CheapCatch

True. Good point. Needs only minor tweaks, such as removing the QB from the kickoff team, and replacing him with the 5th Offensive Lineman.

Tecmo Legacy League still going. Almost through three full seasons. We are currently at the 1978 AFC and NFC Championship game. Since the beginning the league has had 5 to 6 coaches each year, and all teams are MANNED UP! That's a lot of Tecmo.

Did DAL get a new coach for the 1978 season b/c I just watched a posted video featuring WAS-DAL in the playoffs and that offense didn't look the same? signed oh no he didn't

You guys already are legends. I, for one, am happy that you trained in on TSB III. Overall it doesn't get the love, but there is love out there nonetheless. Thanks.

Freakin' awesome. Can't wait to see the list. How about an homage to the orginial TSB and TSB III developers, and add in mysterious attributes that no one has any idea about what they do?

This is truly a revolutionary feat in Tecmo history, and especially for the development of TSB III. I am curious to see how your vision for IV plays out. One all important question: Does HP matter? Thanks for the hard work fellars. Can't wait to check this out! cc

NFC DIVISIONAL PLAYOFF: #4 Washington (14-3) @ #1 Dallas (14-2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OEC6wCnkD1w

AFC DIVISIONAL PLAYOFF: #4 Pittsburgh (13-4) @ #1 Cleveland (14-2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_lRzUPFpv0

NFC DIVISIONAL PLAYOFF: #3 Los Angeles Rams (11-4-2) @ #2 Tampa Bay Buccaneers (12-4) *I know the Eminem song is a bit cliched and cheesy, but I just couldn't help myself* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26ppkhA_kZo

For the TLL78 playoffs, myself, and deadfaulkner aka Mattio Royster, have been in the mode of making videos for the games, which include intros and highlights from the games. I thought I'd share some with you. First up: AFC WILDCARD PLAYOFF: #6 Kansas City (9-7) @ #3 Oakland (10-6) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34xrfkKZ89M

Drunken- This is a post about BB/AGIL, and QU, for defense. I wrote a somewhat lengthy post about BB/AG on offense awhile ago http://tecmobowl.org/topic/12785-body-balance-vs-agility-revisited/ , so Eric followed up with this thread on what these attributes might do for defensive players. Any insight on that one?

Eric- You have some interesting points in here. I can state that we did test QU just as you said, and how fast a defender moves toward the ball was deemed to not be determined by QU. I am confident about that assessment. Again this was deemed to be related to the aggregate of RS/RP/MS. What I like to call the "drag element" is reflected by these attributes based on how the three work together. By "drag element" I mean you can feel a player being slowed down when moving toward a ball (as if some force is pulling against him), or for instance, when he tries to start up again after slowing down or stopping. I think the starting/stopping thing has been talked about a lot, and it's pretty well commonplace knowledge that it is related to RS/RP/MS, but it hasn't been talked about as much as far as players drifting toward the ball. I think the tests Matt (deadfaulkner) and I ran ruled out that QU plays any role in this "ability", while confirming it is related to the aggregate of RS/RP/MS. The odd thing about the potentiality of QU not doing anything is it then means that in at least NES TSB and TSB III the attribute is featured but doesn't do anything. In TSB circles I think it is all but definitively established that QU does nothing in NES TSB. From all of the tests I've done, and others have done, the data points to the same phenomenon for TSB III. It is unbelivable to a lot of people (and rightfully so) that the developers would TWICE add in an attribute that does nothing, and not only that, there are a range of numbers assigned to defensive players in terms of QU. Why would the develops go to such lengths only to have QU not do anything? I think these two reasons are why the witch hunt continues. No data, though, has confirmed the existence of the witches, er I mean QU. This is one of many issues causing people to pine over wanting to sit down and talk with the developers.... I am interested in the defensive diving ability question as well. I think I began testing it at one point, but for some reason gave up on the project. I do agree there is a noticeable difference between defensive players in terms of ability to dive. That is in terms of: a) reaction time with diving (some guys truly just do not react quickly to a "b button press", or in some cases refuse to dive at all, and the length of a dive seems to be different across players. The same phenomena occurs with quarterbacks and throwing the ball. *Some will say this solely has to do with the lag that comes with online play, but I played a ton of TSB III on the console way before ever playing online, and I can assuredly state that certain quarterbacks not throwing when you hit 'b' was noticeable then. I used to always comment on it, and be frustrated by it, thinking it was just some glitch, but then I began to suspect it was somehow related to the coolness attribute, or avoid rush, or a combination of both. I still have not confirmed this, but the point is that the QB b button issue has always been there has far as I am concerned, and so, perhaps there is a connection between defensive player ATTs and diving ability, as you suggested. Quick question: Are you positing that AG might be related to how a defensive player dives because AG on offense concerns the tendency of a player to jump when a defender dives at them? I am supposing you are making that connection. As far as RBs having a tendency to spin when a play is picked, I also notice this, but typically with elite RBs with high BB, which to me is not surprising since high BB RBs spin quite frequently given an approaching defender. The Will Woolford thing I am not sure of. I haven't seen many OL/DL spinning on returns. Tecmo does a lot of strange things. It could just be a statistical anomaly. The key is to examine attributes across a lot of cases. good questions. Let us know if you do any more testing. cc

