
DEFENSE


40 Yard Dash
Speed w/ Acceleration






20 Yard Shuttle
Acceleration






3 Cone Drill
Agility
Dropback, Spin, Juke
Route Running
Blocking Footwork
Strafe, Backpedal, Finesse Move


Vertical
Jumping
Hurdle
Leaping Catch Range

Leaping Swat Range


Broad Jump
Explosiveness
Trucking, Diving
Diving Catch Range
Impact Block
Hit Power, Diving Tackle Range


Bench Press
Upper Body Strength
Stiff Arm
Release
Pass Blocking
Block Shedding, Power Move


Squat
Lower Body Strength
Break Tackle

Run Blocking
Bullrush, Press Cover


60 Yard Shuttle
Stamina






GPA
Discipline (Penalty Propensity)






Aptitude Test
Playbook Knowledge

[JeffHCross]

TIM, there's a reason they went away from universals though. An agile player does not automatically mean solid routes or spin moves, for example.

[TIMB0B]

TIM, there's a reason they went away from universals though. An agile player does not automatically mean solid routes or spin moves, for example.

Yeah, but you'd still have other factors such as awareness, height, and weight that determine effective route running and spin moves where agility is the main component. A guy with good agility can go in and out of route breaks (change of direction skills) more fluidly than someone not as agile; we know that. Agility + lower center of gravity + lower weight = optimum route running and spin move ability. That is not to say a 5'5 160lbs guy by default is a 99 agility. It just means he has that potential because of his size.

An OL/DL is not going to be as agile as a skill position player because of their weight, so their rating will naturally be much lower. However, it doesn't mean they won't have good blocking footwork. A 99 agility to a lineman would be around 70. Anything higher and their weight needs to be much lighter than the average lineman.

My biggest reason for wanting universal attributes is because the majority of all recruits played both ways in high school. Everyone is essentially able to play either side of the ball, and you see it happen in college where prospects were recruited for a specific position (i.e. they were NOT recruited as athletes), but end up moving positions: DL to OL, RB to DB, LB to FB, QB to TE, etc. and vice versa. This is because, fundamentally, they have universal skills.

[JeffHCross]

Okay, are we solely talking recruits here, or are we extending that to all players and positions? The discussion here is unclear on that to me.

The primary problem I have with what you saying is that you said "potential" in one place and "universal skills" in another. The two are not the same. An agile running back is not inherently a top-tier route runner as a wide receiver. Barry Sanders wouldn't have been as adept at running routes as Jerry Rice was. Because while, for example, juke moves and route breaks are both agility-based skills, and they share the same fundamentals, they are still different skills. Skills that take practice, both in practice and at game-speed, to become experts at. There's nothing universal about things that are truly a skill.

I agree with you that a 6-8, 280 lb tight end with blocking skills can transition pretty easily to be a 6-8, 310 lb right tackle. I say this because Reid Fragel did that this year for Ohio State. And I agree that the game, as currently coded, doesn't allow for such a thing to happen. A tight end will not suddenly bulk up and display the blocking skills necessary to be a right tackle. But that type of transition can't happen overnight either.

I do agree that recruits need to be more universal. ATHs should be the norm, not the rarity. But while potential is universal (i.e. a defensive lineman that can explode off the ball would probably be a great run blocker), skills are not 1:1.

Really, the changes you're suggesting would be best if there was some kind of "potential" aspect to a players ratings, not just a rating set in stone. That would mean a player with a high squat (which, in the game, means break tackle, run block or tackling, depending on your position) would have a high potential in those three ratings, but would not guarantee he'll have an 80 in all three coming out of high school.

Make sense?

[TIMB0B]

Okay, are we solely talking recruits here, or are we extending that to all players and positions? The discussion here is unclear on that to me.

The primary problem I have with what you saying is that you said "potential" in one place and "universal skills" in another. The two are not the same. An agile running back is not inherently a top-tier route runner as a wide receiver. Barry Sanders wouldn't have been as adept at running routes as Jerry Rice was. Because while, for example, juke moves and route breaks are both agility-based skills, and they share the same fundamentals, they are still different skills. Skills that take practice, both in practice and at game-speed, to become experts at. There's nothing universal about things that are truly a skill.

I agree with you that a 6-8, 280 lb tight end with blocking skills can transition pretty easily to be a 6-8, 310 lb right tackle. I say this because Reid Fragel did that this year for Ohio State. And I agree that the game, as currently coded, doesn't allow for such a thing to happen. A tight end will not suddenly bulk up and display the blocking skills necessary to be a right tackle. But that type of transition can't happen overnight either.

I do agree that recruits need to be more universal. ATHs should be the norm, not the rarity. But while potential is universal (i.e. a defensive lineman that can explode off the ball would probably be a great run blocker), skills are not 1:1.

Really, the changes you're suggesting would be best if there was some kind of "potential" aspect to a players ratings, not just a rating set in stone. That would mean a player with a high squat (which, in the game, means break tackle, run block or tackling, depending on your position) would have a high potential in those three ratings, but would not guarantee he'll have an 80 in all three coming out of high school.

Make sense?

What you reiterated in the last paragraph is pretty much what I'm saying. Somehow I forgot to include position specific skills in all this. Think of the universal attributes, as charted in the previous post above, as a player's base universal rating with his height and weight included (i.e. his minimum rating no matter what position he played)...THEN when you factor in his position specific skills, the rating fluctuates for each position. His knowledge (experience) from position to position determines his max potential agility rating for each position.

Height + Weight + Agility Rating = Base Universal Agility Rating (3-Cone Drill time)

Base Universal Agility Rating + Position Specific Skills = Max Potential Agility Rating

Position Specific Agility ratings affected are Dropback, Spin, Juke, Route Running (Route Breaks), Blocking Footwork, Strafe, Backpedal, and Finesse Move.

I was initially talking about how height and weight should be factored in agility ratings in the previous post, but forgot to tie-in position specific skills. Although I did conclude with my point, which was that players should be more universal (i.e. able to play multiple positions), it starts with their combine measurables being universal, then position specific skills determine where they end up. And an athlete with great measurables, but not great at position specific skills, would be considered "raw talent." He needs development.

[JeffHCross]

Okay, if we tie this all into "potential" then I whole-heartedly agree. We could both reduce the complexity of recruiting (less ratings to scout and worry about), while increasing the hit/miss strategy (that DT sure looks like a possible OL).

I think there needs to be a "potential" for players (I know it's there, and it's hidden, but there should be a way to see it once the player has signed), and I think there needs to be progression beyond just the position ratings. "Potential" is definitely one way to do it. In particular, I hate how slowly AWR progresses after a position change. It should be much closer to logrithmic growth (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/17/Binary_logarithm_plot_with_ticks.svg/408px-Binary_logarithm_plot_with_ticks.svg.png), where the growth will occur rapidly until it gets closer to some upper bound. Progression should not be a linear function.

