Limiting playbook

[jdrhammer]

Good idea, epecially if it would mean cpu playcalling would drastically improve.

I'll add a little to it, even though it is a more general idea, but I'd like the composure/experience meter to be somewhere in the player's profile and out beside his name in the depthchart. This way, as you play your back-ups they will gain some experience/composure in the meter. Mop-up time should help a little but if there is a case where the starter goes down or has a crappy game and you can't afford to play him anymore, significant game experience will add to the meter. This is if the QB plays well, or doesn't force TO's. Winning would help a little too. It would be a gradual process to build up confidence and experience and it would be cool to have a visual of how they're progressing.

I have been using a SR QB as my starter and I have a fast, change of pace QB who is a FR. I use the FR in certain packages and it has been somewhat of a platoon system. It would be cool to see what my FR's composure rating has changed over the course of the season. I just finished my bowl game and I figure he'll start next season.

[AirRaidTT]

Quote: Originally Posted by jdrhammer

Good idea, epecially if it would mean cpu playcalling would drastically improve. I'll add a little to it, even though it is a more general idea, but I'd like the composure/experience meter to be somewhere in the player's profile and out beside his name in the depthchart. This way, as you play your back-ups they will gain some experience/composure in the meter. Mop-up time should help a little but if there is a case where the starter goes down or has a crappy game and you can't afford to play him anymore, significant game experience will add to the meter. This is if the QB plays well, or doesn't force TO's. Winning would help a little too. It would be a gradual process to build up confidence and experience and it would be cool to have a visual of how they're progressing. I have been using a SR QB as my starter and I have a fast, change of pace QB who is a FR. I use the FR in certain packages and it has been somewhat of a platoon system. It would be cool to see what my FR's composure rating has changed over the course of the season. I just finished my bowl game and I figure he'll start next season.

I like that as well. It would force the users to actually play their backup QB's rather leave in their starter just to boost their Heisman stats.

[jared52]

Sorry I haven't checked on this tread since the post, I forgot to turn on subscriptions!

I am glad people like the idea. I know it's not complete and if we think hard enough, we could probably find some holes. The biggest thing is to limit the ability of a human player to overcome injuries since most decent human player can overcome the given abilities. It would be the option of the user to have the playbook limitations put on the CPU.

[gogators]

Practice has to somehow figure into this. Take UGA for example this season. Joe Cox has sit behind Stafford for three years, but I guarantee he knows every play. He may cannot make the throws, but the has been there long enough to know the plays and it's pretty much because of three years of practice as the main backup.

Maybe practice can figure into this as well. I love the idea though.

[jbdeuce]

I like the idea but in game reality this is where the ratings have to kick in more effectively. For example, all QBs get hurt and you have to put a receiver at QB. With a limited playbook he might have all running plays so that wouldn't be fair. With all plays allowed the WR can throw the ball but his QB ratings would effect his success filling in at the QB spot. One rating that would make this idea exceptable to me would be an experience at the position rating. You would sub guys that have specific position experience instead of picking anyone to fill positions.

[gsueagle23]

I'm going to piggyback off this idea (which I really like by the way). What if at the beginning of each week you were given a playbook of 100 plays. You had to choose x of those that the team would work on during the week and then be able to run in the game. And it would break down like this:

RSSr: 75
Sr & RJr: 65
Jr & RSo: 55
So & RFr: 45
Fr & all non-Qb's: 25

So if your starting QB is a Sophomore then he would be able to run 45 different plays that week. If he is a RSSr then he would be able to run 75 plays.

There could also be "levels of diffuculty" of plays. The older your QB gets the more options he really has. So if you start a True Frosh QB you can't be running 5 wide sets with WR going everywhere. Maybe a 5 wide WR Screen or All Curls but nothing with guys going deep and crossing patters. And more plays are unlocked as the player progresses until once you are a senior you can pick any play in the playbook.

Also instead of the year the QB is, you could actually make awareness part of the game for a QB for once and have his awareness rankings be the deciding factor on how many plays you can put in the playbook each week.

I know this plan has many holes in it and is quite time consuming. But it would be fun and would actually give you the "coach" feel as you would have to gameplan.

[da ThRONe]

I dont like the idea of limiting what can be done in games. My motto is dont limit what I can do figure out why it doesnt work in real life then apply. So instead of not allowing inexperienced players to run certain plays just make them really bad at the plays they dont know well.

[SA1NT401]

Quote: Originally Posted by jared52

It is quite possible this has been addressed before but I was thinking today about how to more effectively limit a player (human) when an injury occurs, players graduate, coaches are hired/fired etc. I am sure this isn't a new idea, but I don't really know how to search for it on the forums and I do not keep up with the day to day posts in the forum in the off season, so here it is for discussion: One of the ways that I think would greatly improve the coaching aspects of this game is to have a rating attached to each play that might equate to the difficulty in running the play. Say a simple dive play is rated a 50 and a play with multiple routes or more complex blocking schemes might be an 80. Now, each player has a playbook rating and only players who have a rating high enough can run that play. Plays in the playbook that cannot be run would just be greyed out on the play selection screen. This would affect several aspects of a game. Such as: 1. Your QB goes down in the middle of the 3rd quarter and the hot shot freshman comes in. He he's speedy and has a rocket arm, but his playbook rating is 45. It limits him to about 20 or the 50 or so plays in the playbook. This makes the defense's job easier and make it more difficult for the user to overcome the injury. 2. Coaches. I hate micromanaging organizations because most of the time it doesn't mean squat what the price of a hotdog is when it comes to winning championships. However, if there were decisions that might make it easier to win a championship, I might turn my attention to it. Each coach would have a playbook rating that would determine how much time could be allotted each week in practice to learning to playbook. This would be position specific for each assistant coach (QB, DB, RB coaches, etc). 3. Graduation would also affect this as there would be a need to prep the guys for the next years of your dynasty. You might not need to put much time in your starting RB's slot to be learning the play book if he's an 83 and there are 3 games left in his senior year, but if your backup RB is at 56, you are going to struggle getting started the next season. There could probably be many variations but I think I have made my point and would like to hear feedback, or just a post saying, "We've thought of this already!"

Good ideas. But i think we are not gonna see innovation like that til the NEXT generation of consoles hit.

less we forget. NCAA10 is pretty much DONE. Everything that is in is IN. Now is the tweaking portion of the process.

Good post nonetheless.