CheapCatch

I've only played the Genesis version a few times (w friends who had a Genesis but not a Super Nin), and I don't recall exactly why since it was over 15 yrs ago, but I do remember liking the SNES version way better. I have to give my vote to SNES ROMs, since you get the basic TSB III framework, while being able to manipulate the players, etc. to your liking.

People here (Tecmo Turd, etc) have already provided all the relevant details for how to connect s ZSNES 1.36 via Hamachi, and I'll just reiterate TT's suggestion. It does sound like the "None" button on the ZSNES chat screen hasn't been chosen. -Not sure if you you cannot even get to the ZSNES chat screen using Hamachi, but if so, make sure you are using the IP that is shown on the Hamachi network.

Cool to see this post revived. Since this post was started, over a year ago, the SNFL came and went, but myself, along with Slim and Deadfaulkner, have launched what we call the Tecmo Legacy League. We are currently in Week 10 of the second season (1977). So far the league has been extraordinary (and the league members are awesome), and I am just so happy to be a part of this. Chaos has joined us for the second season, and has proven to be a great competitor and dedicated participant to the league. 1976 (first) Season Site: https://sites.google...molegacyleague/ As Slim was in the process of readying the league with a site of his own brand, we proceeded with this site for the inaugural season. It has all the data people might be interested in: full statistics, pro bowl team, a video of the Super Bowl on the main page, etc. *for those who do go to watch the video- yes the recording is choppy, but the actual game play is smooth, if one happens to be worried about that. -Sorry that was only the preview of the SB 76 on the site. Here is the actual video of the game footage, produced and edited by Deadfaulker: 1977 (current and future) Season Site: http://www.scottzolak.com/tll/ This site is functional, but is in the the process of evolving. Slim is the main wizard behind the curtain here, and he's done a fantastic job IMO. Site is only going to get better. We are currently getting players and ATTs together for the 1978 season, so coaches can prepare for their team draft. As far as connecting goes: Rarely is there an issue. Connecting to one another is unproblematic 99.9999% of the time. IF there happens to be an issue, it's easily fixable. ZSNES 1.36 has proven reliable. Hamachi works just fine, and lag is not a problem. Anyhow, that's cool TecSpec that you are putting together a TSB III tournament. cheers to TSB III

My experience with San Diego in (MAN v MAN) is that they have an elite running back in Natrone Means, but an otherwise mediocre offense. As well the defense was usually suspect, making the Chargers consistently a bottom tier team in all of the MAN v MAN leagues I participated in. Green Bay is also a subpar team- a lack of running game hurts that team.

The second season aka TLL77 is off to a fast start and seems even more competitive than last season, with coaches getting used to one another's playing style and such. The newest member Chaos Rison has been bringing the thunder this season, winning 9 straight at one point before finally losing his last 2 games. Meanwhile, the Bucs (0-4) face the (0-4) Packers in Wk 5.... Can Gary Huff "The Magic Dragon" carry Tampa to its first victory?

Tecmo Super Bowl III is hands down my favorite version. I recently revisited the NES and TSB I Super Nintendo versions, but I cannot get into either of them for a variety of reasons. tecmo minority....

Hey all. You have probably figured this out by now, but I wanted to correct the above statement. I am a huge Dolphins fan, and keep up almost daily on the team. Richard Marshall is not a rookie; he is a multi-year player that the Phins acquired from AZ in the offseason. Marshall had a decent season last year, and is regarded as an up and coming nickel CB. Currently, Vontae has fallen off a bit, so Marshall is currently the starting CB along w/ Sean Smith. Word from the coaches is that Marshall and Davis may split time, or alternate between nickel CB and boundary CB. Anyway, that is probably too much detail, but just wanted to note about Marshall's status. cc

Sweet....thanks. Honkey wasn't joking when he said he was vanishing....