I think the true answer is that no one knows for certain what exactly BB and AGIL do on defense. I suspect not much of anything, or anything, during defensive proper plays. In the tests I have run, as far as maneuverability goes, the central attributes are RS/RP/MS (how these operate in combination with each other). During a play, when a defender does not have the ball, it does not appear BB nor AGIL do much of anything to help a defender. It's possible AGIL helps toward a defender leaping up to block a pass, but I have never tested this definitively, and am only tying this to the fact that AGIL determines how often a ball carrier will leap when dived at. I am not certain if AGIL is tied to the percentage of a WR jumping for a ball. If it is then it seems one would follow from the other. This is one area to study to perhaps figure this out, or deny it. Where AGIL and BB do come into play is when a defender INTs a pass, or recovers a fumble, and is running down field. Occasionally a defender will spin or jump, but its not enough in my head to make this a significant attribute for a defender. There is also the somewhat obvious point that BB and AG help defensive players, who are returning kickoffs, with spinning and jumping. Not all that helpful, but that's my three cents. cc

I use that site to create the schedule for our TSB III league, the Tecmo Legacy League, and indeed I did find that the ordering is odd. I am not sure exactly how Retro and the other WTF leagues order schedules, but for the TLL I tinkered around a bit with the justinsports positioning slots until I was satisfied, and came up with this: For 5 team divisions I list the teams as such: 1st, 4th, 5th, 2nd, 3rd. For 4 teams divisions: 1st, 4th, 3rd, 2nd I added the list below, and how the schedule turns out. I did not add Divisional games b/c those are a given each season. If there are any other questions feel free to ask. 5 DIV 4 DIV 1st 1st 4th 4th 5th 3rd 2nd 2nd 3rd I. MATCHUPS CF= conference IC= inter-conference #'s below indicate what place a team was in its division . Ex- The first place team in a 5 team division plays the top 2 teams from each of the other two divisions in the conference And for IC plays 1,2,4,5. Third place teams in 5 team divisions have weird schedules. This is inevitable. Back in the NFL day these schedules were reserved for the Fifth place teams in 5 team divisions, but I liked the way the schedule turns out better when designated it to the Third place teams. The NFL also did some odd things scheduling wise that make no sense to me. For instance the 14-2 Super Bowl winning Steelers (a first place team obviously) the NEXT season played way too many bottom feeders from the previous season. 5 team DIV First and Second Place: CF 1, 2/1,2, and IC 1,2,4,5 (if scheduled for 5 team DIV) or IC 1,2,3,4 (if scheduled for 4 team DIV) Third Place:* CF 3,3 (other 5 team DIV) and CF 1,2,3,4 (4 team DIV) and IC 3,3 Fourth and Fifth Place: CF 4,5/3,4 and IC 1,2,4,5 (if scheduled for 5 team DIV) or IC 1,2,3,4 (if scheduled for 4 team DIV) 4 Team DIV First and Second Place: CF 1,2,3/1,2,3 and IC 1,2,4,5 (if scheduled for 5 team DIV) or IC 1,2,3,4 (if scheduled for 4 team DIV) Third and Fourth Place: CF 3,4,5/3,4,5 and IC 1,2,4,5 (if scheduled for 5 team DIV) or IC 1,2,3,4 (if scheduled for 4 team DIV) *Note: My designation for the third place teams of 5 team divisions is standardly reserved for last place finishers of 5 team divisions. This was one element of the schedule making I did not care for, and so I made the third place teams have this schedule. My method is by no means perfect, but after a lot of experimenting I find it to be the best way of scheduling, using justinsports, and prefer it over the old NFL model, as suggested by the PIT example above. cc

Go Bucs! Creamsicle pride.... It is natural for people to want to block out Trent Dilfer aka "The Duck". Alvin Harper went from Troy Aikman in his prime to....dun dun dun.... Dilfer's 4 TD 18 INT season.

Sorry, I won't be joining- I am running a race that day. I was going to perhaps stop on by if if was at a bar or such. Thanks for the info. GL

where is this taking place in Sac?

Of all things people want to latch onto w TSB, how can one be the graphics are better? Or that TSB brings more to the table with game play? One can say that they like the gameplay better, for its simplicity I guess, but it definitely doesn't bring more to the table. That TSB offers "enough complexity" is a fair enough comment. Speaking of music: the lack of music during the game for TSB III is surely a step up.

* note: for the 77 ROM I uploaded a "preseason" version. Meaning, it is the stock/default version, but does differ from the ROMs (even wk1 on the TLL site). I sent this because: Slim's site offers the opportunity for coaches to make their offensive base set, something different than what it is from the original. Really this is just aesthetic, such as the double TE set, shows "two TEs" in the game day lineup screen, but really the top TE is where the normal FB would be. Anyway, the point of this is that I noticed a glitch with MAN v CPU games, if an offensive player gets injured (and I think this just occurs w teams that have switched to the double TE set for instance). Basically it inserts either an OLman or a QB and tends to wig out a bit; it also does not tend to count the game. In short, the version I sent here does not have this issue. And note, the glitch won't occur w the site ROMs in MAN v MAN play. The 1976 ROM is also free of this issue.

