Sweet 16: Better CPU Playcalling vs. Coaching/Conference Offers in OD

[cdj]

After voting, share your thoughts behind your vote and on each feature in this thread.
Vote early - all future rounds will be open just three days for voting.


Better CPU Playcalling

The general idea here is that the CPU would better utilize their team and also vary their playcalling. For example, if a CPU offensive team is strong running but poor passing, they would call plays accordingly, regardless of how their playbook is setup. As well, plays that are too often called (ex. Engage Eight blitz) would be called less and used in better situations.

Another possible aspect to this could be that the CPU would monitor what is effective against particular users and then call plays accordingly. For example, if a user's defense shows tendencies that it is more susceptible to the pass, the CPU then call more passing plays against that user. These tendencies could be learned over time to always keep the CPU's playcalling fresh. (Round 1 Discussion - Round 2 Discussion)


Coaching Offers & Conference Swap Invites in Online Dynasty

Found in regular (offline) Dynasty Mode, this allows users to accept job offers from other schools and also invites for their school to join another conference. This leads to some players selecting a lower-tier school in an attempt to ‘move up the coaching ranks’ and ultimately get their school into a power conference or a job with a prestigious program. Currently, this feature is not found in Online Dynasties as Commissioners can assign users to control of different teams when they deem fit. Conferences can only be changed in Online Dynasties when they are starting using the Custom Conferences feature introduced in NCAA Football 10. (Round 1 Discussion - Round 2 Discussion)

[CLW]

Wow this is were the competition really starts to heat up.

I LOVE both of these options.

Better CPU Play Calling - Lets face it the CPU AI/Logic is down right AWFUL. I'm sick and tired of cheap/easy touchdowns b/c the CPU decides to blitz 8 when I'm in a spread formation. I'm also sick and tired of time outs being called at the 2 minute and 1 minute mark no matter the score/situation. etc...


Coaching Offers/Contracts Conference Invites in OD - This is simply a MUST add. I'd LOVE to run/be a part of an OD where we are basically coaches at the worst programs in the country and depending on our performance we can decide our own coaching careers with the coaching offers and/or conference switches.


I went with Coaching Offers/Conference Invites in OD b/c I think it would add a ton to ODs and just about eliminate the need to run an offline dynasty. Moreover, I have my doubts about whether EA has the talent to actually improve the Playcalling without opening up a whole different can of worms.

[AustinWolv]

Went with better CPU playcalling because that has more gameplay impact.

[Coachdenz]

I voted for the coaching/ offers, I thought we got better play calling this year.

[Jayrah]

I voted for the coaching/ offers, I thought we got better play calling this year.

I think we did too, but it's no where near as effective as it should be. They do a better job of mixed playcalling and even smarter situational playcalling. However, the cpu still has trouble finding ways to get their impact players the ball in a manner that makes you worry about a specific player.

Voted Playcalling

[JBHuskers]

Another match-up I didn't want to see in the sweet sixteen, but I went with playcalling....I would LOVE to have both of these items....but when it comes down to it....the better CPU playcalling makes this a MUCH better game than it already is......the coaching/conference offers is more of an icing on the cake type of thing.

[CLW]

For the guys going with Play Calling, do you REALLY think EA can pull it off?

Don't get me wrong I'd LOVE to have a better CPU AI when it comes to play calls. However, I'm also well aware (as I'm sure all of you are) EA has NEVER been able to do it even close to reality. My vote for Coaching Contracts/Conference Invites was more of a I think it is more realistic to ask of EA than better play calling.

IMHO, it is either too hard and/or EA isn't talented enough to get the AI to be able to handle clock management, blow outs, when to go for 2, etc...

I admit I honestly don't know how much goes into trying to simulate a human's thought process with computer code. The 2 Pt thing seems pretty easy to me. Just take the damn "card" every coach almost always goes by and program it into the AI. However, I still see the CPU "chasing points" in the 2nd Quarter. It also seems rather easy to me to program Coaches to know their kickers range (via the KPW rating) and not call for 60 yard field goal attempts with a kicker with 50 KPW. Yet I see it EVERY week in the MAC OD I run when I play the CPU. Etc....