On a related note, I think we need to add "secondary" positions, where some of the player's progression will cause those secondary positions to progress. And, more importantly, the player's AWR would take a much, much smaller hit (if any) at that secondary position. This would allow for situations like Ryan Tannehill or Kerry Meier, where a backup QB was playing WR for a significant chunk of his playing career. As it stands now, I believe the hit to switch from WR to QB is significant. And it should be, for an average Joe at WR. But Tannehill, for example, was always in the QB meetings, always taking QB reps in practice, etc, etc. That should be a possibility. Especially with the game putting such a heavy emphasis on ATHs that can play multiple positions ... GREAT! Now show me how I can actually let that ATH play multiple positions. A secondary position (which wouldn't be required for every player, just an option) would help that, IMO.

[TIMB0B]

Okay, if we tie this all into "potential" then I whole-heartedly agree. We could both reduce the complexity of recruiting (less ratings to scout and worry about), while increasing the hit/miss strategy (that DT sure looks like a possible OL).

I think there needs to be a "potential" for players (I know it's there, and it's hidden, but there should be a way to see it once the player has signed), and I think there needs to be progression beyond just the position ratings. "Potential" is definitely one way to do it. In particular, I hate how slowly AWR progresses after a position change. It should be much closer to logrithmic growth (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/17/Binary_logarithm_plot_with_ticks.svg/408px-Binary_logarithm_plot_with_ticks.svg.png), where the growth will occur rapidly until it gets closer to some upper bound. Progression should not be a linear function.

On a related note, I think we need to add "secondary" positions, where some of the player's progression will cause those secondary positions to progress. And, more importantly, the player's AWR would take a much, much smaller hit (if any) at that secondary position. This would allow for situations like Ryan Tannehill or Kerry Meier, where a backup QB was playing WR for a significant chunk of his playing career. As it stands now, I believe the hit to switch from WR to QB is significant. And it should be, for an average Joe at WR. But Tannehill, for example, was always in the QB meetings, always taking QB reps in practice, etc, etc. That should be a possibility. Especially with the game putting such a heavy emphasis on ATHs that can play multiple positions ... GREAT! Now show me how I can actually let that ATH play multiple positions. A secondary position (which wouldn't be required for every player, just an option) would help that, IMO.
:+1:

Right there with you on everything. Especially like going a step further with the idea of secondary positions.

If you remember my post about my "off-season dynasty" wish that included recruiting and a spring depth chart, the secondary position makes me think the regular season depth chart should be utilized the same way I suggested for the off-season: make a depth chart applicable to practice i.e. set the percentage of reps for each position group during practice totaling 100%.

Example:

QBs
QB 1 = 50% reps
QB 2 = 25% reps
QB 3 = 15% reps
QB 4 = 10% reps

Now say "QB 2" is a WR as his secondary position. You would place him in the "practice depth chart" where you want him, so he can develop at his secondary position as well as at QB. By the way, I think the position groups should be determined by your specific offense i.e. SE, FL, Slot positions, etc. each separately instead of one big group of WR like we currently have.

Example:

Wide Receivers

SE
WR 1 = 30% reps
WR 2 = 25% reps
WR 3 = 25% reps
WR 4 = 25% reps

FL
QB 2 = 30% reps
WR 1 = 25% reps
WR 2 = 25% reps
WR 3 = 20% reps

*Rep percentages are arbitrary.

[JeffHCross]

While I would absolutely love that, I wouldn't mind doing the simplest version and having it be so that a "secondary" position gets 20-30% of your "progression". So a guy that's only a WR gets 100% WR skills, while a WR/QB gets 75% WR, 25% QB. Or something "simple" like that. Your idea is possibly the advanced version, whereas I just want something there to start with. :)

[TIMB0B]

While I would absolutely love that, I wouldn't mind doing the simplest version and having it be so that a "secondary" position gets 20-30% of your "progression". So a guy that's only a WR gets 100% WR skills, while a WR/QB gets 75% WR, 25% QB. Or something "simple" like that. Your idea is possibly the advanced version, whereas I just want something there to start with. :)

That's fine with me, but aside from that, I'd still love to be able to divvy reps during the off-season. I want some kind of control on the development of my players.

[JeffHCross]

That's another idea I had, but it morphed into the idea of the secondary position ... basically as "Scout as" and "Train as". For example, just because I have a Speed WR doesn't mean I want his Speed to be the focus of his development ... maybe I want him to develop his Possession skills. Or maybe I changed his position and I'm primarily worried about his AWR. Or maybe I have a CB that I want to "Train as" a SS because I'm expecting to move him during the offseason.

2k had something similar on their college basketball titles ... I think that was just in the weekly practices, you could tell the game what you wanted individual players to practice on (and thereby progress on).

[ryby6969]

Watching Clowney destroy Michigan makes it apparent that OL/DL interactions need to be completely redone. Stud defensive ends just do not have the impact they should in the game, especially the running game. Hell, the play on the goaline that the Stanford player made against Wisky will never be made in NCAA right now. Just cancels out the trenches and the game really suffers because of it.

[baseballplyrmvp]

Watching Clowney destroy Michigan makes it apparent that OL/DL interactions need to be completely redone. Stud defensive ends just do not have the impact they should in the game, especially the running game. Hell, the play on the goaline that the Stanford player made against Wisky will never be made in NCAA right now. Just cancels out the trenches and the game really suffers because of it.

might be because the right and left tackles seem to be overpowered in the game. sim a dynasty, and then look at the leaders in pancake stats. right tackles will usually way outnumber every other position (like 8 of the top 10). left tackles will have the second most, but only slightly more than the 3 inside positions.

[ryby6969]

might be because the right and left tackles seem to be overpowered in the game. sim a dynasty, and then look at the leaders in pancake stats. right tackles will usually way outnumber every other position (like 8 of the top 10). left tackles will have the second most, but only slightly more than the 3 inside positions.

I would like to see the move a DT does to split a double team used in 1on1 blocking. The number of animations that play(not sure if they have more in the game that just do not trigger) are far to limited. There is no push up the middle, and the only disruption really comes from blockers just completely missing instead of getting beat. I rarely even look at pancakes because in the our Powerhouse OD my TE's are leading my team in pancake blocks. You can see the potential of what the line play COULD be, but it just rarely ever happens. It is way too important for it not to be addressed this year IMO.

[JeffHCross]

might be because the right and left tackles seem to be overpowered in the game. sim a dynasty...That's only in simulation though. In actual gameplay, the LT and RT really aren't that overpowering. The Powerhouse OD doesn't even end up with guys in double figures in pancakes for the season.