Many other people have discussed this topic, but here is a somewhat detailed account of BB v. AGIL that I wrote up. viewtopic.php?f=3&t=14860 I also did a PC v. PA experiment with a friend on TSB III, and our experiment showed that PC controls location of the passes, while PA played into INT/COMP percentages. WR ATTs also have to be figured into the equation, as well as defensive players covering, so PA/PC can only explain so much of the equation. Quickness: As far as what I've read no one knows what this does. AV: I am pretty sure this only matters for the CPU. It determines whether a QB will hold onto the ball for a long time v. getting rid of it quickly, or scrambling. COOL: This I am pretty sure effects a couple of things. #1- How accurate a QBs passes are if he is trying to throw while under duress. #2- You may notice that sometimes the QB does not throw the ball when you hit B. I used to think was a glitch, but then realized that it only happens more frequently with QBs w lower COOL attributes. FA/Trading: I am pretty sure each player has a FA value built into the game, which helps determine viable trades. That is what I know at this point, but I am just as interested as you are in getting down exactly what certain ATTs do. For sure more is known about TSB than TSB III due to many more people being interested in that game. Sincerely, CC

I was wondering if it is possible to manually alter the type of weather- clear/rain/snow- for regular season games. I am especially interested in being able to do this for TSB III netplay. The reason is that when playing an online season there is virtually no chance that a snow game can occur, since the games are typically set up in Week 1. It'd be nice for say a Week 14 match up between Buffalo and New England to feature snow. I suppose match ups do not necessarily have to be placed in Week 1 all of the time. Are there many issues-ie desynching- that tend to occur when placing online match ups in weeks outside of Week 1? Thanks CC

I got those locations, ill post them once I get a chance, might be tomorrow, but I'll get those for you. TSB3 love is always welcomed! Honkey Vanish!! [ Post made on a Tecmo Super Mobile Device!] Hey, D Honk- Any chance you can post your findings on the locations?

Disregard my replies. I don't know why I felt compelled to respond so negatively to this thread? I just come off sounding like a jerk. If guys like coach then go for it....which you are....so I digress....

The trouble I have with this theory is that is leaves the attributes of many players unexplained. If we focus just on running backs then it leaves over 30 players unexplained. The main issue is this: For instance, Marshall Faulk has 63 MS, but 50 RP, and Barry Sanders has 69 MS and 44 RP. If your theory holds true, then why wouldn't the programmers just have given Faulk and Sanders more RP, since under your theory their RP would be 69? Essentially, if your theory were true, that "if the MS stat's speed value is greater than the RP stat's speed value, then the RS stat is used to determine how quickly the player accelerates to max speed" then it would make no sense to give Sanders 44 RP and Faulk 50, if those numbers are just going to be overridden. There are 30 plus other running backs that meet this same problem under the above theory. This leads me to believe that what you state cannot be the case, and there is something more to determining how RP functions. I am going to look over BD's sheet again, and his theory, to see if BD's NES theory can be adapted to TSB III. BD says he knows exactly how RP works in relation to RS and MS in the NES version, which is backed by a massive amount of somewhat complex data, which helps. It is apparent that RS/RP were switched between TSB and TSB III. The question then is, given that, can Brudog’s theory be applied to TSB III by simply transposing RS/RP? Secondly, what would this look like?

huh....interesting....

