NCAA 14 - OS Community + Playmakers Split Sliders

[JoshC1977]

Quote: Originally Posted by Matt10

I did make two changes to the one Josh posted above: CPU RBL to 25 from 35 HUM RDEF to 25 from 40 Reason is with a higher CPU RBL there is more "glue" more face on blocking than I would like to see, with it @ 25 there is a mix - but also an even line push. Add on the HUM RDEF now you have players not completely over-pursue their angles, primarily the linebackers - who with the high RDEF and CPU RBL - they would get sucked into the glue and the secondary would have to shed their blocks to make the plays.

Intriguing changes, I'll try them out....but given how much we have neutered the CPU passing game, we have to be careful not to neuter the CPU run game as well. As Matt learned last night, the set I posted has some 'bite' to it and the CPU is a challenge. I don't want to lose that.

That said, I do think that the CPU ability to shed tackles is a tad extreme and I have an idea to tone it down without changing the tackle settings, which will mess up the running and pursuit angles.

[32jack]

Played the Tide vs. Chattanooga, week 13 of '13 season. IRL-- 49-0 Tide.

Used whatever set was posted at 3:00 pm yesterday. LOL! Wanted to see a blowout, and it was. 66-0 Tide. I did not try to pour it on... but, Chatanooga had 4 turnovers, with 5 minutes left in the 2nd qtr.

Their QB was something like 19- 40 for the game. Did mass subs for the Tide by the end of the 2nd quarter.

Tide running game was dominant. Checked the RL boxscore and Bama ran and threw to their ratings.

Thanks again! Loving every tweak...

[Matt10]

Quote: Originally Posted by JoshC1977

Intriguing changes, I'll try them out....but given how much we have neutered the CPU passing game, we have to be careful not to neuter the CPU run game as well. As Matt learned last night, the set I posted has some 'bite' to it and the CPU is a challenge. I don't want to lose that. That said, I do think that the CPU ability to shed tackles is a tad extreme and I have an idea to tone it down without changing the tackle settings, which will mess up the running and pursuit angles.

Yeah, try them out first. I know to the eye it seems like it would hurt the CPU's run game more than help, but the main thing I noticed was that the gang tackling was back in the trenches. With a somewhat higher RBL and higher RDEF - the "glue factor" occured in the trenches - and the secondary was forced to make the plays and/or blitzes.

Now, even with the broken tackles on occasion, there is a chance it will happen in the trenches and the supporting cast (secondary and linebackers, even DL) will join in to finish the job.

I like TAK where it's at, it is definitely a decision to be made that you can't just big hit but you also have to be aware of what kind of tackle. A dive tackle may make the play on a bigger tight end - but not a smaller back where you don't have the support - much how it was last night against Barry Sanders.

Quote: Originally Posted by 32jack

Played the Tide vs. Chattanooga, week 13 of '13 season. IRL-- 49-0 Tide. Used whatever set was posted at 3:00 pm yesterday. LOL! Wanted to see a blowout, and it was. 66-0 Tide. I did not try to pour it on... but, Chatanooga had 4 turnovers, with 5 minutes left in the 2nd qtr. Their QB was something like 19- 40 for the game. Did mass subs for the Tide by the end of the 2nd quarter. Tide running game was dominant. Checked the RL boxscore and Bama ran and threw to their ratings. Thanks again! Loving every tweak...

Awesome, man! Yeah, sounds like Version 5 - it's in the Spoilers of the OP. We enhanced it and kept fundamentals of the version with version 6. I think you'll enjoy it

[TheUFGuy]

Ok guys this was my stat line using version 6. I felt it played really realistic. I started off slow on the ground but towards the third I really just took it too them. And really just played keep away. There were no INts between both teams but a descent amount of over throws and a couple drops which is what I like to see. The one thing I love about this set is I think it nerfs the read option well enough and still gives great animations. Oh and had anyone noticed because of the "new animations" the commentary says things you normally don't hear?

[JoshC1977]

Matt, I totally applaud your changes. It has actually made the opposing offense a little tougher as a) the interior blocking is 'cleaner' allowing for more success between the tackles and b) the user defense is more susceptible to PA passes.

Thinking of Cowher's feedback from last night (and your comment that Sanders ran against you more like Tyler Gaffney) I am going to offer one further change, and it is very subtle....

Drop the Facemask slider from 54 to 50. That's it!!

The facemask slider influences the 'type' of tackle performed. Higher settings, you will obviously see more of the facemask animation which leads to more of those calls. But you will also see more of the big hit tackle (hit stick style) and diving tackle types trigger more frequently. Dropping it to 50 will decrease the frequency of those tackle types (which are easier to get a broken tackle on) while simultaneously increasing the number of wrap up tackles. I tried going down as low as 40, and there were more wrap up tackles, but that decreased the effectiveness of the CPU running attack too much.

This setting also ever so slightly makes the human run game a tad easier as it reduces the number of those crazy diving tackles by the CPU which trip you up in the backfield (plus I have even seen a couple of broken arm tackles).

I've known about this effect for a while (thanks to Charter for this from many moons ago) but this is the first time that we wanted to reduce the CPU run game effectiveness while increasing the User run game effectiveness (so I never brought it up).

This is a a subtle change, but subtle is what we needed.

