NCAA13 BCS (XBox 360) League Discussion (1 Spot Open)

SpyNavy wrote:

Kush,

Will Custom PB's be ok? I have gone in and tailored a couple and taken out extra plays that I'll never use because I hate spending precious seconds trying to find a play. I did the same with my Defensive PB... Let me know so I can adjust accordingly.

Thanks,
- Spy

Spy,

We banned Custom playbooks last year

You're Welcome,
- Kush

In all seriousness, we removed the custom playbook feature to deter users from customizing a 5-10 set playbook, and only running those plays. Now of course, I can't stop someone from using the same plays using a normal playbook, but it makes it a little harder to do so. Also, I never liked the idea of combining 2 completely different offenses. They don't really do it in college, and I feel you should have to take the good and the bad with the playbook scheme (Pistol, One-back, etc) that you select. Since we ran through a whole year of NCAA12 without the custom playbooks without issue or complaint, I am going to leave it as such.

Also, I am going to remove the online sim option as well, as we did last year.

Jayhawker wrote:

I think I may take you up on a school change. I've decided to jump back into an SMU dynasty, as Zach Line is one of my favorite college players right now. But I would like to see them moved into another major conference, rather than sit in the C-USA all alone. They are now a 3* school.

Awesome, Rutgers will have a 3-star buddy school. Looks like we'll be conference rivals in Season I. Plus, I can't remember the last time we played each other.

Kush15 wrote:

Spy,

We banned Custom playbooks last year

You're Welcome,
- Kush 8-)

Wait, no we didn't. We went back to allowing custom playbooks...or at least I ran one. The reason being as Spy stated, but also because the default position on defense (hit A to BLITZ) was annoying given the way they had changed up the play calling from the previous year's edition.

I think I could be fine either way. We certainly encouraged the "don't change for money plays, but to make things less complicated." I didn't really run a traditional spread last year, but rather a lot of a single back offense with a bit of spread and I formation thrown in. On defense, I played a 3-4, but didn't restrict the nickel formations to only those with the default 3-4 package.

It was just a base playbook with extra crap taken out. Doesnt matter either way, I'll use the same playbook - it'll just be in a pain in the arse to sort through a bajillion plays I dont use.

firesloth wrote:

Wait, no we didn't. We went back to allowing custom playbooks...or at least I ran one. The reason being as Spy stated, but also because the default position on defense (hit A to BLITZ) was annoying given the way they had changed up the play calling from the previous year's edition.

I think I could be fine either way. We certainly encouraged the "don't change for money plays, but to make things less complicated." I didn't really run a traditional spread last year, but rather a lot of a single back offense with a bit of spread and I formation thrown in. On defense, I played a 3-4, but didn't restrict the nickel formations to only those with the default 3-4 package.

Did we allow it? I remember not wanting to, thus, I thought we banned them. I will check NCAA12 settings at some point. It would be interesting if I did ban them and you were still able to run one

Besides, as long as you weren't Michigan, I didn't mind. GO IRISH!

SpyNavy wrote:

For those interested PastaPadre has released his player name rosters.

Does anyone have any issues with me grabbing their roster? (Thanks SN!)

My HvH picks.

Willhouse4078 (Michigan State)
Firesloth (Iowa/North Carolina)
TheCounselor (Texas A&M)
Bill Bonney (UCLA)

Kush15 wrote:
SpyNavy wrote:

For those interested PastaPadre has released his player name rosters.

Does anyone have any issues with me grabbing their roster? (Thanks SN!)

Pasta has posted them, but he has said he doesn't know the source or the accuracy of the rosters. The main thing I would worry about is that they have changed ratings. My preference is rosters that only have names and appearance edited.

Fairdale will have his out pretty soon. He's got the Top 25 and main conferences done. I donated, so I hope to grab a copy soon. OS won't let him post there because he is asking donation for early release versions. The rosters the OS community are doing are full of edits, so I will probably ignore them.

But the one's from Pasta are at least worth looking at. there was already one guy trying to call a set of roster complete, when they were just Fairdale's with generated names for teams he didn't finish. I won't be surprised if that is what Pasta has.

And I'd vote for banning custom playbooks. I would not be surprised if they were part of the issue Firesloth and Leroy were having. A lot of sports games allow a lot of customization, but they often cause weird conflicts.

Later I will post some sliders I have been working on, including penalties. I'm getting some good results.

The only real preference I have in HvH is to play Counselor. Since he is Texas Tech, that is a rivalry game for us, so it would be good for both.

