i think fan base was the name of the recruiting pitch last year. how its been changed, other than its name, i dont know.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
i think fan base was the name of the recruiting pitch last year. how its been changed, other than its name, i dont know.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
I would like, instead of having to pick which pitch to pitch one at a time while recruiting, let me pick all the pitches at once and then complete the phone call. For example: If I want to spend 30 minutes on a recruit, instead of having to pick 1 topic, wait to see what his response is, wait for the pitch selection screen to show up again, and then repeat 2 more times. Let me pick all 3 topics: Playing Time, Coach Prestige, Prox to Home, and then show me what the score was for each pitch. Dont know how hard it would be to keep the compare pitch/hard sell/find prosp rating option with this
Good idea. Anyway to cut corners to speed up the calling process. The same should be done for scouting. Depending on the time allotted, you pick whichever skills you want to evaluate all at once.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schauwn
Plllllllllllleeeeeeeeaaaaassssseeeeeeeeeeee!Quote:
Originally Posted by Schauwn
I'd be even happier if it gave you an option either way. Sometimes I know all six pitches I want to use. Sometimes I don't. So I wouldn't mind being able to pick up to 6 at a time, but still having the option for one at a time.
Keeping the Find/Compare/Sell option would be pretty easy ... it could be something like this.
Pick your six pitches:
Pitch 1 (select with left stick) -- right stick left/right -- Select Find/Sell/Compare (select with left stick)
etc etc
The harder part, in my head, is how to keep the selection of all the promises / weeks for visits in a mechanic that looked like that. I've probably oversimplified it too much.
I dont follow, if they had "schedule visit" available, then that becomes one of your pitches and instead of the find/sell/compare scroll, change the scroll to wk 8, 11, 12 or whatever weeks the recruit is available for home games.
i like the current model right now, but i understand your point. this would save a buttload of time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schauwn
Possibly. I just couldn't think of how to do it without it becoming overly cumbersome. But maybe you've got the right idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schauwn
Oooh! After you scroll through the pitches with the left stick, the next option could be "Promise", and then you could scroll through all the available promises with the right-stick (like you scrolled through the available options for the pitches with the right stick). Something like that.
:up::up:Quote:
Originally Posted by blkkrptnt819
I like the idea of a JUCO filter.
Another thing that occurred in years past but doesn't now is that I'd like for there to be the occasional 1-2 star who was as good or better then a 4-5 star. I think it was NCAA 2010 where I had a 2 star athlete who ended up coming in with 98 speed and became a 94 ovr Heisman winner as a senior. Recent history has shown us that there are great players who were 1-2 stars as well as walkons. To be honest, if you had a more dynamic in season progression i.e. if your FR running back wins the Heisman, he's going to jump in the offseason. Conversely, if you're preseason AA junior MLB who is 93 overall has a disappointing year or your upperclassman QB throws too many ints, his OVR drops.
In terms of scouting, allow more time in season.
10 hours of recruiting time should be divided up as you see fit. If I want to send all my coaches and spend all my time on the elite tailback that's going to complete my championship team, let me pursue him. I also wish there would be a more dynamic range for incoming recruits...i.e. no cap on the max that a FR is (seems like 82 is the highest I've seen one) but with more guys sitting at 65-70. It seems that almost all decent 4-5 stars are 76-80 and there are few guys that are so elite that bidding wars occur. There is little downside to just going for the next tier of 4 stars as opposed to just going for all 5 stars.
Here's a question and maybe I just don't quite understand how things work. But in regards to disconnects when playing user games in ODs. Why can't the session be held open and the user that got booted be able to rejoin the game?
With all of the Multi-user games like COD, BF3 you can join mid match and are right in the action. I'm assuming it has to do with the fact that in NCAA it's more of a peer connection where those others you are playing off of a specified server, but is it possible to keep the session open and be able to reconnect?
