GWJ2STAR 2.0 - Off-Season

Skip, Skip, Skiperoo.

Let's cut some chumps!

I'm OK with pushing forward as well.

It is pushed.

I had to cut seven players. I guess maybe I didn't need to use all 25 scholarships. I even cut a 4* WR who turned out to be a dud.

I played a game of NIU vs. CMU to get a look at what Firesloth saw. And yeah, it was brutal. Everything else played out well, and I still ran the bal okay, but the DL crashed a lot more than would be expected.

I tried reducing the CPU Pass Rush and and rush defense a bit, but it had little effect. So I boosted User Run Blocking from 20 to 30, and it was significantly better. If you guys can play with it at 30, and let me know, that would be cool. Also, if you are still having the DL get to many free passes to the HB, bump it up to 35 or 40 and tell me what you see.

I had less issue while running these sliders with SMU and Kansas. I played both comparable teams, and highly tanked teams, and found the games to be pretty good. But SMU has a much better OL than the average 2* school, I believe. So bumping up User Run Blocking should help. I'm thinking 30 will work.

Will do. Looking forward to the new settings

I averaged about 3-4 yards a carry against some other crappy opponents. We may want to bump the human stuff up a wee bit more.

I'm done.

I had an open roster spot, so I decided not to cut anyone.

TheCounselor wrote:

I'm done.

I had an open roster spot, so I decided not to cut anyone.

You are too nice. You know some of those chumps deserved to get cut!

Done. Cut a 40 rated MLB.

Done.

Done.

done.

I also just completed my "Preseason" stuff! You can schedule me with people that need a 2nd Human game. I think Nevada and SDSU should probably play as well since both of us are alone in conference.

My preseason will be done today.

After playing TCU with the SMU of the original rosters, I think Run Blocking 40 is probably the way to go. Although I did find running still pretty easy. Zach Line had 97 yards on 15 carries, and my third down back, who also gets carries because Line has terrible stamina, had 60 yards on five carries.

But to be fair, Line had a 34 yard carried, which otherwise left him with 14 carries and 63 yards, and Butler had a 54 yard TD romp on a draw, which otherwise left him with 6 yards on 4 carries.

But TCU did smoke me, as my passing game got me into some serious turnover trouble, and I lost a TD when my TE fumbled t the one yard line on his way into the endzone. Once I got behind, TCU really made me pay. But I had a pretty good opportunity to head into the half with a lead.

The schedule looks great! Thanks for working on that! I'm excited for my first human game!

If I want to beat you, this is the year to do it while I have a good(MAC worthy good) offense.

We are officially in the preseason! The time has come to redshirt the chumps you didn't cut, fill your draft board with chumps you will cut or redshirt next season, and begin the process of getting those depth charts in order.

It is also time for yours truly to knock out a schedule. And I just happen to finish it up last night. It's not set in stone, but I think you will like it.

First, another big change for this season. Each team, except Marshall, will have two human opponents. NIU was already set, as they had two MAC opponents. So Firesloth gets the raw deal, only getting to play conference foes. But everyone else has one or two non-conference human opponents.

My main goal was to not only get everyone two opponents, but to avoid back to back human opponents, and also to avoid having the first game of the season be a human. I then just began randomly filling each team up with teams that were available in weeks that satisfied those two goals. Here is what I came up with.

As I said, these are not set in stone. The teams are based on who the real teams are scheduled to play in 2012, but I eliminated the FCS teams in favor of human opponents. I switched UT Martin for Mid Tenn State in NIU's schedule.

But I can still edit until I advance. So let me know what you all think. I would consider giving teams that lack a ranked opponent an option to swap in one. But remember, this season has fairly dramatically tougher sliders.

