Powerhouse OD - General Discussion Thread

[texacotea]

true, but if we do this we would only have to cut those players.

[psusnoop]

true, but if we do this we would only have to cut those players.

I will agree that I really like this but the only thing that keeps me from the 70 number and more of a fan of say 72 number is the possibility that a JR that may try and leave but shouldn't does which leaves you hurting for depth or worse for two years possibly.

I agree over signing is and always has been something though that I wish would be able to better controlled.

[JeffHCross]

true, but if we do this we would only have to cut those players.

I've noticed that some years it's not obvious which players were the ones added by the CPU. It is pretty obvious if you use the console, less obvious online (I think that was the difference).

Not that I don't trust anyone here, but that would also allow people, potentially, the option of cutting a guy they didn't like so much rather than a CPU recruit, if the CPU recruit was good (mine were horrible last year).

I did suggest this for NCAA 14 in the Proposed Rules thread. I would absolutely like to see this for us in 14, though, like Snoop, I prefer a +3 allowance to allow for some cuts.

[Oneback]

I was game for adding recruiting limits this year until we found out the CPU will auto sign up to 25. I'm super picky about who I recruit/sign even with that so I am onboard with restrictions.

[gschwendt]

Add Texas Tech to the list of teams that need to be relegated to a lower conference next season... C+ OVR.

[JeffHCross]

I have a "crazy" idea about that ... but I need to do a little testing on it first.

[Papa LoneStar]

Only problem with that is that this year, recruits are automatically added to your board at the end of the year. I think practically every year I've had at least 5-10 recruits added that I either didn't offer a scholarship or didn't even talk to.

I recruited a kicker and punter last year....and out of the recruits the cpu added....I ended up cutting the ones "I signed" 'cause the cpu choices were MUCH better

[razorback44]

Is there some sort of glitch in the kicking game this year that I don't know about? I've missed multiple extra points over the last two seasons when I've had the kick meter at full power and then when I kick it the ball barely clears the line and falls way short of the goalpost. Its almost like my kicker is injured or something. Its never happened against a user and never on a field goal. Strangest thing I've ever seen. Has anyone else had this happen to them?

[gschwendt]

I know in SBCOL, we had the kac slider too low causing really bad kicks like you described. It only happened on kickers with already really low kac. That said, since it only happens on XPs, it's strange. What's your kicker's kac?

[razorback44]

I know in SBCOL, we had the kac slider too low causing really bad kicks like you described. It only happened on kickers with already really low kac. That said, since it only happens on XPs, it's strange. What's your kicker's kac?

His kac is 68. That might be it.

I thought kac didn't matter when usering a kicker? I signed him because he had A kick power. Wasn't even looking at his kac rating.

[gschwendt]

His kac is 68. That might be it.

I thought kac didn't matter when usering a kicker? I signed him because he had A kick power. Wasn't even looking at his kac rating.

No, KAC definitely matters. For one, the lower the KAC, the narrower the accuracy window is (the pie shaped area at the top). However, I think what you're seeing is closer to being a glitch rather than intentional. In SBCOL, when we were seeing it, the slider was set at 30 I believe and the moment I bumped it to 35, everything was fine. It only happened for the very lowest KAC players.



On an unrelated note, apparently recruiting against the CPU is even easier than we thought. A few weeks back I found a player that was in Top 3 status and was nearly maxed out for Cincinnati; I wasn't on his board at all. I really liked how he looked so I thought, might as well talk to him, maybe I can get a quick jump up. However, I never got that quick jump but I slowly worked my way up his list, all the while he never went to Soft Commit for Cincinnati. Finally this week, I see that I jumped up into his #1 spot and Cincinnati is now down at #9 with about 1/3 of their meter full and no scholarship offer.

[Oneback]

No, KAC definitely matters. For one, the lower the KAC, the narrower the accuracy window is (the pie shaped area at the top). However, I think what you're seeing is closer to being a glitch rather than intentional. In SBCOL, when we were seeing it, the slider was set at 30 I believe and the moment I bumped it to 35, everything was fine. It only happened for the very lowest KAC players.



On an unrelated note, apparently recruiting against the CPU is even easier than we thought. A few weeks back I found a player that was in Top 3 status and was nearly maxed out for Cincinnati; I wasn't on his board at all. I really liked how he looked so I thought, might as well talk to him, maybe I can get a quick jump up. However, I never got that quick jump but I slowly worked my way up his list, all the while he never went to Soft Commit for Cincinnati. Finally this week, I see that I jumped up into his #1 spot and Cincinnati is now down at #9 with about 1/3 of their meter full and no scholarship offer.

I wonder if Cincy stopped recruiting him/ran out of offers.

[gschwendt]

I wonder if Cincy stopped recruiting him/ran out of offers.

Well, looking at Cincy's class, they have only signed 9 players, however they have signed a 4-star player at this same position. Just seems odd that they would drop that much or that they would even pull his offer outright instead of just putting him on the back-burner.

As well, my understanding is that once you get your meter filled that much, it's not going to drop off like that... sure others may pass you, but it would more or less stay that high (ie the system only adds points, it doesn't subtract).

[Oneback]

Well, looking at Cincy's class, they have only signed 9 players, however they have signed a 4-star player at this same position. Just seems odd that they would drop that much or that they would even pull his offer outright instead of just putting him on the back-burner.

As well, my understanding is that once you get your meter filled that much, it's not going to drop off like that... sure others may pass you, but it would more or less stay that high (ie the system only adds points, it doesn't subtract).

Unsure - may be worth an email to EA.

[JeffHCross]

Yeah, unless someone is doing considerable negative recruiting, the points shouldn't drop.

Though if you completely pull someone and they're off your board, it might drop. It just may. (I've seen a few players that only had one school in their Top 10 near the end of the year). Though the CPU isn't known to ever drop someone completely from the board. So that's still weird.

[Papa LoneStar]

Am I the only one who has "bowl practice" in practice mode....remove all seniors off the depth chart and practice?

[JeffHCross]

Am I the only one who has "bowl practice" in practice mode....remove all seniors off the depth chart and practice?

That's how I play my bowl games

[Papa LoneStar]

That's how I play my bowl games

*saves quote for negative recruiting*

[JeffHCross]

Lmao. They're seniors, they don't care! I let them go up to Mobile for Senior Bowl practice early

[ryby6969]

*saves quote for negative recruiting*

I will just tell your recruits they can come and actually win something with the Tide or be apart of the best team to never win anything in Baton Rouge!