Tecmo Super Bowl rushing
Steve Bantz
Smith I can barely scrape out 50 yds per game after week 5.
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
| Steve Bantz | "If toast always lands butter side |
| University Of Northern Iowa | down and cats always land on their |
| Cedar Falls, Iowa | feet, what would happen if you strap |
| Computer Information Systems | a piece of toast to a cat's back and |
| bantz...@cobra.uni.edu | drop it?" |
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Axl
> Has anyone else noticed how hard it is to rush after about
>week 5? With Emmitt Smith I can barely scrape out 50 yds per game
>after week 5.
>
Hmm...have you tried altering your playbook? Throw in a few
different running patterns than the ones you started with. I too
played Dallas, and woulda captured the rushing title if he hadn't been
injured in week 16 :( Few of my games ever had Smith running for less
than 100.
-axl
eunjoon lee
> Has anyone else noticed how hard it is to rush after about
>week 5? With Emmitt Smith I can barely scrape out 50 yds per game
>after week 5.
Yes, it's much easy to play passing games. I've played as SF 49ers, and
Steve Young recorded over 4000 passing yards. Jerry Rice scored 16 TDs.
Ej
Anthony M. Soto
Steve Bantz <bantz...@cobra.uni.edu> wrote:
>Has anyone else noticed how hard it is to rush after about week 5? With Emmitt
>Smith I can barely scrape out 50 yds per game after week 5.
I've only played two teams KC and Buffalo. I had an impossible time running
with either Barry Word or Christian Okoye for KC, but with Thurman Thomas of
Buffalo, I've been getting 100+ yards rushing a game... I'm 11-0-1 now.
Tony
--
Tony Soto || "For Show and Tell today I brought leaves...
Motorola, Inc. || This is a maple leaf... This is a leaf from an oak...
1501 Shure Dr. || And *this* is a leaf from our kitchen table!!!"
Arlington Heights, IL || -Sally Brown Peanuts
The Legacy
> Has anyone else noticed how hard it is to rush after about week 5? With Emmitt
> Smith I can barely scrape out 50 yds per game after week 5.
No not really. I could still pull 100 yard games with Marion Butts tward the
end of the season... but since he isn't as fast as Emmitt and gang, I passed
more than I rushed throughout the season anyway.
I got into the playoffs as a wildcard, barely won the game, then was
demolished by the Oilers. To answer your question, yes it does get harder,
but it didn't for me until playoffs. (this was the only season I've played
so far, but others have told me that it does get harder as the season
progresses.)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
sta...@alumni.cs.colorado.edu
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dr. Irony
>Has anyone else noticed how hard it is to rush after about week 5? With Emmitt
>Smith I can barely scrape out 50 yds per game after week 5.
I've played this damned damned quite a bit over the holidays. It does get
increasingly hard to run and pass in the second half of the season but
you can still get 100+ yard games running and 300+ passing. You're people
have to be in excellent shape though and the only way to do this is
to continue to get good games from them. Their health appears to go up
when the pass for 300+ or run alot or catch alot of passes. I've rested
them for weeks and their health never gets better (short of being in the
hospital). It also depends on your play selection. I used Dallas in 91
and 92 with basically their standard pro set and was barely able to get
a 1000 yards out of Emmitt. Sanders, meanwhile, got 1700+ averaging 15yds
per rush, mine about 4yds. In '93 I switched to run and shoot type of
offense, almost all plays having 4 wideouts and the runs were all to Emmit,
the pitch sweeps left and right, and did much better. 5000 yds passing,
1600yds+ running, second in the the league to Sanders. Leading passer with
a 205+ rating, two top scorers, Emmitt and Irvin with 200pts+, leading catcher
(Irvin) with Harper not far behind.
All that said, the game pretty much sucks. It is so unrealistic it makes
me sick. I'm never buying another American sports game made by Japanese.
This is a video game first, and football second. I hate it. I wanna take
it back. It's just ridiculous when Irvin or Emmit are 20 yds past everyone
else and get caught up to in no time. RIDICULOUS. Also, you can take the
noseguard and get a sack almost every play. When the ball is snapped, simply
make a quick move downward and jump forward to sack the quarterback. Works
better than 70% of the time. I always have >>100 sacks per season with
Maryland and even more with Childress of the Oilers. That said, I'm gone.