Seriously. Coach Mode is what makes Tecmo the most eternally fun football game ever created. You have to admit...playing Man with Madden is much more fun than playing Man in Tecmo. I am not the person to direct that toward, since I’ve never been a fan of Madden due mainly to the game play. I think Tecmo MAN v. MAN is as good as it gets when it comes to any NFL sports game on any system. Looks like we will never agree in that department. But nothing matches the coaching mode in Tecmo. We used to think the same thing about Man. Now we don't touch it at all. Coach mode takes the cheapness out of the game and opens up the pure competition. How does COACH mode take the “cheapness” out? There is still the potential to make outrageous catches, and everything else involved with a MAN v. MAN game. As far as pure competition goes, I am not sure how you can make that argument since all you are doing is calling the plays. Does pure competition really involve the CPU QB throwing to the short covered RB v. throwing deep to the wide-open WR? Not trying to give you a hard time, but not sure that makes sense. It's like a game of chess. The basic moves are simple. But the mind games get complex. On defense, you try to get into your opponent's head and pick his plays and steer/confuse him with your defensive formations. And you are rewarded mightily when you pick right. The same goes on in MAN v. MAN, except with the added level of controlling your players once the ball is snapped, which makes it more competitive and fun. If you don’t think your LB or Safety can take down the opponents running back, for instance, there is a whole lot of strategy involved in trying to defend against that. On offense, you construct a playbook featuring the strengths of your team. You attack, giving it to your play makers, and trying to keep the defense off-balance. The back and forth emotion involved is more like real coaching than any other football game played. Again, the same applies to MAN v. MAN. You adapt a play style to meet your teams strengths and weaknesses. For example, with Seattle you are better suited to win through the ground game on the legs of Chris Warren than letting Rick Mirer chuck it up all the time. Consequently, Seattle is more successful overall under an effective use of Warren and short to midrange passes with the occasional deep shot. On top of that, the franchise rules I specified above with trades, free agents, and create-a-players allow you to try to build a great team while your opponents do the same. It's a big game of tug-of-war in the offseason and actually just as much fun as coaching the games. Yet again, the same applies. You have the ability to build teams through trades, FA, drafts, etc, in a MAN v. MAN setting.] But the biggest bonus to Coach mode is that ANY novice can play and have fun doing so. It's simply a matter of picking the right plays at the right times. That opens up the game to more people and competition is what makes the world go 'round. I can grant you this one sort of, but I would doubt that most experienced Tecmo players would opt to play novices in COACH mode. There is a learning curve to any game, and part of the learning curve is heartache and not doing well. To use your chess example, chess is easy to learn but hard to master. Would you really advocate COACH mode in chess to accommodate novice players? What fun is there is that? Actually, not even sure what COACH mode would look like in chess, so it’s probably a bad analogy on my part. I've tried coaching on Madden. And while the game is more realistic, there's no big risk-reward. It's rather boring. What makes Tecmo great is the play-pick system. When you pick the other guy's play, you smear him for a big loss. When you pick completely wrong, you get burnt bad. And there are lots of things you can do with formations and playbooks to improve your odds. It's a great and well-balanced game when you coach. The play picking element is there in MAN v MAN as well. As far as picking the wrong play in COACH and getting burned badly, you are forgetting the many instances of the CPU not properly directing the play to the appropriate place. In MAN v. MAN you have total control over where to go with the ball. Thus, I fail to see how COACH mode is fun- if anything it would be frustrating to put up with the inadequacies of the CPU. COACH mode is about as tantalizing as watching the CPU play each other, and really is only one step removed, since all you are doing is calling the plays. As far as “a great well-balanced game when you coach,” have you not been in nail biting games in MAN v. MAN? If I’m in COACH mode and my team is down a score near the end of the game, and I lose b/c my QB decides to not throw it to the deep guy, instead taking a sack, or throwing short, or to a covered WR, that will get old quickly. Sorry to stifle you at nearly every point. It’s not my intention to persuade you back to MAN games, or anything. Above all, if you like COACH, and can find people that do as well, then by all means.

Don't want to spoil the fun, but I am mighty surprised to hear a blazing endorsement of.....coach mode? How could playing in coach mode possibly be more fun than playing someone MAN v. MAN. Even MAN v. COM is more fun. With coach mode you are at the whim of the CPU doing dumb things like not throwing to the wide open receiver or diving short of the first down. I don't get the boiling excitement over coach mode. Well, at least you are having fun.

I read the thread, but honestly RP just makes my head spin. It seems there are too many variables, and I haven't been able to isolate one or another to pinpoint what they do. You may be right that in some cases, such as 63 RP/6MS that the 6MS is overridden by the higher RP and as such doesn't factor. This is tough, though. Basically I am just going to start paying attention to how certain TSB III RBs move and base future players on that premise.

Bruddog- I recalled looking at your work previously, and had some of it handy, as I tried to figure out the RP puzzle. I have only focused on offensive players so far (RBs in particular) regarding RP, as I am trying to pinpoint the art of making TSB III RBs that reflect real-life tendencies/capabilities. As you mention above, I also expected the 69RS/69RP/6MS player to run at a slow speed, but pretty much lost any handle on any preconceived idea I had on the matter, or direction I wanted to go, since this just didn't make sense to me, esp. in light of the compilation of literature on what RP does on this forum. I'll definitely revisit your speed spreadsheets, and use them as a base, for figuring out how RS/RP/MS work, most likely in tandem, for TSB III offensive players.