I don't know if sliders are to blame, but it seems like "stud" ANYTHING, no matter what position, can't dominate the game in NCAA. Maybe a stud HB or QB can, but a stud CB will not force you to look the other way. A stud WR can be easily shut down (unless your opponent has sick user catch skills). A stud d-lineman will not blow up the opposing line any more than an above-average lineman will.

You can use stick skills to make a stud player play like one ... like DEs that people are able to figure out how to get around blocking. But if left to their own devices, studs of any position won't dominate. They'll just play slightly better than normal.


I would like to see the move a DT does to split a double team used in 1on1 blocking. The number of animations that play(not sure if they have more in the game that just do not trigger) are far to limited. There is no push up the middle, and the only disruption really comes from blockers just completely missing instead of getting beat.In short, there's no push ANYWHERE, especially in the running game. Pass Blocking has definitely gotten better this year, with a lot more chicken-fighting and pockets that actually form ... but there are too many "win" animations and not enough "stalemate" or "advantage" animations. If I try a swim move with a DE and it's not good enough, I shouldn't get pushed to the ground, not every time. I should get pushed wide or just shoved off the ball. Too many animations result in one or the other going down. A bull rush move should not result in a guy getting pushed to the ground face first. I've never seen that happen in real life with any frequency.

Unfortunately, I believe that's a limitation of the engine itself, and I don't expect to see a change this generation.

[baseballplyrmvp]

That's only in simulation though. In actual gameplay, the LT and RT really aren't that overpowering. The Powerhouse OD doesn't even end up with guys in double figures in pancakes for the season.

I don't know if sliders are to blame, but it seems like "stud" ANYTHING, no matter what position, can't dominate the game in NCAA. Maybe a stud HB or QB can, but a stud CB will not force you to look the other way. A stud WR can be easily shut down (unless your opponent has sick user catch skills). A stud d-lineman will not blow up the opposing line any more than an above-average lineman will.

You can use stick skills to make a stud player play like one ... like DEs that people are able to figure out how to get around blocking. But if left to their own devices, studs of any position won't dominate. They'll just play slightly better than normal.

good point about the sim stats. forgot about that aspect. however, for the bolded, thats just really sad.

is the easiest way to fix this, by lowering the ratings across the board? it seems, imo, that average players are set up to be rated around a 75 or so, and since the highest rating you're allowed is a 99, it makes it extremely hard to see the studs separate their gameplay/skills from the above average players.

[ryby6969]

One problem with the pass rush is the fact that there are really no speed rush moves to speak of. The only time it "feels" like a speed rush is if they jump the snap. To your point Jeff, you can turn almost anyone you user into a stud. In SBCOL I am using a True Freshman MLB that is like a 64overall and he is a beast because he is fast. Hell, I won the Bendarik in Powerhouse with Allen(MLB) as a RSFr and he was only like a 84 overall. They really need to make the ratings matter more. If a CB has 99 man and zone coverage, he should be an absolute shutdown corner. The problem is so many guys end up with those type of ratings it is hard to tell what ratings actually matter. This is not limited to just CB's either, as it seems it goes for almost any position. Remember how bad Barkley play for E that first year despite his 99 Tha? Is there some kind of consistency rating hidden or do hot and cold streaks mean that much kind of like momentum?

Take my CB Gandy from Powerhouse. He was the top rated CB in recruiting(80ovr) but has sucked all 3 years prior to this one. Was getting beat like he stole something every game no matter how good the WR was he was going against. All of a sudden this season he had a pick in each of my first 4 games, and should have had one in the last game but my SS came over and jumped in front of him. Prior to this season, he would drop almost everything. Now I expect him to catch anything close to him. He only jumped from a 88 to a 91 so his ratings have not improved that much but he is now playing like I expected him to when I recruited him 4 years ago.

[baseballplyrmvp]

One problem with the pass rush is the fact that there are really no speed rush moves to speak of. The only time it "feels" like a speed rush is if they jump the snap. To your point Jeff, you can turn almost anyone you user into a stud. In SBCOL I am using a True Freshman MLB that is like a 64overall and he is a beast because he is fast. Hell, I won the Bendarik in Powerhouse with Allen(MLB) as a RSFr and he was only like a 84 overall. They really need to make the ratings matter more. If a CB has 99 man and zone coverage, he should be an absolute shutdown corner. The problem is so many guys end up with those type of ratings it is hard to tell what ratings actually matter. This is not limited to just CB's either, as it seems it goes for almost any position. Remember how bad Barkley play for E that first year despite his 99 Tha? Is there some kind of consistency rating hidden or do hot and cold streaks mean that much kind of like momentum?

Take my CB Gandy from Powerhouse. He was the top rated CB in recruiting(80ovr) but has sucked all 3 years prior to this one. Was getting beat like he stole something every game no matter how good the WR was he was going against. All of a sudden this season he had a pick in each of my first 4 games, and should have had one in the last game but my SS came over and jumped in front of him. Prior to this season, he would drop almost everything. Now I expect him to catch anything close to him. He only jumped from a 88 to a 91 so his ratings have not improved that much but he is now playing like I expected him to when I recruited him 4 years ago.

i agree that ratings need to matter more. i complained a lot last year about how i had 99 ovr corners in my USC dynasty, who had 99 man/zone coverage ratings and 99 press ratings, yet would get beat for huge yardage at least 5-6 times a game.

[ryby6969]

i agree that ratings need to matter more. i complained a lot last year about how i had 99 ovr corners in my USC dynasty, who had 99 man/zone coverage ratings and 99 press ratings, yet would get beat for huge yardage at least 5-6 times a game.

I just want it to matter to get studs at impact positions. Right now the Jarvis Jone's and Clowney's of the world just do not matter. You very rarely get games like the one Jones had vs UF or Clowney vs Georgia. I would really like to see in user games my opponent have to use a TE to chip my DE/rush LB because his tackle cannot handle him 1on1. That is where the strategy is missing from this game IMO. I would also like to be able to recruit different types of OL and DL. I could go with a huge OL like Wisky, or go with a more athletic group so I could pull like a GT. Same thing with the Dline.

[JeffHCross]

To your point Jeff, you can turn almost anyone you user into a stud. In SBCOL I am using a True Freshman MLB that is like a 64overall and he is a beast because he is fast. Hell, I won the Bendarik in Powerhouse with Allen(MLB) as a RSFr and he was only like a 84 overall.Right, but that's because you're damn good at avoiding blocks with your stick skills. Not because those guys are actually studs.


