NCAA Football 11 Live Tuning Pack 1, Available Now

[ryan36]

Quote: Originally Posted by gigem

I think the next step for tuning is to get rid of 1* recruits= no prospect comes in under 55 = way less d- teams and no more low level teams recruiting garbage 1* players. Problem solved

What's wrong with D- teams? There are teams that are just that bad

[Gotmadskillzson]

More like it is just one giant BLUR to them. Being that this isn't the only website they visit and answer questions on. I am sure some good posts and some over the top bad whining posts might stick out to them, but for the most part it is just one big blur. Kind of like when you visit a town and read their newspaper. Being that your not from there everything is just a blur.

[Gotmadskillzson]

Quote: Originally Posted by ryan36

What's wrong with D- teams? There are teams that are just that bad

Yeah I don't get that either......it is a lot of schools that are simply that bad. If anything this year they have way too many B teams and not enough C teams.

[wryly]

Can someone check to see whether CPU teams recruit decent kickers? That's the one thing that made me stop playing my dynasty.

[andicesharks]

The 3 stars could be lower in another edition but I dont see that working for this one.

The main issue is the default rosters.

It is a problem with FCS teams since they stay the same while others regress and it is an issue just from the feel of playing. Building a team from the ground up does not feel rewarding when most of the players you are recruiting while having a good season end up being worse when they are seniors than your upperclassmen you start with.

Next year, 3 stars could be mid 60s just as long as that stays generally the norm. Not too much regressing and not too much progressing. I think they could nail it this year just from looking at the graphs, One more good push seems like it would throw the progression right into line.



There are other issues like kicking and psychic DBs but for the most part, everything else is pretty solid. Lets not stop at a "good" game - go for the best possible. Once you have the basics down, it is time to knit-pick.

[andicesharks]

Quote: Originally Posted by Gotmadskillzson

Yeah I don't get that either......it is a lot of schools that are simply that bad. If anything this year they have way too many B teams and not enough C teams.

Check out the post I just nade above. It explains this a bit. But, briefly, the bad tems go to mega bad. They dont just stay bad - they get REALLY bad compared to how they start. Even the worst FBS teams (check out records on espn) beat the FCS teams pretty easily most of the time. In this game they lose all the time and become more than worthless.

[yoda43]

Dont know if Russ is still answering questions, and not sure if anyone has ever asked about this. But i have a questions about JU-CO's

First off thanks EA for turning what looked like a potentially bad situation into a very good one. Great job getting the tuner set out there. I'm sure it will really help things.

Now to my question - There are lots of schools who recruit JU-CO players who come in and play from day 1. Rarely do i see a Ju-co who doesnt want to get on the field immidiatley....so why when i pitch a Ju-Co for playing time, why would any ju-co ever say that is of low interest to him. And alos, would'nt making some of the Ju-Co's a little better say in the mid to low 70's and high 60's make recruiting ju-co's more enticing. I would think that after atleast a couple years of football a JU-CO junior would be good enough to have an impact. Instead i see Ju-Co juniors far too many times come in in the high 50's and low 60's. To me this would initially make it easier to take a lower tier program and have some early sucess. Or it might help turn around a program like it did for OU in 2000 with Josh Huipel. Just curious if you guys could look into making the ju-cos a little more important.

[sniperhare]

Quote: Originally Posted by andicesharks

The 3 stars could be lower in another edition but I dont see that working for this one. The main issue is the default rosters. It is a problem with FCS teams since they stay the same while others regress and it is an issue just from the feel of playing. Building a team from the ground up does not feel rewarding when most of the players you are recruiting while having a good season end up being worse when they are seniors than your upperclassmen you start with. Next year, 3 stars could be mid 60s just as long as that stays generally the norm. Not too much regressing and not too much progressing. I think they could nail it this year just from looking at the graphs, One more good push seems like it would throw the progression right into line. There are other issues like kicking and psychic DBs but for the most part, everything else is pretty solid. Lets not stop at a "good" game - go for the best possible. Once you have the basics down, it is time to knit-pick.

If they have a handful of 2* players (as listed by the recruiting sites when they were freshmen) that are rated by the NCAA team as 80+ in their Junior year, it should be possible for generated recruits to get to that level.