It's possible but wouldn't be the simplest thing in the world. You're absolutely right that the primary difference is the P2P architecture of the NCAA multiplayer versus a server-based system.Quote:
Originally Posted by psuexv
That said, that would be awesome.
This would be really nice, I do enjoy the recruiting aspect but there is room to make it much less redundant each week too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Schauwn
:+1:Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
When you're creating a new Dynasty, I would like to see "Roster" added to the list of main items. It can be difficult to remember to go load the roster you want to use. I imagine there are some out there that wouldn't figure it out -- or they just luck into it by only having one roster on their system.
It's compounded by the fact that it seems overly complicated to get a different roster to auto-load as your "default". Loading it and then saving your profile doesn't seem to work anymore.
They should add some scouting hours to the Bowl Week. Most coaching staffs are splitting time between the bowl and recruiting at that point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
unless they brought in underclassmen at that point, i dont think additional scouting time at that point would get used a whole lot as most people would already have everyone on their recruiting board already scouted.
Yeah, scouting wouldn't be a big deal. I'm in week 11 of my current season, and even with 31 people on my board (half signed, half not signed), I added three new players to my board this week just so I could use up the remaining two hours and 10 minutes of scouting that I had left over. Now call time, I could go for some more. I always have to go on a mad dash like a bat out of hell come week 1 of off-season recruiting as I usually have anywhere from 5-10 scholarships still sitting there waiting for players to commit. A number of seasons now I've gone into week 5 of the off-season, only then getting the last couple players to finally commit to me. I would mind even say just 5 hours during the bowl season to do some minor recruiting and try to get a couple players to sign then, take some of the burden off from the off-season recruiting.
decommitments are an absolute must. imagine all the fun the offseason recruiting periods would become in trying to sway recruits at the last moment (especially the week 5 visit).
Yeah, offseason recruiting is stale now that they got rid of the "new" recruits. Pretty much a waste of 5 weeks.
100% scouted? I sure as hell don't. Gonna need three weeks into the off-season to get them all. Plus I just found two more targets this week.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseballplyrmvp
i guess this would depend on how many position players you're going after. i dont target that many athletes. going into week 1 of the offseason recruiting of the tgt360 od, i had 23 of my 24 players fully scouted. the one who wasnt was at 70%.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
Damn! I've got every single player (out of currently 30, with a couple dropped midway through the season) 100% scouted in my current season, and even added three in week 10 just so I could use up my 2:40 of scouting time left over. By week 12, all three of those are 100% scouted. Granted, I don't have and haven't added a single Athlete in my current season, but even with 4 or 5 Athletes last season, I still had everyone on my board (34 players at one time mid-season) 100% scouted before the bowl games.
There's the rub, good point. My board is quite full of ATHs. And I've dumped a few ATHs that I spent at least some time on early in the season. That's one thing I've been doing, since my board thinned down late in the year (once I had like 15 guys signed), is start looking for Gems or other nice players among those left. Give them a full 60 or so to get a good feel for them. Figured if the other guys were already signed, didn't really matter if they were fully scouted. But now I'm getting late in the year and I want them all scouted :DQuote:
Originally Posted by baseballplyrmvp
I've got five ATHs signed, had one that got away, and another two that I spent some time on and didn't like. That's a lot of hours, right there.
yep. there is zero to do when you have 80% of your recruits committed before week 1. they could build in a frequency meter (work the same as difficulty level) for the recruits decommitting....something like many, average, few or off for the number of decommitments you'd see.Quote:
Originally Posted by ryby6969
The problem is how do you have decommits without people feeling screwed? I think the easier answer is more Soft Commits.
if they removed the hard commit in season and just made it so that every recruit was listed as a soft commit, that would help. but the hard commit now, treats it as a signed LOI, and that shouldnt be the case.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
aside from that though, decommitments happen for a reason. if you get a commitment from a recruit, and never talk to him again, you deserve to have him decommit on you. i think a system could be created that would make it very easy to keep your recruits committed to you. (ie: getting a commitment starts you out with a 500 point lead over the #2 school. if the #2 school is able to get your lead to under 100 points, the recruit decommits from you. numbers are just thrown out there, and a slider for the amount of decommitments could raise/lower those point values.) if the system was totally random, though, then yeah, people would feel screwed. but again, if you made the effort to keep your recruit, it should be hard to lose him, unless you're a 1* school trying to keep a 5* recruit over alabama, ohio state, USC, etc.
