CPU interceptions... pull the QB!

[JAYMO76]

Do you remember back in the good old days of the ps2: after you picked off the CPU starting QB four times the backup QB was sent in. Those were good times. Well I beat USC tonight... I was totally in the zone and had a career best of SEVEN INTS! Sounds good right? Well not really. The starting QB for USC went 19 of 43 for 104 yards 2TD's and 7ints. How does he stay in the game??????????????????????????????? Where is the CPU logic? He should have been out after 4-5 pics!!!

EA needs to fix this issue. The cpu replacing a struggling starting QB with the backup is vital to overall atmosphere and presentation. I say go back to the last gen standard: 4 pics = backup QB entering the game.

[Speedy]

Ironic...I remember thinking the same thing last nite. As well as remembering if the CPU is up/down 40 pts in the near-end of the 4th, the 2nd string comes in

[WARNING]

thats crazy, I played USC the other night and Sanchez threw 7 INTs vs me also

[J-Unit40]

Yep. It's part of the EA next-gen logic feature. Well, not exactly.

[BobbyZ23]

Or the more logical thing to do would be adjust your sliders so you don't get seven picks a game. Let's face it, if the cpu puts in the USC backup QB after the starter throws 4 int's, then you most likely pick off three or four passes from the back up. Actually, you may pick off even more, because there's a reason why the backup isn't the starter.

I like your idea in principle, but they would need to make some big changes to make it work. For one, get rid of exact ratings. For instance, instead of having an 82 qb accuracy rating, have an 80-84 accuracy rating for a senior, maybe a 78-86 rating for a junior, etc. A very talented but inexperienced freshman may have a 72-92 rating. Maybe the talented inexperienced freshman is playing at home against a below average opponent, so he feels confident and he plays up to a high 80's or low 90's accuracy rating. Maybe he's on the road against a top 25 program and he's thrown a pick or two and maybe been pressured a bit, so he's playing down to a low or mid 70's accuracy rating.

The big difference though is we as players should always know the range, but never the exact ratings. This way it forces us to make our personnel decisions based on what is happening on the field, and not because of some exact ratings. The same for the cpu. Now it makes sense to replace a starting qb that has thrown four picks, whereas before it didn't because the cpu would be putting in an inferior (rated) qb.

Sorry my post went long.

[DonkeyJote]

Quote: Originally Posted by BobbyZ23

Or the more logical thing to do would be adjust your sliders so you don't get seven picks a game. Let's face it, if the cpu puts in the USC backup QB after the starter throws 4 int's, then you most likely pick off three or four passes from the back up. Actually, you may pick off even more, because there's a reason why the backup isn't the starter. I like your idea in principle, but they would need to make some big changes to make it work. For one, get rid of exact ratings. For instance, instead of having an 82 qb accuracy rating, have an 80-84 accuracy rating for a senior, maybe a 78-86 rating for a junior, etc. A very talented but inexperienced freshman may have a 72-92 rating. Maybe the talented inexperienced freshman is playing at home against a below average opponent, so he feels confident and he plays up to a high 80's or low 90's accuracy rating. Maybe he's on the road against a top 25 program and he's thrown a pick or two and maybe been pressured a bit, so he's playing down to a low or mid 70's accuracy rating. The big difference though is we as players should always know the range, but never the exact ratings. This way it forces us to make our personnel decisions based on what is happening on the field, and not because of some exact ratings. The same for the cpu. Now it makes sense to replace a starting qb that has thrown four picks, whereas before it didn't because the cpu would be putting in an inferior (rated) qb. Sorry my post went long.

I completely agree. I think exact ratings hurt sports games a lot. To make this work though, there'd have to be a spring game so you can evaluate talent.

[jmill703]

Quote: Originally Posted by BobbyZ23

Or the more logical thing to do would be adjust your sliders so you don't get seven picks a game. Let's face it, if the cpu puts in the USC backup QB after the starter throws 4 int's, then you most likely pick off three or four passes from the back up. Actually, you may pick off even more, because there's a reason why the backup isn't the starter.

That would be great in theory...Except for the fact that the sliders are broken. You can turn int all the way down to zero and still get 3-5 int's a game....

[PVarck31]

Quote: Originally Posted by jmill703

That would be great in theory...Except for the fact that the sliders are broken. You can turn int all the way down to zero and still get 3-5 int's a game....

Yeah thats what sucks. I told my wife to give me 2 random teams today and she picked Kent State vs Clemson. I was Kent. I picked them off 5 times. With the INT slider on 0. I still lost 41-24 but it was actually closer than that.