View Full Version : FOF 2004 - Ungodly WR Stats
I have never seen a WR catch this many TD's. One would think that after a while the computer would key in on him. Single player game, with plays being called by me.
http://home.comcast.net/~schokora/wr.jpg
and his stats:
http://home.comcast.net/~schokora/stats.jpg
I kept throwing to him, because it kept working. Late in the season he was double teamed so often that I balanced out my attack.
how did he not have more yards?
flere-imsaho
02-07-2005, 03:03 PM
Holy Crap.
AlexB
02-07-2005, 03:06 PM
how did he not have more yards?
Tough coach! 2000+ not enough? And you gotta be worried about the number of drops...
:)
Franklinnoble
02-07-2005, 03:07 PM
That's awesome.
Tough coach! 2000+ not enough? And you gotta be worried about the number of drops...
:)
well i mean, i had a guy in an MP league with 2029 yards, and "only" 14 tds. So I'd expect 40+ tds to garner much higher yardage.
gottimd
02-07-2005, 03:11 PM
Yeah but his Punt Returns rating is so low....I'd drop him. :D
42 TD's, how many TD's total did his QB have out of curiousity?
Cringer
02-07-2005, 03:18 PM
What was your teams final record?
Was it the same play over and over that you used, or just kept throwing it to him in any way you could?
sachmo71
02-07-2005, 03:29 PM
Were you coaching the games? It's still impressive, but I could see it if you were coaching.
Warhammer
02-07-2005, 03:42 PM
Were you coaching the games? It's still impressive, but I could see it if you were coaching.
Yeah, he said he was calling the plays. My eyes bugged out at first, but after I read that it made sense. I had a guy at 2000+ yards in single player, but the TDs are what really stand out to me.
BigJohn&TheLions
02-07-2005, 03:51 PM
Everyone loves Magical Trevor
'Cuz he catches the ball ever so clever
Look at him now
Score another touchdown
gottimd
02-07-2005, 03:52 PM
I still want to know how may TD's his QB got that year as well.
jbmagic
02-07-2005, 03:56 PM
I still want to know how may TD's his QB got that year as well.
probabaly 42 TD, if he only threw to that WR everytime..
gottimd
02-07-2005, 04:01 PM
he had to have gone to more than just one WR at least a few times. If you were playing him, wouldn't you double/triple, hell just put your entire team on that one receiver?
Warhammer
02-07-2005, 04:08 PM
These are Dewayne Robertson's stats from one of my single player games (computer called the plays):
catches Yards YPC YAC TD
133 1947 14.6 393 15
So, I guess I was wrong, my guy did not break 2000 yards, he was short by 53. The scary thing was in this dynasty, he had previously played with the all time leader in receptions, yards, and TDs for a WR. Three years later he had an ACL injury and was never the same.
jbmagic
02-07-2005, 04:10 PM
he had to have gone to more than just one WR at least a few times. If you were playing him, wouldn't you double/triple, hell just put your entire team on that one receiver?
i sure would,
but now i am wondering if computer teams do a good job with adjusting?
Cringer
02-07-2005, 04:10 PM
he had to have gone to more than just one WR at least a few times. If you were playing him, wouldn't you double/triple, hell just put your entire team on that one receiver?
He says in his post that later in the season the WR was double and triple (not sure if that happens in FOF) teamed a lot and he had to balance out his offensive attack more.
I can post screenshots tomorrow when I get back to work. Here is the breakdown:
We went 14-2
The team scored 562 points on the season. Defense allowed only 248.
QB Copeland: 528 ATT, 317 Comp 60.0% Cmp 4295 Yards
8.13 Y/Att 58 TDs 17 INTs QB Rating: 109.1
Rushing was split so no stand outs.
The next closest WR was TE Marsh with 7 TD's.
I used all kinds of plays to generate this. First time I ever was able to throw short to med and have the WR take it to the endzone. I figured that I will keep throwing to WR lesky as long as it works. Some of the INT's the QB had were because WR Lesky was double covered and I still threw to him. I would have a balanced offense until I got to the endzone. Then I would try to use WR Lesky until the computer would stop him. The last 3 games of the season I had to throw TD's to other WR's/TE's.
QuikSand
02-07-2005, 05:03 PM
I think it's fairly clear that FOF, like just about every sports sim game in every genre, has weaknesses that get exagerrated more and more as you increase the human involvement, allowing more and more ridiculous scenarios like this to occur. Since most of us don't even think to call our own plays in FOF, this is essentially a non-issue... but sure, if you decide to really, really push the boundaries of realism, you're going to find weaknesses in the game's AI, and you'll be able to abuse them badly. Case in point.
I think it's fairly clear that FOF, like just about every sports sim game in every genre, has weaknesses that get exagerrated more and more as you increase the human involvement, allowing more and more ridiculous scenarios like this to occur. Since most of us don't even think to call our own plays in FOF, this is essentially a non-issue... but sure, if you decide to really, really push the boundaries of realism, you're going to find weaknesses in the game's AI, and you'll be able to abuse them badly. Case in point.
Agreed. I think posting and talking about them is a very important step. This will let us recognize the weaknesses and be better able to generate house rules if realism is most desired. I generally always call my own plays and have never seen anything like this before. Of note is that this is the first time with the new patch (The patch a couple months ago) that I have called plays.
QuikSand
02-07-2005, 05:15 PM
This will let us recognize the weaknesses and be better able to generate house rules if realism is most desired.