Buffalo - C-
at #12 Georgia
at Connecticut
#22 SMU (yep, I am the lone ranked squad for this season!)
Pittsburgh
NIU (firesloth in the MAC)

Eastern Michigan - C-
at Michigan State
at Purdue
SDSU (airicc8)
Army
NIU (firesloth in the MAC)

Nevada - C
at Washington
UTEP (HansomB1derful)
Cal
at SDSU (airicc8)

NIU - C-
#15 Iowa
at Army
at Mid Tenn State
Kansas
at Buffalo (Counselar in the MAC)
at EMU (LeroyOG in the MAC)

#22 SMU - C
at Baylor
#17 TCU
#25 Texas A&M
at Buffalo (Counselar)
at EMU (LeroyOG in the MAC)

SDSU - C+
at Cincinnati
Army
at EMU (LeroyOG)
Nevada (DSGamer)

UTEP - C+
New Mexico
at #4 Wisconsin
at Nevada (DSGamer)
New Mexico State
at SMU (Jayhawker in C-USA)

The schedule looks good.

I'll cut my chumps tonight or tomorrow morning.

Cutting is done sir. We have moved on to redshirting chumps!

I'm ready.

Jay, I was looking at the AI/Human settings and noticed you have AI rush defense at 80 and Human run blocking at 20. I take it you want no one to rush for more than 7 yards a game huh?

Also, maybe boost the human ints a smidge.

Leroyog wrote:

I'm ready.

Jay, I was looking at the AI/Human settings and noticed you have AI rush defense at 80 and Human run blocking at 20. I take it you want no one to rush for more than 7 yards a game huh?

Also, maybe boost the human ints a smidge.

Yeah. I'm going into this with trepidation. This is Jayhawker's league. So he can absolutely do with it as he pleases. However, striving for realism in EA games has always struck me as a fool's errand. I'm happy to go along with the experiment. But if I'm averaging a "realistic" 2 yards a carry, can't pass and have virtually no control over my own destiny, I'm not sure how interested I'll be going forward.

I agree completely. I like a little challenge in my sports games but I despise roided out AI.

Also, for what it's worth, part of why I throw passes to the seams and run the ball up the middle is because the linebackers and corners frequently leap 10 feet in the air and pick off passes. At the end of the day this is still a video game and it does video game things. I feel like the default settings, while not ideal, at least give you a fair chance to compete.

This is, of course, a subject of completely valid contention. There are a couple of schools of thought, as I see it, when you think about how realistic sports games should be.

- One way to look at it is that if I'm Nevada I should lose more than I win unless it's to lesser opponents. I should rarely have the ability to beat a top 20 program. It should be a monumental struggle to move from being a 2 star team to a respectable team.

- Another way to look at it is that because of my knowledge of football I bring to the game some experience and talent that improves my team. Much like a great coach can turn around a program through sheer skill and talent, perhaps Nevada can be turned around because I can coach my QB to throw to the right places. I can teach my running backs to hit the holes with good timing. Through that I can start to crack the #20 and build a solid program.

I don't think either way of looking at things is "right". It's just a matter of perspective of what you want out of a game.

Run blocking should be 40 now. I will check to see if the sliders saved.

As I mentioned earlier, I ran for 150 yards in three quarters on TCU with the sophomore version of Zach Line and an iffy OL. I was using the original rosters, not where we are now to gauge their accuracy.

I doubt we will have most of us working on perfect or one or two loss seasons. I think running is going to be fine. I think the real issue will be passing.

Last season was fun, but it was also kind of silly. Five of the top six rushers or so were from our teams. One team had 9000 yards of offense. One WR caught 140 passes and more than 3000 yards. The point of doing a 2* Star dynasty was to have teams struggle to improve. Instead, we turned it into score chasing league.

I can't blame anyone for wanting to bail if the league is not fun. But honestly, I'd bail if the league continued on the path it was on. I'm iffy on the other league now. It's really gotten too easy.

But I'd really like you guys to give the sliders a try in some exhibition games to get a feel for them. I have already bumped the Run blocking up to 40 from 20 due to input from you guys. And I think that had a positive effect. I'm finding overall, that these sliders result in much more compelling gameplay.

DSGamer wrote:

Also, for what it's worth, part of why I throw passes to the seams and run the ball up the middle is because the linebackers and corners frequently leap 10 feet in the air and pick off passes. At the end of the day this is still a video game and it does video game things. I feel like the default settings, while not ideal, at least give you a fair chance to compete.