This might be a good set to check out:

xIZ GONE RAINx

These are just names. I don't believe they are 100% yet.

I would think that we could just wait until a complete roster is set before we setup the league. But then again, I could just hand it off the the fullback!

I love the option!

I tried setting up a custom playbook last year and it was so broken. There were formations in the game playbook that weren't there in the "Edit" playbook. So I went back to my usual one.

Cincinnati is a 3* school as well.

Kush,

It's ok to use another teams playbook? For instance I like LSU and the 4-2-5, is that acceptable as long as they are stock?

Thanks
-Spy

SpyNavy wrote:

Kush,

It's ok to use another teams playbook? For instance I like LSU and the 4-2-5, is that acceptable as long as they are stock?

Thanks
-Spy

Yeah, I have no problem with that.

I dint care who I face HvH but I would like to have a shot at Zell since we have some decent games against each other

Kush15 wrote:

Shag texted me a little while ago, and has committed to Georgia Tech. Waiting now on Coolbeans and Firesloth for final team confirmation. Also, this is your final boarding call for any school changes.

I'm probably going to go with four 2-tier conferences. Conferences will have 2-4 users, depending on where schools rank. Conferences will possibly change from season to season.

Please start requesting your HvH matchups. I will take all into consideration, some will be done purely by ranking.

I wont get my game until tomorrow and I want to look at the teams before I commit to WVU. I mentioned that earlier in the thread. Give me til Saturday if you would be so kind. As for HvH matchups, I just want to make sure I can play willhouse and kush if possible.

Kush15 wrote:
SpyNavy wrote:

Kush,

It's ok to use another teams playbook? For instance I like LSU and the 4-2-5, is that acceptable as long as they are stock?

Thanks
-Spy

Yeah, I have no problem with that.

That's always been the case. I ran Kansas as a triple option team for awhile. And I definitely plan on a more suitable gameplan for SMU than Run and Shoot. When you have a big bruising halfback, a more run-oriented gameplan makes way more sense.

So no 5 star schools? That would eliminate UGA and maybe SC (not sure though).

South Carolina is the cream of the 4* crop, and Coolbeans has said he is going to take another school after Shag decides.

I will stick with the SEC and take Tennessee.

Everyone's moving down south this year!

Coolbeans wrote:

I will stick with the SEC and take Tennessee.

Firesloth will need to decide now, or I will have Curtis reset him to Grinder status.

J/K

Iowa.

Here is the first draft of sliders I have been working on. Nothing too extreme. I think Very Slow is the right speed, but I'm guessing at 40 for a Threshold. I think Threshold may help some of the easy over the top pass plays.

I feel very good about penalties, although Clipping might need a boost. Roughing the Passer was finicky. I love that it actually gets called, but that slider seems sensitive. I think 55 is a good balance. I actually had pass interference called once.

Let's see how Pass Coverage does at 80 before bumping to 100. It's pretty bad on both sides. But 80 seems to have had a positive effect. We might also nudge QB Accuracy down a bit, but this needs more testing.

Gameplay
Skill: All-American
Injuries: On
Fatigue: On
Quarter Length: 8 minutes
Play Clock: On
Game Speed: Very Slow
Player Min Speed Threshold: 40
HFA: On
Ice the Kicker: Off

Penalties
Offsides: 100
False Start: 100
Holding: 55
Facemask: 55
Off Pass Interference: 100
Def Pass Interference: 100
KR/PR Interference: 65
Clipping: 65
Intentional Grounding: 100
Roughing the Passer: 55
Roughing the Kicker: 55

Skill USER/CPU
QB Accuracy: 40/40
Pass Blocking: 60/60
WR Catching: 45/45
RB Ability: 50/50
Run Blocking: 60/60
Pass Coverage: 80/80
Pass Rush: 40/40
Interceptions: 50/50
Rush Defense: 60/50
Tackling: 50/50
FG Power: 50/50
FG Accuracy: 45/45
Punt Power: 50/50
Punt Accuracy: 50/50
Kickoff Power: 50/50

et tu?

firesloth wrote:

et tu?

I think you could call me a Stupid Motherf*cking Undesireable.

firesloth wrote:

Iowa.

Firesloth: Our own Idiot Out Walking Around.

Why state the obvious?

Jayhawker wrote:
firesloth wrote:

et tu?

I think you could call me a Stupid Motherf*cking Undesireable.

I am just waiting to see what players you can buy to get them to go to SMU.

I'm just hoping for a lot of big, corn-fed O and D linemen... We aren't as flashy in Iowa as down south. We bribe our players with heads of cattle.