NCAA Football 13 Recruiting Database (TSO) - Page 2 - Operation Sports Forums
Home

NCAA Football 13 Recruiting Database (TSO)

This is a discussion on NCAA Football 13 Recruiting Database (TSO) within the NCAA Football forums.

Go Back   Operation Sports Forums > Football > NCAA Football
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 05-10-2012, 08:40 AM   #11
SOS S3 Champs!
 
NDAlum's Arena
 
OVR: 29
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NC
Posts: 5,923
Re: NCAA Football 13 Recruiting Database (TSO)

Small step in the right direction

__________________
S.O.S. Madden League | League Archive | League Website
St. Louis Rams (56-32) | SOS Crew Bowl III Champs
S.O.S. NCAA League | League Archive
Maryland Terrapins | Pumped for 7/9/13
NDAlum is offline  
Reply With Quote
Sponsors (you can remove in-post ad banners by registering or logging in)
Old 05-10-2012, 08:43 AM   #12
Pro
 
brza37's Arena
 
OVR: 18
Join Date: Oct 2008
Blog Entries: 1
PS Network: brza37
Re: NCAA Football 13 Recruiting Database (TSO)

I think its a good start but I think the bigger problem is that players do not gain weight in NCAA. In real life a lot of guys will put on 15-20 pounds during their college careers.

And I like your proposed system better than the old one but I think the top end is a bit too heavy in what you proposed. There just aren't many 6'5" WR coming out of HS at 220. There are 6'5" DEs that come out at 220 but get FBS scholarships because they have a good burst and a wide frame that the coaches know they can pack another 30 pounds minimum onto.

But like I said I like your system much better and I'm glad you got them to change.

I think the next step has to be linking tendencies with weight as rudy suggested. No more 5'8" 170 lb possession receivers or powerbacks. Then they need to fix weight progression during the careers.

If every recruit randomly gained between 0 and 4% weight each year that wouldn't be realistic either though. Weight progression should ideally be a hidden value like Potential attached to each individual recruit. Some guys can gain weight while others can't. That should allow for still having guys like Desean Jackson graduate at roughly the same weight as he came in but also allow for others who started off as WRs to gain so much bulk they get moved to TE or LB to DE.

EDIT: Oops, I see someone already brought up my point. I forgot to hit send and Vanderbiltfan kinda stole my point in the meantime
__________________

Commissioner of Sim Madden League Europe. Established league for sim players in Europe. Join the waiting list here:
SML - Europe PS3 Madden Online Franchise/Connected Career

Last edited by brza37; 05-10-2012 at 08:46 AM.
brza37 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2012, 08:46 AM   #13
The new X-Men "A" team
 
jfsolo's Arena
 
OVR: 20
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Santa Clarita, CA
Posts: 6,357
Re: NCAA Football 13 Recruiting Database (TSO)

This may be only an aesthetic change for this year, but for me, a tweak like this adds to my level of immersion much more than any improved aspects of presentation.

Many may consider this a small thing, but for members of the community to get them to take the first step to finally fixing something that has been sub par forever, is a job well done. Good work guys.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdolski
I dont get this. Ok nothing against anyone whos buying both or whatever but when I buy a NBA game I want the most accurate and best graphical game possible and by accurate I mean all current players, arenas, equipment. Not some bum from the 80's
jfsolo is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2012, 08:55 AM   #14
Rookie
 
vanderbiltfan87's Arena
 
OVR: 5
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Columbia, TN
PS Network: vanderbiltfan87
Re: NCAA Football 13 Recruiting Database (TSO)

Quote:
Originally Posted by brza37
I think its a good start but I think the bigger problem is that players do not gain weight in NCAA. In real life a lot of guys will put on 15-20 pounds during their college careers.

And I like your proposed system better than the old one but I think the top end is a bit too heavy in what you proposed. There just aren't many 6'5" WR coming out of HS at 220. There are 6'5" DEs that come out at 220 but get FBS scholarships because they have a good burst and a wide frame that the coaches know they can pack another 30 pounds minimum onto.

But like I said I like your system much better and I'm glad you got them to change.

I think the next step has to be linking tendencies with weight as rudy suggested. No more 5'8" 170 lb possession receivers or powerbacks. Then they need to fix weight progression during the careers.

