Providing Detail and Clarity to Changes Found in NCAA Football 12 Dynasty Mode

[RynoAid]

Quote: Originally Posted by Roggie

Pike, first off, NOBODY said they'd rather have nothing than this. We're all saying that they left out the most important part. Second, the "ratings" coaches are given have ZERO effect on the performance of your team. That's the issue.

false, there is a progression boost directly related to the prestige rating of each coach. So in turn, that has an effect on a lot of different areas.

[PikeJR23]

Quote: Originally Posted by MSU124

But it doesn't matter if the stick with their B+ coach or hire a new one, the team will play the exact same.

That's not entirely true. If the previous B+ coach was an Spread/Option coach and he recruited for that philosophy then it will make a big different in the immediate future. I haven't heard anything on that issue (the blog for friday might shed light on that). So if you hire another B+ coach but he's more pro style then it will make a difference. That B+ coach will now have the previous personnel, and his best QB maybe an option QB with low ACC and THP. That will make it hard on that coach in the immediate future to accomplish goals that are required to keep his job. So again, you guys aren't look deep enough into the effects of philosophy changes and prestige (when edited before the start of the dynasty to reflect real life).

I could be wrong, but the upcoming info will be intriguing. Now if your concern is in the generic coaches that are created after the start of the dynasty, yes that would be a concern that I see. But again, with job security, jobs like Oklahoma, Texas, Alabama, etc. shouldn't open up immediately within the first 5-10 years. And even when they do, if alma mater was done right, guys like Kirby Smart (Alabama) or Major Applewhite (Texas) will be first in line hopefully. This is all wishful thinking of course.

[dan_457]

I'd love to have ratings too, but some of you must not realize the massive overhaul that would be required to implement them, it's just not possible to do in only a year. Recruiting would need overhauled, Progression would need overhauled, school prestige would need overhauled, and numerous other changes as well. I'm loving what we've got and will make the most of it. It's not perfect, but it's a hell of a lot better than what it was.

[volstopfan14]

This is very dissapointing to me. You would think things like ratings and hiring your own assistants would be so obvious that you couldn't miss them. I really hope EA builds on this next year because this has a TON of potential. I'm glad that coaching carousel is in and it is better than nothing but ever since the IGN article it seems everything has gone downhill. At least I will now get to see my coach standing on the sideline.

[PikeJR23]

Quote: Originally Posted by Roggie

Pike, first off, NOBODY said they'd rather have nothing than this. We're all saying that they left out the most important part. Second, the "ratings" coaches are given have ZERO effect on the performance of your team. That's the issue.

All I said was the OP was overreacting a bit. He said he'd rather this feature not be in at all. He stated "this year CC is a big waste to me". You didn't say it Roggie, but he did. I understand the concerns about no actual ratings, I'm with you on that but I also see the positives outweigh the negatives. That's all I'm trying to get across. This is a big upgrade over last years system. Also, they guy doing Q&A stated that Prestige has an effect on simulated games. Which obviously would effect all games between CPU teams and yours (if simulated). But that's based on that guy's statement in the original link. Who knows if he's right or not.

[Da Hype Iz Real]

Quote: Originally Posted by PikeJR23

That's not entirely true. If the previous B+ coach was an Spread/Option coach and he recruited for that philosophy then it will make a big different in the immediate future. I haven't heard anything on that issue (the blog for friday might shed light on that). So if you hire another B+ coach but he's more pro style then it will make a difference. That B+ coach will now have the previous personnel, and his best QB maybe an option QB with low ACC and THP. That will make it hard on that coach in the immediate future to accomplish goals that are required to keep his job. So again, you guys aren't look deep enough into the effects of philosophy changes and prestige (when edited before the start of the dynasty to reflect real life). I could be wrong, but the upcoming info will be intriguing. Now if your concern is in the generic coaches that are created after the start of the dynasty, yes that would be a concern that I see. But again, with job security, jobs like Oklahoma, Texas, Alabama, etc. shouldn't open up immediately within the first 5-10 years. And even when they do, if alma mater was done right, guys like Kirby Smart (Alabama) or Major Applewhite (Texas) will be first in line hopefully. This is all wishful thinking of course.

The change in philosophies and playbooks alone is the biggest thing for me. People fail to realize how game changing this can be I think. If the whole conference has spread offenses and that bottom feeder gets a 3-3-5 DC then maybe they match up better and win more games and such.

[Lavar]

Quote: Originally Posted by JJ_Bills9

Who cares. As long as I can still play football and it looks good, I don't care one thing about the extra crap in Dynasty mode. My only concern is fixing recruiting so prestige isn't the only determining factor that makes recruits interested in schools.

Don't ever , ever write stuff like this again. You should be banned.

[justblaze09]

Disappointed, yes, but it's not the end of the world.