TLL1976.smcTLL1977.smc ....should be attached, TLL76 and TLL77 it's true TS....I definitely encourage people to check out the TLL site.

oh cool. thanks Dave. I'll get on that....

Yeah, and I can get you the 1976 version too if you like Shalbotnik. What's your email? The 1978 version will be released pretty soon as well. If you want the "preseason" one for 1977, download Wk1, otherwise you will end up with injured players on the ROM. If anything else, i can also send you the 77 ROM as well. cc

#1- I don't think there is any speed boost by pressing "a", but sometimes I do that too for anticipation purposes #2- The audibles are a bit limited as they correspond from pass to run or run to pass, and are direction specific. Meaning, if you pick "up and a" (a run play) and complete the audible, you will audible to the corresponding pass play, "up and b", and visa versa. #3- Punting can be tricky, and I actually like that about the game. There is a delay on the meter, so you have to anticipate. You only need to hit the button once, but the meter keeps going a few notches after you hit it, so thus the needed anticipation. #4- I don't find the "lob" pass to be much of an advantage. The only* instance it might be is toward the end of a half where you only have time for one play but not enough time to let your WR get far enough. The lob will allow a WR to get further downfield (b/c it is slower), thus allowing you to actually have a shot at a last second CC TD. Although this only comes in if you don't have enough time to let WRs get far enough downfield. * Really, the major advantage of the lob pass is that is it comical to watch unfold, so it provides a break in the tense action (it is a Tecmo version of comic relief if you will)

I've wondered this same thing, TecSpectre. Over time I've had a chance to gather views on it. Most of what I hear is basically that TSB is the game people grew up w/ and that they have never played TSB III. Also, I consider that HP actually matters alone to be worth the jump from TSB to TSB III, but interestingly, I've heard some hardcore TSB players express their dislike for that. I respect the opinion, but I don't agree w/ it. In my estimation HP actually does something in TSB III, while in TSB it really isn't much of a factor (thumb speed is). The complaints about how TSB III looks are odd, since the original TSB isn't that "pretty" itself. I find the sprites to be upgraded. One major detraction in TSB III: QB Eagles is Randall Cunningham, the former QB Browns is Bernie Kosar, and QB Bills is Jim Kelly It is definitely slower (in terms of how long it takes to play a game, and the game play itself), as TSB feels like a track meet sprint- the games actually transpire too quickly for my taste. With TSB III I actually feel I can settle into a game, and it doesn't bother me that the games take longer (with the exception that people here have mentioned....when your opponent takes forever checking players, switching plays, etc.). As a whole, though, the various defenses and audibles don't really slow the game down significantly. -I disagree that TSB III is not an upgrade. I think in many ways it is (starting w HP mattering- that is tops in my opinion). To name a few more: being able to down the ball in the EZ, being able to call a timeout on the field, 2 pt conversion, you can't punt the ball a million miles/combined with you can call for a fair catch, the addition of rain and snow games, the various "moves" built into the game, in particular spinning, but also the bullrush and drag are pretty cool. A lot of people don't mind this it seems but in TSB it gets tiring having a defender constantly jump up and either block or INT passes- seems to happen way too frequently (i do realize the coding behind this, and I think it is faulty, and I also realize that more proficient players know how to limit this....but I think the tweak to the coding for TSB III is an upgrade), the fact that a QB can throw off DLmen and LBs consistenty in TSB but not in TSB III. I'll also add that you can't blow up plays as easily on TSB III as on TSB. Granted you still can in TSB III, but not w the ease and consistency of TSB, such as getting your RB tackled immediately by a rushing LB down in and down out. It also seems to me (although I haven't proven this) that the play selection algorithms are more complex than in TSB. What I mean is, it seems that in TSB if you don't pick pass it is a certainty (or near it) that no one will cover. In TSB III I've yet to see any consistent correlations in terms of how players react on the field in relation to offensive plays being picked and defensive plays being pick, in combination w/ alignment choice. There are still some ridiculous, quirky elements of TSB III- no doubt, but it is a TECMO football game after all.... Anyway...I'm not here to convince anyone. I think a lot of it comes down to what we are familiar with, and hence are most likely better at. It's tough to make the transition, or to move back and forth between the games. It's rare to find TSB III lovers and more so hybrid (TSB and TSB III) players, such as Chaos. I understand the vast majority of online Tecmoers are hands down TSB enthusiasts, but I am happy that there is at least a small contingent of TSB III fans, and that this site can bring people together to fulfill childhood dreams, and to make advancements to the game itself (the work done here is phenomenal and much appreciated).... As to TSB II: it has potential, but it is a half baked project: no first down markers, the yard line it says you are on is out of line, such as you can be on the 82 yard line....I see TSB III as the fully developed TSB II.

me too ! ! ! !