Remember how bad Barkley play for E that first year despite his 99 Tha? Is there some kind of consistency rating hidden or do hot and cold streaks mean that much kind of like momentum?Eh ... I don't know what happened there. Because I was having the same problem with E.J. Manuel, and I haven't had that problem since. And I don't think he has either. I think we just hit some weird bug or momentum issue. May have been stealth patched.


I just want it to matter to get studs at impact positions. Right now the Jarvis Jone's and Clowney's of the world just do not matter. You very rarely get games like the one Jones had vs UF or Clowney vs Georgia. I would really like to see in user games my opponent have to use a TE to chip my DE/rush LB because his tackle cannot handle him 1on1. That is where the strategy is missing from this game IMO. I would also like to be able to recruit different types of OL and DL. I could go with a huge OL like Wisky, or go with a more athletic group so I could pull like a GT. Same thing with the Dline.Well, the strategy can only matter so much when there is no such strategy to be had. As far as I know, we have no way, in the game, to tell a TE to chip a stud DE. So they can't be that good. But they could still be better than they are.

[baseballplyrmvp]

As far as I know, we have no way, in the game, to tell a TE to chip a stud DE.

i would assume it could be possible for 14 now that the infinity engine gives a real body to players (currently, body parts pass through other body parts without penalty). combine that with adjusted routes for te's and you could create some kind of minor collision between a d-end and te.

[JeffHCross]

Possibly. But I meant from a mechanics standpoint ... I don't think just setting the TE to pass block would do it, for example. There would have to be logic there to account for the fact that the LT/RT is getting his ass kicked, y'know.

EDIT: In short, there are a lot of adjustments that, from a strategic standpoint, are available to a real-life coach but not in the game. Some of those we don't need. Some we do. But that's a very, very deep rabbit hole.

[baseballplyrmvp]

ya. btw, what happened to real assignment ai for the o-line? i have the playart turned on in my games, and on running plays, i'm not seeing it happen that a certain d-lineman is gonna get double teamed.

[ryby6969]

You may not be able to have a TE chip on a DE, but you can certainly leave him in to block. I think the big thing right now is the fact that there is no double team pass blocking which is a major issue. As for the MLB and stick skills, my point was you can take any player and make them a stud. Not just players with stud ratings.

[Rudy]

I don't know if sliders are to blame, but it seems like "stud" ANYTHING, no matter what position, can't dominate the game in NCAA. Maybe a stud HB or QB can, but a stud CB will not force you to look the other way. A stud WR can be easily shut down (unless your opponent has sick user catch skills). A stud d-lineman will not blow up the opposing line any more than an above-average lineman will.

You can use stick skills to make a stud player play like one ... like DEs that people are able to figure out how to get around blocking. But if left to their own devices, studs of any position won't dominate. They'll just play slightly better than normal.



This is one of the biggest disappointments this gen with NCAA. I know most hated it in 06 but I loved impact players. Elite players truly scared you in the game and you had to game plan around them. I would never throw near an impact safety. I wouldn't run inside against a stud DT and a stud MLB would make your life miserable. Impact WRs were very dangerous. It added a ton of personality to the game unlike the current games where every team has the same feel and you don't change your play calling for anyone.

To get the DL play right they have to add a ton of moves and animations for DE. Truly elite pass rushers should make your life miserable and force you to keep RBs into help. We need options where we can set the TE and\or RB to chip specific players before releasing. This area is so generic and bland in EA that it needs a ton of work.

[Jayrah]

Speaking of defensive players dominating games, I think the mechanic to "highlight a single defensive player" should be added. This puts 2 blockers in assignment on this one player. It would then be necessary to keep an extra blocker in to cover the hole that should create. I think this would add a certain level of strategy to both sides of the ball with all of the new possibilities this would create.

[Rudy]

Speaking of defensive players dominating games, I think the mechanic to "highlight a single defensive player" should be added. This puts 2 blockers in assignment on this one player. It would then be necessary to keep an extra blocker in to cover the hole that should create. I think this would add a certain level of strategy to both sides of the ball with all of the new possibilities this would create.

Totally agree. Most dominant defensive players face more than one blocker on many plays. Dominant pass rushers seldom get a free 1 on 1 one with a tackle unless the tackle is also elite.

[TIMB0B]

You may not be able to have a TE chip on a DE, but you can certainly leave him in to block. I think the big thing right now is the fact that there is no double team pass blocking which is a major issue. As for the MLB and stick skills, my point was you can take any player and make them a stud. Not just players with stud ratings.
I agree. And I think EA could utilize the "gameplan adjustments" in order to do this. The existing adjustments (other than Tempo, Zone Defense, Option Defense, and Strip Ball) are more based on a player's individual skill or instincts than a coaching adjustment. The following is a list of additional adjustments I came up with that might be more applicable.

Cadence (This is more or less for the A.I. and to counter the Defensive "Jump Snap" adjustment)
AGGRESSIVE: HARD COUNT
(+) Higher Offensive Jump Snap Chance
(-) More False Starts

CONSERVATIVE: SILENT COUNT
(+) No False Starts
(-) Lower Offensive Jump Snap Chance

Offensive Line Splits
AGGRESSIVE: WIDE SPLITS
(+) Bigger Running Lanes
(-) Susceptible to Inside Blitzes

CONSERVATIVE: NARROW SPLITS
(+) Prevent Inside Blitzes
(-) Smaller Running Lanes

Run Blocking Scheme
AGGRESSIVE: ZONE BLOCKING
(+) Base, Backer, to Safety Progression
(-) Backside Defenders unblocked

CONSERVATIVE: MAN BLOCKING
(+) Block Assigned Man
(-) Minimal upfield progression

Offensive Line
AGGRESSIVE: CUT BLOCKS
(+) Take Out Legs of Playside Defenders
(-) More Illegal Chop Block Calls

CONSERVATIVE: DOUBLE TEAM
(+) Double Team "Keyed" Defensive Player
(-) TE or FB/RB Stay Home Block

Pass Offense
AGGRESSIVE: QUICK ROUTES
(+) Receivers Look for Pass Immediately
(-) Shorter Route Depth

CONSERVATIVE: EXTEND ROUTES
(+) Deeper Route Depth
(-) Receivers Look for Pass Later
_____________________________________

Defensive Line Techniques
CONSERVATIVE: BULLRUSH
(+) Occupy Blockers to Free Up Linebackers
(-) Less Chance of Making a Play in the Backfield

AGGRESSIVE: STUNT
(+) Higher Chance of Backfield Disruption
(-) Susceptible to Screens and Playaction Pass

Linebackers
CONSERVATIVE: READ PASS
(+) Initial Step toward Coverage Assignment
(-) Susceptible to Screens and Draws

AGGRESSIVE: GAP READ
(+) Initial Step toward Run Gap Assignment
(-) Susceptible to Playaction and Intermediate Pass

Safety Support
CONSERVATIVE: ROLL COVERAGE
(+) Double or Cloud Cover "Keyed" Receiver
(-) Susceptible to Run

AGGRESSIVE: LOAD BOX
(+) Run Support
(-) Susceptible to Playaction and Deep Pass


Speaking of defensive players dominating games, I think the mechanic to "highlight a single defensive player" should be added.
I had this same thing in mind when I first wrote up these additional adjustments, specifically "Offensive Line" and "Safety Support."