It is often stated that the following is the case: RS= starting speed RP= acceleration MS= top speed As well, it has been stated that RP represents a player's acceleration to his top speed. I have always thought the same, but despite this, how these attributes interact remains an enigma. If RP is a player's acceleration to his top speed, then why is it that a player with say 69RS/69RP/6MAXSP is still fast the whole way through. In my experimentation, the 6 MAXSP is nowhere to be found. In light of this example, and other experimentations, I am still left bereft of a clean explanation of what RP is and how it functions, esp. in relation to RS and MAXSP. Thanks.... CheapCatch

I realize this topic has much ink spilt over it on this site, but my current posting is inspired by the fact that there is still quite a bit of uncertainty and inconsistency regarding what BB and AGIL amount to in TSB III. In light of this, I embarked on a bit of an experiment to gauge the difference, and I believe I can with confidence proclaim what that difference is. Body Balance controls spinning and Agility controls jumping. The conclusion reached here has undoubtedly been issued by others, but again, the goal here is to solidify the findings. Below I will post my results, along with some commentary. I created two players, both with the same RS/RP/MS. One player, call him Lang, had MAX BB and 6 AGIL, while the other player, call him Wms, had MAX AGIL and 6 BB. BB Results: Lang (MAX BB) # of Spins # Runs 12 21 5 21 13 21 12 21 13 21 11 21 7 21 8 21 TOTAL: 81 Spins out of 168 Runs (48.2%) NOTE: Multiple spins on one run are included in these statistics. Wms (6 BB) # of Spins # Runs 1 28 (took until the 28th rush to produce first spin) 0 21 5 21 0 21 2 21 2 21 2 21 0 21 TOTAL: 12 spins out of 175 runs (6.85%) ---- AGIL Results: Wms (MAX AGIL) # Jumps # of Opponent Dives 10 14 8 14 10 14 TOTAL: 28 jumps out of 42 opponent dive attempts (66.67%) Lang (6 AGIL) # Jumps # of Opponent Dives 1 14 1 14 2 14 TOTAL: 4 jumps out of 42 opponent dive attempts (9.5%) Note: You will notice that there is a much larger sample for the BB experiment than the AGIL experiment. This is due to the fact that to test jumping you need to create the correct scenario, and hope that a player dives at you. This consequently takes many more run attempts to gauge, so in the meantime I continued to compile BB spin statistics until I completed a few samples of AGIL jump statistics. Also, I would like to note that perhaps in the past the idea that one cannot just gauge the # of attempts when analyzing jumping, but has to account for when a defensive player actually dives at a RB, may have been missed when judging AGIL and jumping. Granting that both RBS had the same attributes outside of BB and AGIL has caused me to conclude that BB solely dictates spinning and AGIL solely dictates jumping. As well, there may has been confusion in the past concerning AGIL, since the booklet proclaims that AGIL controls "how quickly a player changes direction". I do not think AGIL controls that at all in TSB III, since Lang had 6 AGIL and Wms had MAX AGIL, and both maneuvered around the field with ease, and without a discernible difference between the two RBs. Each player, though, shared Emmitt Smith's RP 63/56 MAXSP rating. More likely then "how quickly a player changes direction" has to do with a combination of RP/RS/MS, but that is another mystery to solve for a separate posting.

"Thx for the input. My rom has a hp hack in it so it's more of a challenge to bring the runner down. I made my rom the way i did for it to be challenging......every game,and every down."- Drummer It is interesting b/c I as well enjoy a challenge in the TSB realm, and it sure beats going 16-0 nearly every season against the computer. The second season I am in the middle of is with the Raiders. I went 11-5, and have so far, defeated Indy 20-14 in OT in the Wildcard round. Let me see if I can articulate the "challenge" issue. What I have noticed with the game is that computer controlled WRs hardly ever miss a catch, even when covered. Meanwhile, with the team I am controlling a pass into coverage is most often a sure INT, and it doesn't seem to matter who is covering. Also, the rate at which computer defenders jump up (often from poor angles) and INT the ball is over the top. The ability to run the ball becomes nearly nil once you are 5-6 games into the season, and so I find myself running the same 2-3 plays over and over, hoping that someone will be open as I dare not throw into coverage. Also, it seems as though the rate at which human controlled players fumble is high, and the amount of dropped passes when not covered is also high. Yes, I noticed Peyton Hillis immediately, as my first game was against the Browns with the Bengals. He was quite the force, and perhaps my mashing thumb isn't seasoned enough. Anyway....get well, and I don't mean this to be a scathing review. It is just some things that "jump out" at me (like a computer controlled defender.... Cheap Catch