Most of us quickly adopted a house rule of "no calling plays myself" but YMMV, of course.
I am unaware of anyone who wanted to actually continue calling plays, who then went on to develop any sort of rules for doing so to retain any measure of realism. An unexplored frontier -- have at it.
Most of us quickly adopted a house rule of "no calling plays myself" but YMMV, of course.
I am unaware of anyone who wanted to actually continue calling plays, who then went on to develop any sort of rules for doing so to retain any measure of realism. An unexplored frontier -- have at it.
I get the feeling that this was done because there was a lack of interest in the playcalling system. Not because the playcalling system was broken or lead to unrealistic stats. True?
jbmagic
02-07-2005, 07:02 PM
i still think , if there going to have playing calling in FOF, it should be more improved.
i think if you run the same plays over and over, the computer should be a lot smarter and adjust.
or if you keep picking plays to pass to the same receiver over and over, the computer should adjust.
i know Play calling option in FOF is not popular, but it should be look at.
Buccaneer
02-07-2005, 07:34 PM
Most of us quickly adopted a house rule of "no calling plays myself" but YMMV, of course.
I am unaware of anyone who wanted to actually continue calling plays, who then went on to develop any sort of rules for doing so to retain any measure of realism. An unexplored frontier -- have at it.
ROTFL...something (I'm not as good as SkyDog in coming up with clever acronyms). This sort of reminds me of one of the video football games where you could call the same pass play everytime and it would always work for big yards. The obvious solution was, "don't do that".
ROTFL...something (I'm not as good as SkyDog in coming up with clever acronyms). This sort of reminds me of one of the video football games where you could call the same pass play everytime and it would always work for big yards. The obvious solution was, "don't do that".
I think this is a lot more invovled than that. I was not calling the same plays, only calling for the same primary reciever in a majority of goal line situations. Playcalling is a major feature of FOF 2004 and if the only way for it to be realistic is to not play it, then why have it? I think there is some middle ground here. Playcalling is fun for me and I enjoy it. This is the only time I have achieved these kind of results. I will attempt to achieve them again to see if it was the game or a fluke.
gottimd
02-07-2005, 08:15 PM
I will attempt to achieve them again to see if it was the game or a fluke.
He knows what he is doing, and knowing is half the battle.....gi JOE, GO JOE!
sabotai
02-07-2005, 10:45 PM
You say that this was the result of using the same receiver in a goal line situation, but in the goal line formation, there is no FL. I wonder if the AI defensive play calling is adjusting for you not using the GL formation and calling a goalline defense against your normal offense which is causing this. Do you have any of the play by plays so we could see what the AI was doing?
You say that this was the result of using the same receiver in a goal line situation, but in the goal line formation, there is no FL. I wonder if the AI defensive play calling is adjusting for you not using the GL formation and calling a goalline defense against your normal offense which is causing this. Do you have any of the play by plays so we could see what the AI was doing?
Sorry, I should have said red zone situations. Anything 20 yards and in I was using FL as the go to guy. Formations would vary. I try to use all formations a QB knows. I'll host some game logs and link them up. There was a 7 TD and a couple 5 TD games for WR Lesky. Going off searching for game logs...
Here are game logs and some team stats:
http://home.comcast.net/~schokora/week1.pdf
http://home.comcast.net/~schokora/week2.pdf
http://home.comcast.net/~schokora/week4.pdf
http://home.comcast.net/~schokora/week10.pdf
http://home.comcast.net/~schokora/week13.pdf
http://home.comcast.net/~schokora/team.pdf
http://home.comcast.net/~schokora/teamstats.pdf
Ben E Lou
02-08-2005, 07:45 AM
I get the feeling that this was done because there was a lack of interest in the playcalling system. Not because the playcalling system was broken or lead to unrealistic stats. True?That would be my guess. I'm curious, though. I'm posting a poll about this right now.
Ben E Lou
02-08-2005, 09:36 AM
Yup. So far, it is about what I suspected: less than 1/4 of people responding so far call their own plays on a regular basis.
jbmagic
02-08-2005, 10:58 AM
Yup. So far, it is about what I suspected: less than 1/4 of people responding so far call their own plays on a regular basis.
not totally true.
a lot in that poll say they use it near ends of games or in big games too.
Ben E Lou
02-08-2005, 11:45 AM
not totally true.
a lot in that poll say they use it near ends of games or in big games too.Yup. So far, it is about what I suspected: less than 1/4 of people responding so far call their own plays on a regular basis..
duckman
02-08-2005, 05:47 PM
Yup. So far, it is about what I suspected: less than 1/4 of people responding so far call their own plays on a regular basis.
Could you make this a wee bit bigger? ;)
Yossarian
02-08-2005, 06:15 PM
I meet your stats and raise you some more.
I too was calling plays for this guy. Dont often call plays now although I find it hard to resist jumping in when we REALLY need a good play and I think I know which one we should call..
http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/~fof/forums/showpost.php?p=353521&postcount=14
Yossarian
02-08-2005, 06:15 PM
and yes... that WAS 45 td's in a season...
I meet your stats and raise you some more.
I too was calling plays for this guy. Dont often call plays now although I find it hard to resist jumping in when we REALLY need a good play and I think I know which one we should call..
http://dynamic2.gamespy.com/~fof/forums/showpost.php?p=353521&postcount=14
Nice. Best game for Lesky was a 7 TD performance.
vBulletin v3.6.0, Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.