[JeffHCross]

You may not be able to have a TE chip on a DE, but you can certainly leave him in to block.Right, but my point was it's difficult to wish for DEs so dominate that you'd "need" to leave TEs to chip, since right now we'd have no counter-move for that.


As for the MLB and stick skills, my point was you can take any player and make them a stud. Not just players with stud ratings.Right. We, the user, can. But that's a far cry from a digital equivalent of Clowney taking over a game.

[souljahbill]

Aren't you guys nervous that if they make DE's more dominating that we'll go back to the days where a user-controlled DE could get 150 sacks in a season?

[morsdraconis]

Aren't you guys nervous that if they make DE's more dominating that we'll go back to the days where a user-controlled DE could get 150 sacks in a season?

Until they actually fix the OL/DL interactions to be something like real football (with partial wins and losses and a spectrum of things that can happen instead of a simple blocked or unblocked setup), it's simply not possible to have a real portrayal of what Clowney was able to do this year in this game.

[Rudy]

Aren't you guys nervous that if they make DE's more dominating that we'll go back to the days where a user-controlled DE could get 150 sacks in a season?

For me this is a significant issue in Madden. On all-pro you are a much better pass rusher than your CPU controlled teammates. The best and possibly only way to fix this is to add a separate USER pass rush slider that only affects a user controlled rusher. I have to use house rules on myself when I rush the QB to prevent abuse.

[baseballplyrmvp]

Aren't you guys nervous that if they make DE's more dominating that we'll go back to the days where a user-controlled DE could get 150 sacks in a season?

good point, and the only thing i can think of to counter that, would be to make it harder for user controlled players to break off of their blocks. obviously, the higher rated your block shedding and strength ratingd str, its easier to do, but an average player shouldnt be able to break free like what you can do now.

[TIMB0B]

Aren't you guys nervous that if they make DE's more dominating that we'll go back to the days where a user-controlled DE could get 150 sacks in a season?

Also back in the day, they had the "impact player" where after making several successive plays the icon would start flashing. When your guy was flashing, then he could go Jadaveon Clowney on someone. That might be the baby step move they need to bring back.

Or, as Rudy said, create separate sliders for users.

[JeffHCross]

good point, and the only thing i can think of to counter that, would be to make it harder for user controlled players to break off of their blocks. obviously, the higher rated your block shedding and strength ratingd str, its easier to do, but an average player shouldnt be able to break free like what you can do now.They made user-controlled D-line moves significantly harder (or just significantly less likely to work) on 12 and 13. I don't personally feel that my user control is much better than the CPU would be able to do, with the same players. At least not in terms of breaking off blocks. The user can still pull a "disengage from the block and run around", but that's a different kind of thing.


Aren't you guys nervous that if they make DE's more dominating that we'll go back to the days where a user-controlled DE could get 150 sacks in a season?We're not specifically advocating that DEs are more dominant. Rather than an individual player with dominant abilities/ratings can actually dominate. It feels now that a 99 OVR player is merely above average, not great, when compared to the rest of the players around him. And that's not what we see in real-life. There's no ability to "take over" in the game.

As for your larger question ... yes, I'm nervous that any change will have unintended consequences.

[TIMB0B]

They made user-controlled D-line moves significantly harder (or just significantly less likely to work) on 12 and 13. I don't personally feel that my user control is much better than the CPU would be able to do, with the same players. At least not in terms of breaking off blocks. The user can still pull a "disengage from the block and run around", but that's a different kind of thing.

We're not specifically advocating that DEs are more dominant. Rather than an individual player with dominant abilities/ratings can actually dominate. It feels now that a 99 OVR player is merely above average, not great, when compared to the rest of the players around him. And that's not what we see in real-life. There's no ability to "take over" in the game.

As for your larger question ... yes, I'm nervous that any change will have unintended consequences.
Do you remember the old "impact player" they had? That might be what they need to bring back. I like it because it takes some momentum to build first.

[JeffHCross]

They still have it. It just doesn't have that much of an impact anymore.

But that's still not the kind of thing I'm talking about. Because every team had impact players. That was more of a "clutch" factor. I more mean a player like Cam Newton, Clowney, Desmond Howard, Charles Woodson ... who could just take over a game. Put his team on his shoulders and win the f-in game. Those types of players are rare, yes, but they're non-existent in NCAA. You could have a 99 OVR with 99 in every attribute and he still wouldn't dominate the game -- unless you found some way for him to be unblocked or uncovered.

[TIMB0B]

They still have it. It just doesn't have that much of an impact anymore.

But that's still not the kind of thing I'm talking about. Because every team had impact players. That was more of a "clutch" factor. I more mean a player like Cam Newton, Clowney, Desmond Howard, Charles Woodson ... who could just take over a game. Put his team on his shoulders and win the f-in game. Those types of players are rare, yes, but they're non-existent in NCAA. You could have a 99 OVR with 99 in every attribute and he still wouldn't dominate the game -- unless you found some way for him to be unblocked or uncovered.

Well, bringing back the impact of the impact player would be a good first step, but don't have it for every team. Perhaps it could be awarded to the top player at each respective position?

[Schauwn]

The problem for me is, when I try and user a DE/DT i get stuck in an animation loop that doesnt allow me to change my attack angle or even react to a run that might be going in a direction that I could make a play on.

[baseballplyrmvp]

Well, bringing back the impact of the impact player would be a good first step,

could easily be done by lowering ratings across the board. average teams in this game have starters in the 80's, and the 6* teams have a lot of starters in the 90's as well. they need to make it more like madden's rosters and have starters for the 6* programs be like in the 80's or so. this would bring back the impact of the impact players (90+ ovr)

[Schauwn]

There are a couple of rosters out there that have done this on OS, they swear by them. I haven't tried any of them yet to be honest.

[JeffHCross]

I haven't tried them in years, but did mess with similar ideas in the past. There's definitely a big difference in how the game plays.

[baseballplyrmvp]

I haven't tried them in years, but did mess with similar ideas in the past. There's definitely a big difference in how the game plays.

from what some people are doing on OS, by using a generic roster editor and then transferring the files onto their console, they said the game plays way differently, just by dropping ratings 5-10 points or so across the board. things like cpu players playing more according to their ratings and classification, etc.