Well, as it is now, a commitment jumps you to +2000. They could keep that and just have the player stay open.
They shouldn't totally remove Hard commits though. It's obviously not realistic now, but there are some kids IRL that will commit and have no chance of wavering. So there should still be some hards, just not so many.
seems a bit much, especially if you were listed as only 1 point behind. but agreed in the sense that recruits, after they commit, need to be able to be talked to.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
i think they could combine an aspect that they have now with this, rather than randomly programming the chances a kid will waver on his commitment.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
when at the players leaving stage, they have the little meter telling you how likely it is to change that player's mind (think the stages are very low, low, average, above average, high, very high?)....they could bring that in here for use after the recruit commits, and use it to show how likely the kid will hold in his commitment. its very true that some kids shut down their recruiting very early, but that doesnt mean that coaches stop recruiting them. that scale could then be used here, in how likely the recruit will decommit. the rank he comes in at would be totally random, but you should still have a shot at swaying him to become a solid commit.
varying levels of a commitment? i like it.
Wouldn't want it to be totally random (e.g. if I was the only school that recruited a kid, he should be less likely to decommit), but otherwise yes.
it'd have to be totally random, but the more you talk to him after he commits, the less likely he would be to decommit. and for him to decommit, there'd have to be a reason for it (ie: have a very high reason to decommit and a lead over the second place school of less than 100 points or so). if you're the only school on his list, he shouldnt decommit.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
however, if they could tie his committedness (if thats a word :D) to how big of a lead you had when he made his commitment, that could be an easy starting point. you would have to continue to talk to him in order to solidify his commitment, and other schools would either try to downsway him or build themselves up.
this brings up another hell of a problem in how does the cpu get reprogrammed to handle committed recruits? :fp:
The CPU is one reason why, while it's not necessarily realistic, I'd lean toward the "instantly up to +2000" idea. That shouldn't require much reprogramming.
Definitely want Decommitting, but I would it solid and not random.
One way it could be solid is if it depends on recruiting pitches. Since recruiting pitches are dynamic now, they could have it where if one of your pitches that your recruit covets decreases their interest could decreases, even if they committed. Like if the recruits prefers winning teams and you start losing games, you could automatically losing points. Or if the recruits covets Coach Loyalty and the coaches jumps at another school, I would like to see recruits decommits. Imagine, one of your rival teams signs a recruit you covet and the team loses it coach and the players decommits and your and to snag the recruit.
- I want to see is the ability to edit recruits or allow users to download other people recruiting class. I think that is something that could give Dynasty more replay-ability after 4+ seasons.
-I think the Team Specific Ratings(from Madden) is something that could really improve recruiting and dynasty as a whole. Each recruit could have a playstyle attached to him dictated by their ratings. I.E. a small fast RB would be considered a spread back. It would be nice to see teams like Texas Tech going after QBs with high THA. Or a team like ORE go after smaller fast RBs. I would like to see the teams scheme to change once the coach leaves(unless same scheme).
-Coach Grades. Like Recruiting, Playcalling(may go to OC/DC), Teaching(progression), and Motivation(game day boosts). It could A-F grading system. I would like to see OC/DCs have them. For example a HC with A+ Recruiting will consistently get top 10 classes, while C+ coaches are more likely to get a gem recruit rather than a top recruit. If a A+ recruiting HC get busts than his grade will go down. I would like playcalling be tied to a playcalling grade.