I finally tried my hand at this ROM, and I have to say I found it extremely difficult. I decided to choose the Bengals to make the experience trying, but often it was virtually impossible to win. I went 9-7.....9-7.....against computer opponents. Playing against Pittsburgh was a lost cause. I lost count of the number of times Cedric Bensen fumbled the ball. While it was nice to have a challenge playing a TSB game, I do have to say INTS occured at a rapid rate- perhaps it was my horrible pair of QBs. Sometimes I felt as though I was playing Tecmo Bowl (the one with 12 teams), since it seemed anyone covering a player would pick it off, even players with low INT ratings. I felt like Howie Long was going to make his way on the field and corral 5 INTS. The most annoying feature was the number of times computer controlled RBs would take it to the house. I mean once the first tackle was missed RB after RB would scamper 50, 60, 70 yards without even a possibility of catching the guy, especially with the computer "help" diving far too soon in an attempt to bring the RB down. Greg Little (a rookie WR from Cleveland) is breaking tackles against LBs and Safeties, and running 40 plus for a TD. I mean c'mon. Vonta Leach, a fullback, was like Emmitt Smith in terms of speed and elusiveness. With his HP, none of my LBs or Safeties could bring him down at first tackle, and then there he is, running untouched down the sideline, as if he is a star halfback. The game was great, and I am admittedly more inclined to the ways of TSB III, so perhaps I have some bias, but I felt like every game I was in the middle of a sprinting track meet. There were hardly any in between runs- of the four to five yard variety. Either I would dive at the RB and get him at or behind the line of scrimmage, or he would bust a tackle and zoom for an enormous chunk of yardage. Maybe the original TSB has always played like that, and it could be I just haven't played it in awhile, but the experience definitely drew me further toward the feel and style of TSB III, where WRs, will almost never break the tackle of a LB. TSB is too much of a button mashing game for my liking. That being said, I appreciate the hard work that went into the ROM....

I guess I'll chime in on this assessment of TSB III teams. In my experience, AZ is the worst, followed by the NYJ. Other pretty bad teams, or teams that are hard to win with (against human opponents) are Houston, San Diego, Oakland, St. Louis. Other teams that are middle of the road, but still not consistently good: Cleveland, Jacksonville/Cincinnati, NO perhaps in that order (although NO has the cheap catch master Michael Haynes on their team), any NFC Central Team. The NYG have pretty bad QB play, but are still a decent team in my opinion. The teams I've had the most success with, or that I've witnessed others have consistent success with are: Dallas, Denver, Pittsburgh, Atlanta, Philadelphia, Washington. -Miami and NE are approx. 10-6 type teams, and Buffalo never performs to potential, placing them at about a 8-8/9-7 team. Indy is a team that is hit or miss, and rides with the success of Faulk and how much the QB play can get you by. Seattle has potential with Chris Warren, some decent WRs, and a stud Safety, but Rick 'the Duck' Mirer drags the team down. KC is middle of the pack. -SF is decent, but never turns the corner in my estimation. For some reason I've had much success with Carolina, mostly due to Bananas Foster/Dwight Stone power/speed running combo, and Bubba McDowell on defense. .....I think that covers them all....ha....

looks like this thread is still going, so why not....I am basing my decision on experience playing human opponents.... Without a doubt Rod Woodson is the most difficult player to play against- the guy covers every inch of the field in no time, and is a beast in the kick return game. I got to the point of just onside kicking against him. Woodson is a one man wrecking crew that automatically lifts the Steelers to one of the Top 5 teams in the game. -Other players I hate to play against are: Michael Timpson and Michael Haynes due to their unprecedented cheap catch abilities. -Rod Berstein is really annoying to try and defend, and is definitely a classic TSB III player that didn't do much in the NFL....yes, one of those guys. On the flip side: Marshall Faulk is fun to run with, and I also like using certain LBs in defense: Jessie Tuggle, Hardy Nickerson, Derrick Thomas That's who comes to the top of my head at the moment....

Turd to the rescue, yet again. Thanks dude. That makes complete sense now. I was just getting overloaded with the variety of file extensions.