[baseballplyrmvp]

just played a game in the TGT360 od, in which i won the rose bowl as ASU.

corners in off coverage repeatedly get burned on streak routes. what is happening, is that the corners do not backpeddle, but basically hold their position until the wr is within 5 yards of them. then, the corners try to run up to the wr (closing the distance between them), before having to turn 180 degrees to cover the wr as he runs downfield.

whether this is intentional or not, it leads to corners being badly beaten on a type of coverage that they shouldnt be.

[Schauwn]

mvp, try out those rosters, let me know what you think

:nod:

[Rudy]

They still have it. It just doesn't have that much of an impact anymore.

But that's still not the kind of thing I'm talking about. Because every team had impact players. That was more of a "clutch" factor. I more mean a player like Cam Newton, Clowney, Desmond Howard, Charles Woodson ... who could just take over a game. Put his team on his shoulders and win the f-in game. Those types of players are rare, yes, but they're non-existent in NCAA. You could have a 99 OVR with 99 in every attribute and he still wouldn't dominate the game -- unless you found some way for him to be unblocked or uncovered.

Agree 100%. I want to see college playmakers and game breakers stand out in the game. Haven't seen that since last gen.

Maybe a global editor could help things but if you can't apply it to new recruits it is pointless in longer dynasties.

[TIMB0B]

Agree with you guys on complete ratings overhaul of 5-10 points.

Side note: has anyone noticed the over abundance of white RBs and CBs in recruiting? I'm not racist, but there's so many it's unrealistic.

[JeffHCross]

I personally believe that race of recruits is completely random. For example, how many black kickers are there in college?

[TIMB0B]

I personally believe that race of recruits is completely random. For example, how many black kickers are there in college?

I'd imagine it's random, but it was way more rare in previous years.

[Schauwn]

Don't know if this is the right spot but...

Im watching the Texans game and wondering why there aren't stacked WR formations in any playbook

[Rudy]

I'd like to see EA increase the difficulty again. All-American for NCAA and All-Pro in Madden have never been easier. They got too watered down and there were too many slider adjustments necessary to make them more difficult. I think adding a 5th difficulty in between AA and Heisman would be a good idea. Make Heisman stupid difficult for the elite but put in a good in between difficulty. Almost all the All-American slider sets on OS are to make the game harder as many are still afraid to jump to Heisman.

[psuexv]

Not sure if this has been posted before but I'd really like to be able to flip a running play while I'm in a shotgun set like you can do while under center. You flip the play and the HB just moves to the other side of the QB.

[TIMB0B]

Not sure if this has been posted before but I'd really like to be able to flip a running play while I'm in a shotgun set like you can do while under center. You flip the play and the HB just moves to the other side of the QB.

I agree.

That makes me think of procedure penalties. I think there should be the option to motion any player to either side of the ball, which opens the door to illegal formation penalties. One of the things that I think would really add to the game is including every penalty in the rulebook.

[JeffHCross]

That makes me think of procedure penalties. I think there should be the option to motion any player to either side of the ball, which opens the door to illegal formation penalties. One of the things that I think would really add to the game is including every penalty in the rulebook.However, on the flip side, that's a lot of code (to calculate the guys on the LoS, whether or not a formation is legal, where they are allowed to move, where they aren't, which players should automatically move up/back, which shouldn't, etc) for something that very, very few people would use. And, worse, a fair amount of people might use accidentally and not understand why they were just penalized.

For example, I'm pretty sure I haven't motioned a single player on NCAA 13. The formations I call don't have any usefulness in using motion, so I don't waste my time with it.

[baseballplyrmvp]

i think that cpu controlled rb's look for contact too much. they need to focus on getting upfield more.

this vid was from my rtg. as soon as the rb clears the right tackle and tight end, he's a yard away from the endzone, yet makes a stupid decision and turns right into the cornerback.


http://www.easports.com/media/play/video/148537744


http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn284/baseballplyrmvp/uscrtg_zps9ea16308.jpg

i mean, come on! the rb needs to get into the endzone, especially when there's that much open space. its just stupid that he chose to turn right into the on coming db. :smh:

[Rudy]

i think that cpu controlled rb's look for contact too much. they need to focus on getting upfield more.

this vid was from my rtg. as soon as the rb clears the right tackle and tight end, he's a yard away from the endzone, yet makes a stupid decision and turns right into the cornerback.


http://www.easports.com/media/play/video/148537744


http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn284/baseballplyrmvp/uscrtg_zps9ea16308.jpg

i mean, come on! the rb needs to get into the endzone, especially when there's that much open space. its just stupid that he chose to turn right into the on coming db. :smh:

Ugh. I saw crap like that in NCAA 11. It's probably been in there awhile this gen. EA needs to improve CPU logic a lot.

[baseballplyrmvp]

ya, its terrible rudy. this should be an easy touchdown.

[Rudy]

That's the Troy Hambrick run to darkness move lol.

[Schauwn]

Anyone else ever notice how far away a defender can be juked out by an RB or WR. My EA files arent uploading so I can't pull up a clip, but I just gave up a 95+ yard run because by FS got juked out by the RB even though he was about 15 yards away and in pursuit from behind. The RB juked away from him, and he broke down like the RB was right in front of him, taking him out of position and gave up the big run.

There should be a window around the player that jukes only affect players within that window, and players pursuing behind should be less affected. Or something.

[illwill10]

i think that cpu controlled rb's look for contact too much. they need to focus on getting upfield more.

this vid was from my rtg. as soon as the rb clears the right tackle and tight end, he's a yard away from the endzone, yet makes a stupid decision and turns right into the cornerback.


http://www.easports.com/media/play/video/148537744


http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn284/baseballplyrmvp/uscrtg_zps9ea16308.jpg

i mean, come on! the rb needs to get into the endzone, especially when there's that much open space. its just stupid that he chose to turn right into the on coming db. :smh:

That has been a problem for years in both games.

Ball Carriers aren't as Dynamic as they need to be. You don't see the wow plays. They don't set up blocks or use special moves to avoid tackles. Like you said, they rely too heavily on looking for contact. It seems like ball carriers are programmed to be power backs. It seems like they have tunnel vision when running.

They either have to revamp BCV or allow BCV and AWR a ball carrier to see the field more and avoid tacklers

[baseballplyrmvp]

i've always been under the impression that ball carrier vision was a super sim rating that has zero affect on actual gameplay. correct me if i'm wrong, but i thought it was wisey, who said this back on utopia.

[JeffHCross]

As far as I can recall (or find with Google) Wisey never said anything specific about BCV. It was others that suggested it wasn't used for gameplay.

Personally I'd be willing to believe it's one of those that affects the CPU runners but not HUM controlled.