- OC/DCs having a bigger effect in Dynasty. I would like to hire the OC/DC if I am the HC. I would like the option to have your OC/DC call the plays. Like instead of Ask Coach or Corso(whatever it is), it could be Ask OC/DC. Something I would like to see is OC/DCs suggests players to recruit. It could go with the recruiting grade of OC/DC and scheme specific overall. I.E. there could be a section where OC/DC suggestions. Where they have recruits that can fit their scheme.
this is fucking retarded. player progression NEEDS to have stat based progression play a larger part into its equation. its not even a question of if it should, its a must!
case in point: we just got past the offseason training results in the TGT360 od, inbetween seasons 2 and 3. i chose to be the oc at arizona state my first year and selected michael eubank as my starter. there were 4 qbs on the roster, all of which were within 2 overall points of each other. eubank was the starter all of his freshman season. he passed for 4600 yards, and roughly 45 tds. the backup, who was the same overall rating, only had like 20 passes or so over the course of the whole season.
season 1's offseason's training results have eubank and the backup listed as the same overall going into season 2. season 2 happens, and eubank wins the heisman. he throws for 6100 yards and 58 TD passes!!! the backup? 6 passes all season! this should be a no-brainer! yet, going after the offseason training period, eubank and his backup will be the same overall again, going into season 3 of this od! :fp: how is it possible that one qb who throws for close to 11,000 yards and over 100 td passes in 2 seasons progresses at the same rate that his backup does, who's only thrown around 30 passes his whole career?!?! what the hell!
/end rant
Is it possible the backup had a higher :1star: rating in recruiting? That would indicate a higher potential/progression, most likely.
they were both on the default roster. eubank was a rs frosh, while the backup was a rs soph. eubank is now a rs jr, and the backup is a rs sr. this shouldnt even be about potential and progression. i'm talking 11,000 yards passing and over 100 td passes compared to 30 career passes and maybe 2 td passes. and they're progressing at the same rate? thats just stupid!Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffHCross
i'm not even gonna bring up my 3rd string qb, who's also a rs sr. when we started in this od, he was only 1 ovr point behind eubank, and is now sitting at 3 points behind him as a rs sr. he hasnt thrown a single pass in his entire career!
Here's an idea I haven't seen anywhere else (please correct me if I'm wrong.)
Dynamic Rivalries
Like most of you I play the hell out of Dynasty. I have even played 60 season on NCAA 12 and thought of a few ideas. This is one of them.
With the addition of Custom Conferences the past few years you're only limited by your own imagination. Say you want to go nuts one day and move Florida to the Pac 12. Why would you? Just because. And as you play season after season you start to have really competitive, exciting, and close games with USC. It becomes a trend, and over say 20 seasons or so it becomes one of the marquee games of the season. Yet, it'll never be mentioned in commentary, or the history both teams have with each other. How important has this game become in the grand scheme of things? What if that gets brought up? Maybe the game atmosphere is different. The crowd is more hostile, each play adds more tension to the crowd. Maybe, during a game break you even see saved highlights from games from ten years ago and get a reminder what makes this new rivalry so amazing. Maybe, you could go so far as to create a new rivalry trophy to award the winner. MAYBE even set the game at a neutral location ala OU/Texas or UF/UGA.
Granted there are some audio and crowd noise improvements that would be needed to amplify this idea. But it gives you a reason to have replay value and give you a new game to look forward to that you may not be accustomed to. Maybe you have star ratings for current and developing rivalries to get an idea of what the marquee games are. For all we know Alabama and Texas A&M could become the new marquee SEC matchup for years to come? Why not do the same in the game?
It's been mentioned quite a few times, but it can never hurt to be mentioned again. I'd love to see it!
That'd be awesome! :nod:
I would love to see a team "hall of fame" nothing special but maybe at the end of the season when graduations comes around where you click around to check out all of your players that are leaving stats, you can add that player and all of his accomplishments to a wall of fame or something. Then later on in the dynasty cycle you can go in there and click on a few names just to remember how good some of those guys where. You can see all of their stats, attributes, awards, records they broke, and all American or all conference recognitions.