(Oh, and Cowher....I played a half against MSU and Langford (using Wisky), he had 105 yards in the first half on 15 carries (low 80's rated defense). However, he only went 'beast mode' on one 19 yard carry (his long of the game) and that is keeping the tackle slider at 30. I think you will enjoy it.)

[thedudescrew]

Great job guys. I can't wait to play this tonight now.

[Matt10]

Quote: Originally Posted by JoshC1977

Matt, I totally applaud your changes. It has actually made the opposing offense a little tougher as a) the interior blocking is 'cleaner' allowing for more success between the tackles and b) the user defense is more susceptible to PA passes. Thinking of Cowher's feedback from last night (and your comment that Sanders ran against you more like Tyler Gaffney) I am going to offer one further change, and it is very subtle.... Drop the Facemask slider from 54 to 50. That's it!! The facemask slider influences the 'type' of tackle performed. Higher settings, you will obviously see more of the facemask animation which leads to more of those calls. But you will also see more of the big hit tackle (hit stick style) and diving tackle types trigger more frequently. Dropping it to 50 will decrease the frequency of those tackle types (which are easier to get a broken tackle on) while simultaneously increasing the number of wrap up tackles. I tried going down as low as 40, and there were more wrap up tackles, but that decreased the effectiveness of the CPU running attack too much. This setting also ever so slightly makes the human run game a tad easier as it reduces the number of those crazy diving tackles by the CPU which trip you up in the backfield (plus I have even seen a couple of broken arm tackles). I've known about this effect for a while (thanks to Charter for this from many moons ago) but this is the first time that we wanted to reduce the CPU run game effectiveness while increasing the User run game effectiveness (so I never brought it up). This is a a subtle change, but subtle is what we needed. (Oh, and Cowher....I played a half against MSU and Langford (using Wisky), he had 105 yards in the first half on 15 carries (low 80's rated defense). However, he only went 'beast mode' on one 19 yard carry (his long of the game) and that is keeping the tackle slider at 30. I think you will enjoy it.)

Wow, very interesting. Played a half that way and yeah - you're right, more wrap up tackles. That's awesome, Josh!

I think we can combat the ease of running by actually lowering the CPU's RDEF to 25 because they too will be susceptible to being glued in (despite RBL @ zero for USER) - and they will also have a chance to defend the read option better.

Also, I wanted to lower False Start for the sake of them just being called too often in threatening positions - primarily Field goals for the CPU - pretty much every time. I've dropped it to 45 and am still seeing it - but not as much on Field Goals.

I really like where this is going, man. Going to load up twitch and get some games in before soccer @ 5! Twitch will be up in 10 mins.

So, in the meantime - Version 6.5 is as follows:

[cparrish]

I gave these a run in the OD I am playing with two friends as we have been running with the sliders I created. This was my first game as the HC of the University of Colorado as I just took the job after three seasons at Eastern Michigan of 4-8, 9-5, and 9-4.

Colorado State Rams at Colorado Buffaloes
Jan 1,	1ST	2ND	3RD	4TH	SCORE
Colorado State Rams (0-0)	3	10	14	0	27
Colorado Buffaloes (0-0)	10	14	14	21	59

Team Stats Comparison
	CSU	COLO
Total Offense	244	644
Rushing Yards	62	389
Passing Yards	182	255
First Downs	10	27
Punt Return Yards	6	25
Kick Return Yards	40	100
Total Yards	290	769
Turnovers	0	3
3rd Down Converstion	2-14	8-13
4th Down Conversion	1-2	0-0
2-Point Conversion	0-0	0-0
Red Zone Touchdowns/Field Goals	2-0-2	8-6-1
Penalties	2-25	1-5
Posession Time	13:51	18:09

Colorado State Rams PASSING C/A YDS TD INT R, Barclay 11/23 182 1 0 RUSHING ATT YDS AVG TD B. Peters 17 75 4.4 0 R. Barclay 15 -18 -1.2 0 R. Childress 2 5 2.5 0 RECEIVING REC YDS AVG TD R. Higgins 3 64 21.3 0 B. Peters 3 34 11.3 0 J. Vaden 2 41 20.5 1 DEFENSE TACK SACK INT TD N. Januska 10 0 0 0 J. Oden Jr 9 0 2 2 T. Simmons 7 0 0 0 B. Ohene 5 2 0 0

Colorado Buffaloes PASSING C/A YDS TD INT S. Liufau 22/35 255 3 3 RUSHING ATT YDS AVG TD M. Adkins 27 294 10.8 2 P. Lindsay 10 126 12.6 3 RECEIVING REC YDS AVG TD E. Dunston 6 80 13.3 1 D. Ross 4 62 15.5 1 S. Irwin 3 51 17.0 1 D. Hancock 3 38 12.6 0 DEFENSE TACK SACK INT TD J. Cooper 7 5 0 0 D. Jones 6 0 0 0 A. Gillam 5 0 0 0 J. Gilbert 4 2 0 0

If it were not for the three horrible decisions I made while passing that directly gave them 17 points, they would have barely broke double digits in points.

Their offense was of no threat the entire game outside of a couple random long plays; one rushing and one passing. Their QB threw maybe 5-7 passes out of bounds.

I will take it with a grain of salt as maybe this game was just a fluke and I am going to have the other two guys play a game or two with these sliders so I can get their input. Thank you again as always for the sliders!

EDIT: I ended up having both the NCAA offense and defensive players of the week.