[illwill10]

i've always been under the impression that ball carrier vision was a super sim rating that has zero affect on actual gameplay. correct me if i'm wrong, but i thought it was wisey, who said this back on utopia.


As far as I can recall (or find with Google) Wisey never said anything specific about BCV. It was others that suggested it wasn't used for gameplay.

Personally I'd be willing to believe it's one of those that affects the CPU runners but not HUM controlled.

I dont want to say it has no effect, but it should have a MAJOR effect in the game next release. A low rated RB with high BCV should still be able to produce at a high rate and a talented RB with low BCV should only produce on defensive mishaps or missed tackles.

[illwill10]

For Me, the biggest gameplay improvement is OL/DL Interaction:

Games are won and loss in the trenches. When the best way to get pressure/sacks on QBs is to engage and disengage OLs, then there is something wrong. You dont really see OLs get pushed back or manhandled by dominant DLs. It seems like OL animations are done as a group, not one on one battles. I say that because most of the big runs(excluding broken tackles) by both user and DL are when all the OL/TE(and WRs at time) are able to block their guys and get to the second level. Basically they block their guy, get to the second level and block those guys. All the RBs have to do is follow the blockers. I want to see double team blocks in passing plays. I want teams to recognize the dominant players and shift line to them. But, I dont want to still want to see players slide to stop a rusher in the nick of time.

Something else I want to see improved is Improved A.I:

I am talking CPU A.I in general. This is the biggest thing for me at all aspects of the game. I want to see A.I. Coaches and Players adjust to what has been going on in the game. I want to see CPU QBs shift the OL to certain sides if he keeps getting pressured and call audibles when they see same plays over and over. I want to see better playcalling or add a Play Calling grade to coaches. I want to see Defenses either shift toward the Line if they are getting dashed in running game or shift back if they are getting dashed in passing game. Better Blitz-Pickup by RBs and OL. I want to see better Playcalling on both sides. It seems like CPU calls plays based on what the User calls. I definitely want to see better Ball-Carrier Logic. I want BCV to have a bigger effect. Ball Carriers have tunnel vision. You dont see the "WOW" plays you see in real like. I want players to use their special moves.

Those are the main two things that I want to see that can really make a huge difference in the game in all aspects. Also things like improve running animations(broken tackles and running styles), improved kick/punt returns, improved coverage.

Edit:
Something else I want to see improved is Audibles. I really dislike when I audible to a running play and the defense shifts up close to the line and when I switch back to a passing play they back up.

[JeffHCross]

I dont want to say it has no effect, but it should have a MAJOR effect in the game next release. A low rated RB with high BCV should still be able to produce at a high rate and a talented RB with low BCV should only produce on defensive mishaps or missed tackles.Not sure I follow. What does missed tackles have to do with setting the hole?

Also, do you mean you think it should have a major effect on user controlled backs?

[illwill10]

Not sure I follow. What does missed tackles have to do with setting the hole?

Also, do you mean you think it should have a major effect on user controlled backs?

I should have worded it better. What I mean is low BCV RBs should only really produce when there are defensive breakdowns or produce when they are able to break a tackle and gain
yards off of contact.
I mean on CPU controlled Backs. Ratings like AWR and BCV, I dont expect to have an effect on User RBs since we are controlling them anyway.

[JeffHCross]

Disagree, slightly, though this may just be a wording disagreement. Any back that can find the hole should be able to produce. It's more that low BCV backs are more likely to run the play as called and just go forward, while high BCV backs should have more patience, see cutback lanes and have generally more field vision.

[illwill10]

Disagree, slightly, though this may just be a wording disagreement. Any back that can find the hole should be able to produce. It's more that low BCV backs are more likely to run the play as called and just go forward, while high BCV backs should have more patience, see cutback lanes and have generally more field vision.
It is wording and me rushing. I wanted to edit it. Obviously any Rb should be able to produce if they are able to find the hole, I made it seem like only high BCV RBs should produce. But like you said high BCV RBs should be more patients, while low BCV backs might stutter step and loss yards at times

[neystar206]

I'd like to see EA increase the difficulty again. All-American for NCAA and All-Pro in Madden have never been easier. They got too watered down and there were too many slider adjustments necessary to make them more difficult. I think adding a 5th difficulty in between AA and Heisman would be a good idea. Make Heisman stupid difficult for the elite but put in a good in between difficulty. Almost all the All-American slider sets on OS are to make the game harder as many are still afraid to jump to Heisman.

The game has became easier in my book also. I would like for them to make it harder to beat the CPU.

[baseballplyrmvp]

The game has became easier in my book also. I would like for them to make it harder to beat the CPU.

:+1:

cpu needs to become smarter, not psychic, but smarter. its got to track our playcalling and tendencies better, use more of its playbook in an effort to stop us, and make a buttload more adjustments within the game.

[illwill10]

:+1:

cpu needs to become smarter, not psychic, but smarter. its got to track our playcalling and tendencies better, use more of its playbook in an effort to stop us, and make a buttload more adjustments within the game.

Exactly, since I only play against CPU, this very important to me.

I want to have a gameplan against CPU. As of now, I can beat the CPU with a couple plays on both sides of the ball. It shouldn't be like that. As poster above said, I would love to see our tendencies tracked and cpu make adjustments on both sides of the ball. I don't like how they know if I am audibling to a run or pass

[Rudy]

100% agree with the last two posts.

[illwill10]

On the lines of Playcalling, they have to stop that psychic playcalling. It is not just on audibles. I was playing Madden earlier and I noticed something that I have been noticing for a while. It seems like the CPU playcalls are tied into your playcalls. It seems like they call the right plays at the right times. I noticed when I was in zone coverage, that there are always a open man. I forgot what coverage it was but, they would call curl routes on the same zone. I noticed it because when I called the same play, I switched to man and they ran curl routes. That is why I think Custom Plays would be unstoppable against CPU at times because they wouldnt know what to call.

That is why them tracking your tendencies would be great. So, if I have a tendency to run on 2nd and short, I would like to see the defense to come out in run stopping formation. I also want them to recognize the formations I come out in. Like if I only run the ball in the I-Form sets, I would like to the defense to shift toward the LOS. It seems like defenses only make adjustments/shifts if you make audibles.

[baseballplyrmvp]

On the lines of Playcalling, they have to stop that psychic playcalling. It is not just on audibles. I was playing Madden earlier and I noticed something that I have been noticing for a while. It seems like the CPU playcalls are tied into your playcalls. It seems like they call the right plays at the right times. I noticed when I was in zone coverage, that there are always a open man. I forgot what coverage it was but, they would call curl routes on the same zone. I noticed it because when I called the same play, I switched to man and they ran curl routes. That is why I think Custom Plays would be unstoppable against CPU at times because they wouldnt know what to call.