I'm surprised the backup didn't transfer!!Quote:
Originally Posted by baseballplyrmvp
This. For example, what was Manziel's rating in NCAA 13 and what will it be in NCAA 14. Surely he will get a 20+ point jump. Players need a potential rating so that redshirts can progress a little. But player progression needs to be based on stats. This random 3-7 for each player is just completely stupid. Next year, if they get Florida's new field art, uniforms, and accessory color right I might take the time to go in depth and edit each team after each season based off of stats from the year before. Especially the starters. to make things look realistic.Quote:
Originally Posted by baseballplyrmvp
Recruiting needs to be overhauled completely.
1. They need to fix the Top 100 players to make more defensive guys present. Past years it has been mainly RBs, WRs, and ATHs dominating the top 100.
2. Spring Practices and Spring game should return. Areas where players can add a few extra progression points.
3. Early enrollees should be feature and allowed to play in spring games and practices to progress a few points.
4. There should be a signing day or week where players can pick schools and top players can pick between their final 3. Instead of knowing where everyone goes.
5. They should update the Top 100 a few times during the year and they should stop adding 5 star recruits in offseason recruiting. Thats unreal.
6. JUCOs should have their own Top 50 or whatever. Keep them off the main boards. They need their own section.
7. TEAMS NEED TO SIGN ENOUGH PLAYERS AND THE RIGHT PLAYERS. No more teams with 8 Quarterbacks.
8. I'd like to play the Army and Under Armour all-american games. Or atleast be notified which recruits played in these games.
---ASIDE FROM RECRUITING.
-Like custom conferences, I am hoping that EA allows us to input the 4 team playoff in future years and assign which bowl games will host the first round.
-ALLOW US TO DUPLICATE NUMBERS. One per offense and one per defense. Or at least add the duplicate number glitch back.
-Fix poll logic.
-And again FIX PROGRESSION. Progression is so horrid. Progression should be only based on potential rating and stats from the previous year. Making 10-20 increases possible if a players plays that well.
agreedQuote:
Originally Posted by GatorBait06NC
why? players are already way overrated. adding in another stage for them to progress, means that every 6* team will have a crapload of 99 OVR players.Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorBait06NC
recruits would need to have a randomized gpa in order for this to work. additionally, not every recruit should be able to enroll early because of their grades, even though they're labelled as an EE.Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorBait06NC
been asked for by a lot of people, but honestly, how many people would want to slow down the offseason, just so everyone has a chance to see the signing day show?Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorBait06NC
they dont add recruits in the offseason anymore. i agree though, that the recruit rankings should shift a few times during the season.Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorBait06NC
agreedQuote:
Originally Posted by GatorBait06NC
agreed. when cpu teams have a certain need for a position, they oversign and this causes problems with roster management.Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorBait06NC
i dont see a point in being able to play the high school all star games. if people cant tell how good certain recruits are by looking at their ratings, playing just one game with those recruits isnt gonna help that person make up their mind. additionally, most 4 and 5* recruits (in the game) are already committed by week 1 of the offseason, and with no way for recruits to flip on their commitments, playing the high school all star games isnt gonna be something that will help with your recruitment of the recruit. i'd be fine with a visual though.Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorBait06NC
chances are, this probably wont be up to the user. they'd probably just have the first round be random sites (or the current bcs bowl sites) with the final round being on a rotation between the 4 sites.Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorBait06NC
:fp: they're not gonna purposely add a glitch back into the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorBait06NC
:smh: potential? yes. stats from previous year? no. dynamic progression based on current year's performance? yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorBait06NC
stats from the previous year shouldnt have any bearing on how a player is currently playing. manziel will probably be rated really high, but if he comes out and throws 4 ints in his first game and fumbles the ball twice, he'll be benched. if he does that in his second game too, there's a chance he could lose his starting spot.