If every recruit randomly gained between 0 and 4% weight each year that wouldn't be realistic either though. Weight progression should ideally be a hidden value like Potential attached to each individual recruit. Some guys can gain weight while others can't. That should allow for still having guys like Desean Jackson graduate at roughly the same weight as he came in but also allow for others who started off as WRs to gain so much bulk they get moved to TE or LB to DE.

EDIT: Oops, I see someone already brought up my point. I forgot to hit send and Vanderbiltfan kinda stole my point in the meantime
It's a point that I feel could not be reiterated enough. That was my first post on here in probably a year if that tells you anything.
vanderbiltfan87 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2012, 10:25 AM   #15
Banned
 
GCSM's Arena
 
OVR: 13
Join Date: Nov 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by brza37
I think its a good start but I think the bigger problem is that players do not gain weight in NCAA. In real life a lot of guys will put on 15-20 pounds during their college careers.

And I like your proposed system better than the old one but I think the top end is a bit too heavy in what you proposed. There just aren't many 6'5" WR coming out of HS at 220. There are 6'5" DEs that come out at 220 but get FBS scholarships because they have a good burst and a wide frame that the coaches know they can pack another 30 pounds minimum onto.

But like I said I like your system much better and I'm glad you got them to change.

I think the next step has to be linking tendencies with weight as rudy suggested. No more 5'8" 170 lb possession receivers or powerbacks. Then they need to fix weight progression during the careers.

If every recruit randomly gained between 0 and 4% weight each year that wouldn't be realistic either though. Weight progression should ideally be a hidden value like Potential attached to each individual recruit. Some guys can gain weight while others can't. That should allow for still having guys like Desean Jackson graduate at roughly the same weight as he came in but also allow for others who started off as WRs to gain so much bulk they get moved to TE or LB to DE.

EDIT: Oops, I see someone already brought up my point. I forgot to hit send and Vanderbiltfan kinda stole my point in the meantime
We decided it would be better to represent senior weights since they don't gain weight realistically.
GCSM is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2012, 10:54 AM   #16
Rowdy Reptile
 
BenGerman's Arena
 
OVR: 25
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,791
Blog Entries: 5
PS Network: BadNewsBen
Re: NCAA Football 13 Recruiting Database (TSO)

Just another reason a global editor would have won over so many hearts here at OS.
__________________
BenGerman is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2012, 11:35 AM   #17
Banned
 
OVR: 17
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Athens, GA
Posts: 558
Blog Entries: 1
Re: NCAA Football 13 Recruiting Database (TSO)

It's good that it got changed, but geez were they just going to let this go another year? It kinda says something about their knowledge of football too
TDAWG89 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2012, 11:56 AM   #18
Cover 2
 
jmik58's Arena
 
OVR: 42
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,958
Blog Entries: 273
PS Network: jmik58
The bigger question is whether or not this is just a cosmetic issue. In other words, does it really matter on the field for gameplay?

Does weight matter in EA's football games? I've yet to see that it does.
jmik58 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2012, 12:03 PM   #19
Pro
 
DorianDonP's Arena
 
OVR: 9
Join Date: May 2010
Re: NCAA Football 13 Recruiting Database (TSO)

A 6'4 175 pound receiver in high school is not unrealistic. There are several guys in the current rivals 100 that are almost that size.

The big issue is that the guys don't gain weight (only a few pounds in some instances) and their size really doesn't relate to their attributes.

There should be some kind of weight training in the off-season where you can bulk up some guys. It would actually be kind of fun to go after a 6'4 200 pound defensive end, and weight train him for five years, and after his redshirt senior season have him be a 6'4 240 pound beast pass rusher.
DorianDonP is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2012, 01:22 PM   #20
Banned
 
WatShot's Arena
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Feb 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by DorianDonP
A 6'4 175 pound receiver in high school is not unrealistic. There are several guys in the current rivals 100 that are almost that size.

The big issue is that the guys don't gain weight (only a few pounds in some instances) and their size really doesn't relate to their attributes.

There should be some kind of weight training in the off-season where you can bulk up some guys. It would actually be kind of fun to go after a 6'4 200 pound defensive end, and weight train him for five years, and after his redshirt senior season have him be a 6'4 240 pound beast pass rusher.
In all honesty how hard is it to go into edit players and add weight and set the attributes that you see need be. I know it's the fact that it doesn't do it without you having to go in and do it yourself, but there are workarounds that can be done
WatShot is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

« Operation Sports Forums > Football > NCAA Football »


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:37 PM.

Top -