I wouldn't buy the game. IT IS WAY TOO UNREALISTIC.
Chuck
--
Chuck Machala | Same as it ever was.
Yo-Yo Dyne Corporation | (Talking Heads)
| Disclaimer: I'm just me.
Xcaliber
> Has anyone else noticed how hard it is to rush after about week 5? With Emmi
> Smith I can barely scrape out 50 yds per game after week 5.
> --
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> | Steve Bantz | "If toast always lands butter side
> | University Of Northern Iowa | down and cats always land on their
> | Cedar Falls, Iowa | feet, what would happen if you strap
> | Computer Information Systems | a piece of toast to a cat's back and
> | bantz...@cobra.uni.edu | drop it?"
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
I do notice that the defense does get better after you totally kick its
ass... but I still can run for over 150 yards per game throughout the
entire season... btw: I love defense.. I have only allowed 5 touchdowns
in 10 games.. and I've outscored my opponents 250+ to 42
--
xcal...@mookie.sbay.org (Xcaliber)
Mookie's Place BBS +1.408.942.1984 Milpitas, Ca
Xcaliber
> I've only played two teams KC and Buffalo. I had an impossible time running
> with either Barry Word or Christian Okoye for KC, but with Thurman Thomas of
> Buffalo, I've been getting 100+ yards rushing a game... I'm 11-0-1 now.
> Tony
Hehe.. my favorite team to use the Giants.. they totally kick ass!
Especially with Taylor on the defense... I netted over 40 sacks in one
season once with Taylor... IMO.. they made it to easy to stop the running
game at times... Another reason why I like the Giants is that Hampton is
almost as fast as Emmit Smith and he has just about the same amount of
strength as he does.
- Xcal
The Legacy
> bantz...@cobra.uni.edu (Steve Bantz) writes:
>
> >Has anyone else noticed how hard it is to rush after about week 5? With Emmitt
> >Smith I can barely scrape out 50 yds per game after week 5.
>
> I've played this damned damned quite a bit over the holidays. It does get
> increasingly hard to run and pass in the second half of the season but
> you can still get 100+ yard games running and 300+ passing. You're people
> have to be in excellent shape though and the only way to do this is
> to continue to get good games from them. Their health appears to go up
>
> All that said, the game pretty much sucks. It is so unrealistic it makes
> me sick. I'm never buying another American sports game made by Japanese.
> This is a video game first, and football second. I hate it. I wanna take
> it back. It's just ridiculous when Irvin or Emmit are 20 yds past everyone
> else and get caught up to in no time. RIDICULOUS. Also, you can take the
> noseguard and get a sack almost every play. When the ball is snapped, simply
> make a quick move downward and jump forward to sack the quarterback. Works
> better than 70% of the time. I always have >>100 sacks per season with
> Maryland and even more with Childress of the Oilers. That said, I'm gone.
> I wouldn't buy the game. IT IS WAY TOO UNREALISTIC.
>
> Chuck
Let's step back for a minute and consider who you are playing with. Since
you are playing with a superbowl championship team with lots of star players,
obviously they are going to lead the league in rusing, passing, receiving,
sacks. They did in real life... is this unrealistic?
Secondly, the rusing game is made that way because they allow quick breaks
from the crowd. It would be more realistic if the RB always got caught
at the line of scrimmage and maybe a few yards beyond, but that isn't any fun.
They also did this because it is just as easy to pass 50+ yd bombs as it is
to flip out a screen pass to the sidelines. If they didn't make defenders
catch up it wouldn't be a game anymore.
Because you tend to use quick pro-bowl defensive backs to make the sacks,
of course you aren't going to have trouble getting through. Try challenging
yourself a little and use someone else. In other words you are playing the
game in easy mode and complaining that it is too easy.
Choose some loser team with a slow running back, and a QB who overthrows his
receivers 1/2 the time, and some DB's that get thrown every time they touch
an offensive linemen. Or better yet, play against a human opponent. Computer
opponents are NEVER hard to beat in sports games. If you actually played
with someone that is equal in ability to you, and chose equal teams, it
will be a good game. If you choose Dallas and he chooses Cincinatti, who
do you think will win? It is obvious... REALISTICALLY not everyone in the
league has Dallas and Houston as teams...if they did, the NFL would be boring
too.