That leads me to believe either #1 it is more complicated than I realize and/or #2 EA either doesn't know basic football coaching strategies and/or they dont have the programming skills to make it happen.

[cdj]

CLW, I think the challenge lies in creating a real-life coach's mindset in a mathematical formula and/or programming code.

For example, in real life we 'accept' (using that term loosely, depending on fan base) quirks and poor coaching decisions. For example, late clock management by Les Miles, poor and/or risky fourth down decision making by Mark Dantonio, and that becomes the 'personality' of a real life coach.

In a video game, we (present company included) seem to want the CPU to make the right call every time but only fail via execution & talent levels. IRL, we say a coach isn't bright or we call him risky, but in a video game we say it's poor or incorrect programming. That isn't fair, but it's the nature of the beast - In some ways we are asking EA to write a program that is smarter than some real-life college football coaches.

Now, I'm not saying playcalling has been perfect in the game and I think all of us (devs included) will say it could use work, but how do they also add in poor/risky decisions by the coach to a point where gamers will see it as such and not 'poor programming'?

Part of that lies in 'repeat offenses' - making sure we don't see the same play called almost everytime in the same situation. Perhaps if coaches are ever added in, there is some variance in 'correct' (base) playcalling based on the individual coach rating, prestige, etc. With that, perhaps commentary reflects the 'risky' or playcall gamble called to infer more that the 'coach' made the call versus a programmer.

In a nutshell, I don't think we as a community will ever be 100% happy with the playcalling in the game, but do have to reach a point where we are very or highly satisfied. If the perfect playcall was made everytime, we'd either say the CPU was cheating or (if coaches ever get added) coaches would never have a risky or bad playcall. The only difference between the coaches would be what formations the play came from and that would eliminate any chance of these cyber-coaches having any sort of identity or personality established.

Sorry for the long post, but this has always been my train of thought on playcalling. Fleshing out the playbooks may help with the playcalling more than we think as well.

[xGRIDIRONxGURUx]

i went for coaching offers... as i honestly feel that we are OWED better play calling each year this releases... may not ever be "perfected" but as long as it is improving at the same speed as these other great additions are in gameplay

"E"

[Rudy]

As someone who could care less about coaching offers (either online or offline) this is a no brainer for me. Better cpu play calling! Especially on defense!

[JeffHCross]

I voted for the coaching/ offers, I thought we got better play calling this year.

We did ... for the offense. But the defense still needs a lot of help.

For the guys going with Play Calling, do you REALLY think EA can pull it off?

If they put all their people onto it and made it a major emphasis ... yes, I absolutely believe they can. No matter what people in the community believe, I still think EA as a whole has some of the best programmers and designers in the game industry. They may not always do what we want, but I think EA, as a company, is one of the top game companies out there.

CLW, I think the challenge lies in creating a real-life coach's mindset in a mathematical formula and/or programming code.

Absolutely. It's well known in the game community that sports, especially football represent some of the most difficult AI in all of video games. For those of you that have played organized football, remember back to how your coaches would instruct you and teach the game. Now imagine trying to code that into a series of functions resembling "if (x happens) do (this)". That's the nightmare of football AI.


I absolutely want coaching offers and conference invites in OD. I want Online Dynasty to be just as awesome as an offline dynasty.

BUT ... gameplay is more important. I can live with not getting a contract or a conference invite. I've lived with it for two years. I can't take anymore of the CPU's defensive playcalling.

[souljahbill]

Sorry online OD guys, I'm a CPU dynasty player so I went with play-calling.

[Coachdenz]

i went for coaching offers... as i honestly feel that we are OWED better play calling each year this releases... may not ever be "perfected" but as long as it is improving at the same speed as these other great additions are in gameplay

"E"

I Agree!!

[jaymo76]

The cpu can call the best play in the world but the catch is will the cpu actually have the ability to execute said play? Wishbone offense and Pistol offenses in NCAA 11 are classic examples. The cpu sturggles so badly with execution and playcalling won't help that.

[cdj]

This is a tough one. I picked Coach/Conference Offers in OD as I think the benefit (fun factor) of OD members moving up from the lower tier programs to the top is too tough to say no to.