First of all: this is easily the best CFB simulator out there, certainly the best PC based CFB game. Nowhere else do you get the depth in recruiting, training, roster (only game I've seen with the full 85-man scholarship roster), etc etc etc.

The area where I believe the game could make it's next leap forward is the game engine. It has drastically improved since it's first iteration, so kudos on that. However, I wanted to organize my thoughts on it a bit:

1. While I have no real issues with the 2D engine, a 3D graphical (even rudimentary) would be good. If you've ever seen what Football Manager does, it's not FIFA by any stretch but it's easily the top soccer simulation in the world. Even a representation like the old FBPro 98 would be good to see.

2. Custom Playbooks: This is another area where baby steps have been made, but there is still quite a ways to go.
-----More formations. I know you guys have implemented motion to help recreate formations, but I (and others I have seen agree) would like to see more default sets. Even something as simple as a Trips set I have to experiment with in order to figure it out, and I can't even say for sure I have it the way I want it. Also as of now there are now empty back sets. So if I want to create one with 5WR, I have to put in motion and also "waste" one of my packages.

-----Routes: There are a lot of routes I'd like to see put in. Just as an example: I like to create the Shallow Cross series, but in order to properly put that in I need a "drag", or "shallow" route. With the lack of routes like this, we have to either try to edit the routes available outside the game (which I have tried but am pretty sure I did an awful job of), or try to shove a square peg into a round hole using the routes that are available in game. There is no wheel route, no post-corner, no whip route, no dig (post-in), etc.

-----The 4-2-5 ( and other defensive personnel sets): There are a lot of teams who use the 4-2-5 but it has not made it's way in game. I'd like to see that, as well as the 2-4-5, etc.

This is not a criticism. You guys have done an amazing work; I just feel this is the area of the game that lags behind the others. If recruiting is a 10, the game engine and strategy is around a 4. It's also an area that if you can make improvements I believe you pull in a huge part of the football gaming market that doesn't purchase the game now.

I appreciate the feedback. For the 3d option I agree it would be a fun aspect to introduce. Unfortunately we don't have the resources to pull off this kind of thing yet.

The formation and play discussion is a little trickier. Ultimately what we may have to do is have a simple/advanced depth chart screen where regular users just set one overall depth chart (we've had this in the past) and then if you want to be an advanced user we could add as many formations as you wanted. I'd probably also eliminate packages at that point since there would be limited benefit to having to do depth charts for dozens of formations and then multiple times for rotations or backups as well.

The main drawback of this is that all of our plays are designed based on formations. We'd probably revamp the plays to not be tied to formations (or at least not tied to only one formation) to make them a bit easier to manage.

Today everything you're talking about above (except for the wasting a package comment which is true) is all doable by creating your own custom plays. It gives the user/modder a ton of power... you can create your own routes, your own alignment, your own blocking schemes, your own defensive rotations, etc. However, it's complicated and thus far I'm only aware of a handful of folks have ever actually tried tinkering with it. My original idea was to have all of those plays shared amongst users so instead of there being just one play designer (me), there would be dozens or hundreds of folks doing it. It just never really materialized that way, mostly because of difficulty, and partially because I misjudged the interest. The custom plays in game are kind of a attempt to make things easier for folks. You get most of the power of a fully custom play, but you need none of the code prowess to accomplish things. It just doesn't have the same unlimited power that a truly modded play would.

So in future versions we may go back to how these plays were created, how they're tied to formations, how they're tied to depth charts, and we'll use what we've learned over the years to try and evolve the system to improve things. I've been resistant to it since I felt there were other aspects of the games that needed improving, but it may be time to bump this overhaul to the top of the list.

You definitely know your game better than I do, and you've done a tremendous job with it. It's one of those games where I sit down to play for "just a few minutes", and then 10 minutes later it's actually been 3 hours. I just would just like it be a little deeper with more options on the tactical side. I used to tinker with the custom plays and playbooks on FBPro98 a lot and it was my favorite component of that game. BUT I think the direction your strategy interface is going is a lot better, because FBPro was TOO detailed with too many options. Honestly I'd just like there to be more formations with more route options.

And I have created a lot of different looks using motion, which was a GREAT addition BTW. I motioned a WR next to the QB in the Shotgun 4WR formation to create a 3-wide, 2 back shotgun look. And I motioned a RB out of that formation to get an empty back look. I'd just like to see more default sets where I didn't have to do that without using one of my packages to get the personnel I want on the field. I actually really like the package idea and I'd hope you could keep it, to be honest.

And yes, I agree I'd like to see more community involvement. I hold my hand up on that because I'm honestly one of the people who just play without really interacting with other players. FBPro98 had a pretty vibrant community and the Football Manager community is unbelievable. It would certainly help you to get more volunteers involved, sharing their custom plays and playbook. I'm still tinkering a but with my Air Raid book but I'd be willing to throw it out if we had a "hub" of sorts.

Unfortunately I think most people are expecting a lot of these formations to be in the game... so even though they're still technically possible, it may be out of reach of most. The byproduct would be if I added a bunch of formations people aren't going to want to create at least 2-3 packages per formation... if I bump it up from 10 formations to 20 or 30 or 40 that just gets unwieldy. So I would have to adjust how that works. Ideally I would have a "primary" package that everyone had that all formations used, and then let the user create unlimited personnel grouping packages and just assign those to specific formations. All of this is just hypothetical at this point... redoing formations, depth charts, packages, and all of the plays would be a massive undertaking, so I'd have to make sure we were prioritizing things correctly before doing it.

Is there some sort of explanation or graphic that would explain what all the motion and passing route options we have in the custom play creator actually are? What exactly does it mean by motion right tight, slot, wide, etc? I don't feel that the play diagram in the game indicates these very well.

JDB wrote:Is there some sort of explanation or graphic that would explain what all the motion and passing route options we have in the custom play creator actually are? What exactly does it mean by motion right tight, slot, wide, etc? I don't feel that the play diagram in the game indicates these very well.

I would agree with that. I have to tinker with motions, etc, because the in-game diagrams are not clear and there isn't a guide available that I have seen.

As is, the process has to go like this:
-I create a play and hypothesize which is the correct motion to use.
-I go to a game, and call the play and try and determine if it's correct.
-If it's not what I had in mind, I have to exit the game, re-load the save, and try again, repeating the process until I either find the correct instruction or decide that it's just not possible.

That's true of motions, but I also add that some routes aren't exactly clear. It's definitely not if you have motion, because the diagram shows the player starting the route from where they were set before they went in motion.

The ideal solution would be that the play diagram more definitively displays the result of instructions. Short of that, maybe a "practice" mode where we can see the play executed without having to start up a game.