Tweaked 1966 game

[capa]

All credit to Soundwave for creating the 1966 roster. A nice job on a year many of us were clamoring for.

I tweaked all player ratings to try to get a more (IMOHO) 1966 feel and representation to the gameplay. I used a tweaked version of Iteachpercussions run and balanced play books more aligned with how the game was played in 66. All credit to him for creating these great books!

Packers fell behind early but rode Taylor and Starr to the finish line.

CPU vs CPU. Pro level. 52 fatigue. 25 threshhold...25 injuries. Slightly adjusted from default sliders.

Still too many QB sacks due to the usual QB won't move stuff, but they did have 2 great defensive lines in this game...especially the Fearsome Foursome.

Have fun!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jyfccz15hPE

[bbgeek]

@capa, @Iteachpercussion, @Soundwave_8177

First, many thanks to all of you for the great historic rosters you have provided the community!

I played a recent game with a historic roster and the cpu QB threw a lot of short(er) passes. I know that is "baked" into the game to reflect current NFL tendencies, but I wonder if there is a way (via settings/sliders) to influence the cpu to attempt more downfield passes.

Note: It might be my own fault in the game I mentioned, as I was playing with a self-created 71 Cowboys team against the 70 49ers (good passing), and I played a lot of cover 3 to try and minimize the damage Brodie might inflict. So maybe I got the result I "game planned" for.

Should stick to cover 1 hole to get a more realistic game?

[capa]

I can tell you this. If you use stock team playbooks or even the genetic ones they are set up to reflect today's game. Lots of check downs and passes to TE.

If playing with classic teams from 60s and 70s you really need to use or create a playbook that has more downfield pass plays and delete most of the TE routes and slants.

PIA I know but impossible to get realistic results with stock books. Percussion knows more about this stuff than I do so hopefully he weighs in too.

C

Sent from my Pixel using Operation Sports mobile app

[capa]

Also lower TE catch and catch in traffic ratings..unless they actually had a lot of completions for that season. Like put in the lower 60s or 50s.

Sent from my Pixel using Operation Sports mobile app

[Iteachpercussion]

Quote: Originally Posted by capa

I can tell you this. If you use stock team playbooks or even the genetic ones they are set up to reflect today's game. Lots of check downs and passes to TE. If playing with classic teams from 60s and 70s you really need to use or create a playbook that has more downfield pass plays and delete most of the TE routes and slants. PIA I know but impossible to get realistic results with stock books. Percussion knows more about this stuff than I do so hopefully he weighs in too. C Sent from my Pixel using Operation Sports mobile app

You are right about using the standard playbooks. If you want passing downfield, you have to build it into the playbooks. That is a difficult task if you want much variety in the playcalling because the route combinations are not too friendly for classic gameplay.

A couple of things can help. Make sure the TEs route running is low. For all but elite level TEs, I make Deep route running in the 30s and 40s, Medium in the 40s-50s and short in the 60s-70s. Honestly, those numbers could go even lower. By lowering the route running, it helps to keep the TEs covered and less likely to be open for a check down.

When creating playbooks for more throws downfield, you have to make sure that your ratings (stars) for those plays are above the shorter patterned plays. Again, this is difficult because the the lack of options we are given.

In terms of QB ratings or sliders... this is a matter of what you are willing to live with. I believe that you might get slightly more aggressive QB play if the Deep accuracy rating is higher. However, you also get too many perfect deep passes for my liking. This results in higher QB completing percentages than I like.Same with the QBaccuracy slider.

Now, I will be honest here. I have not tried to raise QB accuracy from my old formulas for M20. It is possible that with the right combination of higher QB ratings and better DBs that you could strike a balance. That is something I might test a little at some point.

I wish I could give a better answer to fix the issues, but we are handicapped by what EA gives us.

[tommycoa]

Qb ratings arent the problem. It’s the wrs. They’re way too overrated. I try to put the 60s for a file like this in the 60s to 70s. Bullet Bob Hayes would be the highest at about an 85 or so. I just try to keep the catch rating down and the short and middle route running. Seems to work good.

I was working on a 1966 file. Doing playbooks for each team. But I’m out of data this month, can’t download the patch, so i can’t upload playbooks and test them at the moment. Also, my time has shrank a lot. Haven’t watched a game in a week or so. Got issues with my family.

But with catch rating this is how ive been doing it to keep them playing like the era they came from. I look at the catches per game.

1 catch a game=60 catch rating
1.1 61
1.2 62
1.3 63
Etc

2 catches 70

3 catches 80

4 caThese 90

Even with the 90 catch guys, i keep the route running lower, in the 60s and 70s. It was a deep ball game back then. If it wasn’t open deep, they threw it to running backs. For the most part, Tight ends were afterthoughts. Those guys need to be real low and when you customize a book, make sure there’s not many hot reads for tight ends. With this method, I’ve nuked the te position to be like they were back then.

Also, i usually put the rb with most catches at the slot reciever position. I rarely see buck up wrs out there.

Quote: Originally Posted by Iteachpercussion

You are right about using the standard playbooks. If you want passing downfield, you have to build it into the playbooks. That is a difficult task if you want much variety in the playcalling because the route combinations are not too friendly for classic gameplay. A couple of things can help. Make sure the TEs route running is low. For all but elite level TEs, I make Deep route running in the 30s and 40s, Medium in the 40s-50s and short in the 60s-70s. Honestly, those numbers could go even lower. By lowering the route running, it helps to keep the TEs covered and less likely to be open for a check down. When creating playbooks for more throws downfield, you have to make sure that your ratings (stars) for those plays are above the shorter patterned plays. Again, this is difficult because the the lack of options we are given. In terms of QB ratings or sliders... this is a matter of what you are willing to live with. I believe that you might get slightly more aggressive QB play if the Deep accuracy rating is higher. However, you also get too many perfect deep passes for my liking. This results in higher QB completing percentages than I like.Same with the QBaccuracy slider. Now, I will be honest here. I have not tried to raise QB accuracy from my old formulas for M20. It is possible that with the right combination of higher QB ratings and better DBs that you could strike a balance. That is something I might test a little at some point. I wish I could give a better answer to fix the issues, but we are handicapped by what EA gives us.

[Culture Rot]

Thanks for this, I'm sure Soundwave doesn't mind, knowing how he is.