One thing to consider is that in the new ratings, INT's are hammered really low.

What I have found is that if you are throwing over the middle, trying to throw a bullet pass is tougher to pull off than a normal pass.

- One way to look at it is that if I'm Nevada I should lose more than I win unless it's to lesser opponents. I should rarely have the ability to beat a top 20 program. It should be a monumental struggle to move from being a 2 star team to a respectable team.

- Another way to look at it is that because of my knowledge of football I bring to the game some experience and talent that improves my team. Much like a great coach can turn around a program through sheer skill and talent, perhaps Nevada can be turned around because I can coach my QB to throw to the right places. I can teach my running backs to hit the holes with good timing. Through that I can start to crack the #20 and build a solid program.

I don't think either way of looking at things is "right". It's just a matter of perspective of what you want out of a game.

No, there isn't a right way. But honestly, my #3 ranking and and undefeated season didn't make me feel like a smart coach. It made me feel like the game was easy to take advantage of. I didn't feel a sense of accomplishment in anything other than my C-USA Championship game.

When seven of the eight teams picked specifically becasue they are at a disadvantage end up getting ranked, mist of us in the top 10 or so, it's clear that the game was just too easy.

Jayhawker wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

Also, for what it's worth, part of why I throw passes to the seams and run the ball up the middle is because the linebackers and corners frequently leap 10 feet in the air and pick off passes. At the end of the day this is still a video game and it does video game things. I feel like the default settings, while not ideal, at least give you a fair chance to compete.

One thing to consider is that in the new ratings, INT's are hammered really low.

What I have found is that if you are throwing over the middle, trying to throw a bullet pass is tougher to pull off than a normal pass.

Lower INT rates would be nice. This part of the game is fundamentally broken, though, IMO. At least compared to 2k. The problem is that if you try to put a little more touch on it you will frequently watch it hang as a DB from across the field catches up with a WR who has burned his defender.

Jayhawker wrote:
- One way to look at it is that if I'm Nevada I should lose more than I win unless it's to lesser opponents. I should rarely have the ability to beat a top 20 program. It should be a monumental struggle to move from being a 2 star team to a respectable team.

- Another way to look at it is that because of my knowledge of football I bring to the game some experience and talent that improves my team. Much like a great coach can turn around a program through sheer skill and talent, perhaps Nevada can be turned around because I can coach my QB to throw to the right places. I can teach my running backs to hit the holes with good timing. Through that I can start to crack the #20 and build a solid program.

I don't think either way of looking at things is "right". It's just a matter of perspective of what you want out of a game.

No, there isn't a right way. But honestly, my #3 ranking and and undefeated season didn't make me feel like a smart coach. It made me feel like the game was easy to take advantage of. I didn't feel a sense of accomplishment in anything other than my C-USA Championship game.

When seven of the eight teams picked specifically becasue they are at a disadvantage end up getting ranked, mist of us in the top 10 or so, it's clear that the game was just too easy.

I don't know if that's the complete picture, though. I think there is more going on here.

#1 - The AI around rankings, awards, etc. is way wonky. We've all had guys with obscene yards lose the Heisman Trophy. I had a QB who rushed for 5,000 yards his first year (next to lowest difficulty on my own personal dynasty) as an option QB and then proceeded to throw for around 6,000 yards each of the next 3 seasons. He never won the Heisman. Even worse, my team, which admittedly was over powered, finished all 4 years undefeated and twice had to get a last second break to go from 3rd to 2nd to get into the BCS game.

Then, on the flip side, you have this weird AI that says that going undefeated as SMU should get you in the top 5. That's also whack, obviously.

#2 - One way to fix that is to have us start playing each other (which we're doing). In "real life" the reason you wouldn't see a season like our season last year is because some of these teams would start scheduling each other in order to increase their strength of schedule and get a better bowl game. Teams would also shift conferences eventually. Yes it would be weird if there were 7 or 8 undefeated, top-20, non-AQ teams every year. And this is part of why it would never happen.

