Comeback Code in 2006?

[Cardot]

I am still playing NCAA 2004. I still like the game, but there are 2 nagging issues for me that are beginning to take a toll.

1. Lobbing the long pass into triple coverage seems to have the same success rate as 3 yard passes to wide open recievers. From what I have read, this still exists in 2005 and 2006.

2. The ole comeback code. I am not looking to rehash a tired old argument here. If you are one of those folks that doesn't believe there is comeback code, then I respect your opinion, but we'll just have to agree to disagree. If on the other hand believe that there has been comeback logic in previous versions of NCAA, can you tell me if things are any different in 2006? I don't think that it is as blatant as it is in some games, but it is still frustrating to play 3 tough quarters and suddenly the CPU becomes unstoppable by completing a parade of passes into tight coverage.

[RealSeahawkFan]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cardot

I am still playing NCAA 2004. I still like the game, but there are 2 nagging issues for me that are beginning to take a toll. 1. Lobbing the long pass into triple coverage seems to have the same success rate as 3 yard passes to wide open recievers. From what I have read, this still exists in 2005 and 2006. 2. The ole comeback code. I am not looking to rehash a tired old argument here. If you are one of those folks that doesn't believe there is comeback code, then I respect your opinion, but we'll just have to agree to disagree. If on the other hand believe that there has been comeback logic in previous versions of NCAA, can you tell me if things are any different in 2006? I don't think that it is as blatant as it is in some games, but it is still frustrating to play 3 tough quarters and suddenly the CPU becomes unstoppable by completing a parade of passes into tight coverage.

I used to think that there was a comeback code. Today, I played Notre Dame (as Michigan) at the Big House, and they scored 21 points in the 4th quarter (although I won, 35-41).

But I realized something: I was slacking off. I would control the corner and try to pick off the ball, or not run the ball when I obviously should have. It cost me big time.

As far as the passing goes, chances are it'll be picked off in triple coverage.

[Tig5309]

I've played past versions of Madden and felt there was some comeback logic (not really coded -- but flaws in the way the hurry up worked) but in my first year playing NCAA everything seems ok. I just had a game where I held on to a 4 pt lead on my final defensive drive to end the game. Most games that I lead late, I win although I do have the expected few that I give up like you would expect.

[rudyjuly2]

I don't think there is a comeback code. The only thing that might make comebacks more likely is when the CPU gets down they have to throw the ball a lot. This forces them to exploit the deep ball issue which can help them score a bunch of points but I don't think the logic changes from the 1st quarter. I really don't have a problem with the deep ball when playing cover 2 man. Its 1-1 with a WR where I usually see it completed at a high percentage.

Edit: To really do a fair analysis of the alleged comeback code, I think you would have to define what a comeback is (ex. down by 10 points or more going into the 4th quarter). You would then track how many times both the human and cpu are in that position and how many times a comeback actually happens. If the CPU's percentage is significantly higher than the human's then you could prove its true. My point is that I bet I have comeback to beat the CPU more often than they have done to me.

[Dallasin2K3]

I saw comeback code on the harder difficulties in previous versions, but I don't see it this year, playing on Heisman.

[J0nnD0ugh]

I wouldn't call it a code. As if there is something put in on purpose to keep the CPU from being blownout. I think alot of it is the CPU's mathematics will se your tendencies & adjust. IRL, you continue the same strategy until they stop it. In NCAA the opposite is almost true.

The home run ball is worse in this version than any other version IMO. Granted, it could be the fact I've slanted things in the CPU's favor. But even when all things were equal, it seems the offensive player will get the ball 80-90 percent of the time.

[Cardot]

Quote: Originally Posted by J0nnD0ugh

I wouldn't call it a code. As if there is something put in on purpose to keep the CPU from being blownout.

Yeah, I don't know if it is anything that sophisticated. Perhaps just a 4th quarter boost to the passing game. This would however benefit the team from behind, and penalize anyone playing like a team with the lead should play.

It just seems that for 3 quarters, I tend to get reasonable results when the CPU attemps to complete long passes into good coverage....Sometimes complete, sometimes not. But once that 4th quarter comes, it is lights out and I can't stop jack.