Dr. Irony
>Let's step back for a minute and consider who you are playing with. Since
>you are playing with a superbowl championship team with lots of star players,
>obviously they are going to lead the league in rusing, passing, receiving,
>sacks. They did in real life... is this unrealistic?
>Secondly, the rusing game is made that way because they allow quick breaks
>from the crowd. It would be more realistic if the RB always got caught
>at the line of scrimmage and maybe a few yards beyond, but that isn't any fun.
>They also did this because it is just as easy to pass 50+ yd bombs as it is
>to flip out a screen pass to the sidelines. If they didn't make defenders
>catch up it wouldn't be a game anymore.
Yeah, exactly, so it is totally unrealistic. Because they made one thing
unrealistic, they had to make it all that way. Sheesh. In Tecmo if you
pick a wrong defense you can have a WR run down the field uncovered
and catch the ball for a touchdown almost every play even though the
defense you picked was very similar to the one you should've picked.
How 'bout this one. I throw a pass to a guy maybe 40 yds down the field.
A defensive cornerback covering a guy close to the line of scimmage on
the other side of the field sees me throw the pass, races over and blocks
it. He runs 70+ yds in 3 seconds max! I don't think so.
The Madden football games are orders of magnitude more realistic in the
way they are set up and how they play.
>Because you tend to use quick pro-bowl defensive backs to make the sacks,
>of course you aren't going to have trouble getting through. Try challenging
>yourself a little and use someone else. In other words you are playing the
>game in easy mode and complaining that it is too easy.
No, I'm not complaining it's too easy. I'm complaining that it barely
resembles football.
>Choose some loser team with a slow running back, and a QB who overthrows his
>receivers 1/2 the time, and some DB's that get thrown every time they touch
>an offensive linemen. Or better yet, play against a human opponent. Computer
>opponents are NEVER hard to beat in sports games. If you actually played
>with someone that is equal in ability to you, and chose equal teams, it
>will be a good game. If you choose Dallas and he chooses Cincinatti, who
>do you think will win? It is obvious... REALISTICALLY not everyone in the
>league has Dallas and Houston as teams...if they did, the NFL would be boring
>too.
I've played with lousy teams too and still kick. The nosetackle thang
still works, they rarely score. I can get safeties and sacks gallore.
I can always pass the long bomb and can never run, so it gets pretty boring.
As I said before, my complaint is not with the difficulty level, but
with the unrealistic game play. I like the season and the playoffs and
the having to keep players healthy, but the game play sucks. This is
a video game that is loosely based on football.
Bryce Arnold
I have found out that it is TOTALLY unrealistic as well, you can ALWAYS
throw a long bomb, I don't care who your QB is, the game plane sucks!
The Legacy
> sta...@alumni.cs.colorado.edu (The Legacy) writes:
> >Secondly, the rusing game is made that way because they allow quick breaks
> >from the crowd. It would be more realistic if the RB always got caught
> >at the line of scrimmage and maybe a few yards beyond, but that isn't any fun.
> >They also did this because it is just as easy to pass 50+ yd bombs as it is
> >to flip out a screen pass to the sidelines. If they didn't make defenders
> >catch up it wouldn't be a game anymore.
>
> Yeah, exactly, so it is totally unrealistic. Because they made one thing
> unrealistic, they had to make it all that way. Sheesh. In Tecmo if you
> pick a wrong defense you can have a WR run down the field uncovered
> and catch the ball for a touchdown almost every play even though the
> defense you picked was very similar to the one you should've picked.
I thought your complaint was that it was too easy, rather than simply
unrealistic. Most video games have a degree of unrealism to make the game
enjoyable...Tecmo is at the arcadish end, whereas Madden is right in-between.
Try out NFL '94 starring Joe Montana (SEGA) if you want some realism. Too much
realism (i.e., the passing game) can make a very frustrating game.
If you are looking for realism, next time buy the box that says "simulation"
instead of "game." Lack of realism doesn't mean the game is bad. How real
do you think Mario Bros is? How about Contra III? Any realism in StarFox?
Street Figher II is real (not). How about all the awesome realism in Super
Offroad? Legend of Zelda needs lots more realism. If you wanted pure realism
in any game, you're going to have a very tough time, but until then, enjoy
the games as they are!
Most people would enjoy to throw 50 yard bombs for TD's several times a game.
If you could, you sure wouldn't be sitting in front of your TV playing
Nintendo, would you?