I guess my bottom line is that I don't get too worked up over stat inflation. It is a video game, after all, and part of the fun is racking up stats. Competitiveness is a good goal. However, I think there's only so much we can do with the game that NCAA Football is.

I had a QB who rushed for 5,000 yards his first year (next to lowest difficulty on my own personal dynasty) as an option QB and then proceeded to throw for around 6,000 yards each of the next 3 seasons.

Honestly, I'm not sure how playing a game like that is fun. I don't begrudge anyone for playing like that, but there is no way that I am interested in making it easy to crank out ridiculous stats so that I can tell the internet that my HB or QB won an award. What I want is a game that that challenges me week to week with enough resistance that I have to consider my strategy to maximize my strengths and minimize my weaknesses to I can pull off a good season.

I don't want a league where teams are failing to get more than a few first downs a game and can't complete 50% of their passes. I don't want teams losing by 20-30 points a week. And if that is what is happening, we will go back to what we had, or at least make significant changes.

But in a Two Star dynasty, I didn't expect anyone to win a Heisman, let along have it dominated by us. And I don't feel an obligation to make it possible. I feel more obligation to prevent it.

Here is the slider thread on OS that I am basing these on.

Jayhawker wrote:
I had a QB who rushed for 5,000 yards his first year (next to lowest difficulty on my own personal dynasty) as an option QB and then proceeded to throw for around 6,000 yards each of the next 3 seasons.

Honestly, I'm not sure how playing a game like that is fun. I don't begrudge anyone for playing like that, but there is no way that I am interested in making it easy to crank out ridiculous stats so that I can tell the internet that my HB or QB won an award.

You're putting words in my mouth. Or in my head. I didn't play those 4 seasons so I could brag to the Internet. I played those 4 seasons because I personally enjoyed it. Often I'd throw on my headphones with a podcast and just zone out to picking apart the defense. That's fun for me, regardless of who knows. It's like football Peggle.

Jayhawker wrote:

What I want is a game that that challenges me week to week with enough resistance that I have to consider my strategy to maximize my strengths and minimize my weaknesses to I can pull off a good season.

I don't want a league where teams are failing to get more than a few first downs a game and can't complete 50% of their passes. I don't want teams losing by 20-30 points a week. And if that is what is happening, we will go back to what we had, or at least make significant changes.

Let me try to explain this again. For me personally present day football AI is terrible. All the sliders in the world can't fix it as far as I'm concerned. It's no better than the days of Tecmo Super Bowl relative to my meager skills. So I enjoy modern football games much like people enjoyed Tecmo Super Bowl back in the day. By playing a video game, racking up stats and just zoning out as if it were a video game.

Now, playing a human? That's a whole different story. Humans have variable AI and are far more interesting than playing the computer. I equally enjoy playing mostly humans, even if I get my butt handed to me. This is a whole different kind of fun to me. Much closer to what you were talking about earlier. Where every game is a chess match and you have to really match whits. With people I think this is much easier and really rewarding. The game I've played the most this year is Battlefield: Bad Company 2, precisely for this reason. I love playing with and against humans. Just in general.

To me it's been really disappointing that XBox Live has largely gone south in terms of the people online. I used to love going online with Madden, NCAA, APF2k8 or NBA2k and playing games against people. Honestly, if I knew I could get a good game with a person all the time I would probably never play seasons against the computer. That's why I never really got into NBA2k11. Because I want to play people.

Jayhawker wrote:

But in a Two Star dynasty, I didn't expect anyone to win a Heisman, let along have it dominated by us. And I don't feel an obligation to make it possible. I feel more obligation to prevent it.

"Obligated"? By whom? You're talking about what *you* want out of the game. And that's perfectly fine. But please don't put forward your opinion as if it's some objective idea of what is fun. I just put forward the two ways I enjoy football games, generally. Ideally people would have the ability to get their games in timely enough that I could be in a league with all humans. That would be amazing and I would totally do it. In the absence of that, though, I'm not going to enjoy the game more if the already bad AI is tweaked in other bad ways.

But, once again, that's just my opinion.

I completely understand where DS is coming from. I catch up on TV shows when I am playing NCAA/Madden