sacks in 6.3b

[Apathetic Lurker]

I went into the late 80's in 3 different careers using 6.3b and have yet to see any player break 100 career sacks, with Lb's being the premier sackers, no matter what defense is used.. Anyone know a tweak I can use to increase Dline sacks?

[Ben E Lou]

I went into the late 80's in 3 different careers using 6.3b and have yet to see any player break 100 career sacks, with Lb's being the premier sackers, no matter what defense is used.. Anyone know a tweak I can use to increase Dline sacks?I haven't seen this. By "late 80s" does that mean 1980s and you're using "historical" rosters. If so, that's likely the problem. In a test career I'm using, I've got several 100-sack guys, all of them DEs. And in a 7-year career on this machine, I've got a DE on an AI team who already has 74 sacks. if he avoids injury, he'll get to 100 easily.

That said, sacks do appear to be down a hair in the 6.3 family of patches. However, hurries, blocks, and overall PRPct are all up quite a bit.

[Apathetic Lurker]

The best I had was a 93.5 sack career by John Dutton(74-84)..Its 1986 right now.
The Ohter career I have is in 1985 and John Dutton(again 74-84) is in the lead with 113

I have never had such low numbers in a career league. Previous to this 6.3b patch I had them in the 140-160 range by the mid eighties. Single season record was 29.5 by Too Tall....Now the top was 16 by Dutton.

[Ben E Lou]

I'm sure the ratings oddities in the "historical" leagues are causing the issue. 6.3 probably is expecting particular ranges that aren't there in the non-standard rosters.

[Apathetic Lurker]

any way to "rollback " the patch? without reinstalling all

[Ben E Lou]

Maybe it's just me, but it seems that the better solution would be to alter the "historical" rosters to better fit the latest version of FOF.

[Apathetic Lurker]

If I only knew how.....If I only knew how.....

[Firefly]

The AUFL is a historical league. After 7 weeks in 1991 the top 4 sackers are DEs and they all have at least 7.5 sacks. Last year, two different DEs from these 4 had 16.5 and 18 sacks.

Next theory.

[Ben E Lou]

The AUFL is a historical league. After 7 weeks in 1991 the top 4 sackers are DEs and they all have at least 7.5 sacks. Last year, two different DEs from these 4 had 16.5 and 18 sacks.

Next theory.
1. A 1.25-season sample means diddly squat.
2. MP leagues are a completely different ball-game than SP when it comes to stuff like this. Humans develop players differently (much better). The talent gaps are very different. We game plan differently. Humans use players longer. (A 37/37 DE with 75 PR Tech and 70 PR Strength who has 90 career sacks may well become a FA and never play again in SP. In MP, some human will squeeze another 20-30 sacks out of him before he is shelved.) It's truly apples and oranges when it comes to career stats.

It seems quite odd that someone would claim to have played two long* "historical" careers with 6.3b and seen the same stats twice in a row and there not be something to it. The most obvious thing is that something about the "historical" rosters doesn't jibe with 6.3b SP, given that this isn't being seen when using the correct roster sets.

*-(I assume they're long. I have no idea what year he started or what year the "historical" rosters begin.)

[Firefly]

I guess it could be an SP/MP thing. But he also claims he can't produce high-sack DEs in his own teams.

After further review, I can offer one more AUFL post-patch season to make it 2.5 seasons total. In this 3rd season there was a DE with 15.5 sacks and several others with 10-11.

In all fairness, in the historical vnflHouse league OLBs have been the top 3 sackers in our 2 postpatch seasons, though not with more than 14 sacks in each.