That is why them tracking your tendencies would be great. So, if I have a tendency to run on 2nd and short, I would like to see the defense to come out in run stopping formation. I also want them to recognize the formations I come out in. Like if I only run the ball in the I-Form sets, I would like to the defense to shift toward the LOS. It seems like defenses only make adjustments/shifts if you make audibles.

thats why we need the madden IQ back in the game. sure, it took a couple of games to get it zero'd in, but it made every game against the cpu really challenging. it was one of those things, where the more you played, the harder it got.

[JeffHCross]

Madden IQ was just auto adjusting sliders though, wasn't it? Not really tendency analysis.

[baseballplyrmvp]

Madden IQ was just auto adjusting sliders though, wasn't it? Not really tendency analysis.

ya more or less. i think it auto adjusted cpu pass defense, rush defense, pass offense, and rush offense to your levels. but still, heisman is incredibly easy. madden IQ means that the game constantly changes according to your strengths.

add in a little bit of tendency analysis to the cpu play logic, and it'd be a huge boost, imo.

[illwill10]

thats why we need the madden IQ back in the game. sure, it took a couple of games to get it zero'd in, but it made every game against the cpu really challenging. it was one of those things, where the more you played, the harder it got.

I forgot all about that features. It had some promise, just needed to be implemented better. But, I wouldnt want it in Dynasty unless it was implemented the right way. I wouldnt want a bad team to all of the sudden play better. Unless they use your IQ as a weakness. Like if your Rush IQ was high and Pass IQ was terrible, they should stack the box. Just like if your pass coverage IQ was low, than they should pass it often.

CPU Playcalling needs to be fixed. But, I think CPU AI(in general) need to be improved. Football is a game of adjustments, and this game(and Madden) doesnt make Adjustments. This game is really just you calling plays and the CPU just calls plays designed to stop it/take advantage. Basically, the CPU AI allows you to dictate the game. It shouldnt be like that. I want the CPU to try to dictate the game. Whether its the CPU forcing the run because it recognizes that you cant stop it or its the CPU calling blitz a lot because they are getting sacks.

[gigemaggs99]

Not sure if this has been suggested but it would be a nice option.

My buddy and I were playing tonight in our usual darby, he had a 4th and 13 on my 38, his FG kicker couldn't make the long kick and he can't do coffin corner punts so he was in no-mans land.

He said, man this would be a cool time to have the option of a pooch kick with you QB. I told him it would probably have to be an audible but, you know, like EA says, "If it's in the game"...so it would be cool to atleast have the option of using that play.

[JeffHCross]

2k8 had a pooch kick option, as a play in the PB.

[JeffHCross]

The punter's animation is way, way too quick and way too short. It's basically a half-stride and then kick in place. There's almost no forward movement, and definitely doesn't take the strides that a punter normally would. I believe that is the primary reason we don't get punt blocks in game.

[baseballplyrmvp]

The punter's animation is way, way too quick and way too short. It's basically a half-stride and then kick in place. There's almost no forward movement, and definitely doesn't take the strides that a punter normally would. I believe that is the primary reason we don't get punt blocks in game.

:+1:

there's also a complete lack of special teams plays that sacrifice pressure for coverage downfield....not to mention, newer spread out punting formations every year.

[baseballplyrmvp]

dynamic depth charts.

i want different depth charts for the different play styles or the ability to set a depth chart for every formation. its time for an upgrade in this area, especially with how popular the spread formations have become. i'd like to be able to set certain wide receivers as outside only wr's and some guys as slot only wr's. this applies to defense as well. its a small thing that'd require a lot of user involvement, but it'd fix a lot of issues regarding player substitutions/fatigue.

[gigemaggs99]

:+1:

there's also a complete lack of special teams plays that sacrifice pressure for coverage downfield....not to mention, newer spread out punting formations every year.

+1 it would be cool to see some of the aussie/rugby style kick animations. I also think it would be nice to see more blocked punts or if not blocked punts running/roughing the kicker. On a normal Saturday you see a lot more blocked punts than you ever see in this game. FGs too, on NCAA I maybe see 1-2 per season.

[baseballplyrmvp]

+1 it would be cool to see some of the aussie/rugby style kick animations. I also think it would be nice to see more blocked punts or if not blocked punts running/roughing the kicker. On a normal Saturday you see a lot more blocked punts than you ever see in this game. FGs too, on NCAA I maybe see 1-2 per season.

well jeff was onto something when he brought up the punting animation being way too quick. combine that with the addition of a snap power rating and snap accuracy rating, and the whole blocking FG's and punts problem would solve itself, imo.

[JeffHCross]

well jeff was onto something when he brought up the punting animation being way too quick. combine that with the addition of a snap power rating and snap accuracy rating, and the whole blocking FG's and punts problem would solve itself, imo.Yeah. I remember back on NCAA 2004 where there'd be a random snap that would sometimes go wide. And when it went wide, if you had the right pressure on, you'd get there and get it blocked. I loved it.

[JuicedUpJay]

NCAA 14 Wishlist

-Equipment

*New Helmets (Revo 360, Schutt Vengence)

*More Variety of Cleats

*Adidas Gear (Visors, Gloves, Socks)

*Eye Black (One Eye, Both Eyes, or Over The Nose)

*Socks (Elite Socks, Double Socks, Long or Mid Socks)

*Mouth Pieces with Lip Guard

*Basketball Sleeves with Pad

*Compression Pants (Leggings)

*Back Flaps Out

*Have a choice of 2nd Team Color gear

*Towels (Front, Side, or Back)

*Spats


-Road To Glory

*Like NBA 2k My Player. With Coaches Calling and Coaches Coming and Interviewing the player and pursuading them to come to the College and you have the option to answer.

*More High School Team Designs

*ESPN 150 Rankings

*Underarmor All-American Game

*Signing Day. with you picking the hat up between the top 3 school your interested in and putting it on.

*College Summer Workouts like Weightlifting and 40 times

*Mini Camps

*Acual Major and Grades

*Post Game Interviews with you answering the question like 2k.

*Heisman Ceremony like '07 NCAA

*Senior Bowl

*Import into Madden 14

*The ESPN Magazine Covers with Players on the pages instead of Helmets


-Creating Players

*Different Varietys of Hair Cuts

*Diffferent Faces

*You can customize the way they look

*Pick different Strides and Running Styles. Also Quarterback Throwing Motions and Drop backs.


-College Game Day

*Corso Mascot

*Talking about key players

[souljahbill]

Not trying to be an asshole , Jay, and what's done is done but none of these things are gameplay related. There are separate threads for everything listed above.