Jump to content

New Base NES ROM (w/ 'Authentic NFL Experience' Hacks)


GameplayLoop

Recommended Posts

The purpose of this thread is to create conversation about what might act as a base for a Tecmo Super Bowl 'authentic NFL experience hacks' ROM. In the pinned thread dealing with the ORIGINAL STYLE ROM, Bruddog wrote a list of hack possibilities that act as a great foundation for discussion about what this proposed 'authentic experience hacks' ROM might consist of. This proposed ROM is obviously a more difficult and tricky beast to navigate than an 'original-style' ROM development thread. But I think that eventually we'll be able to nail down a proper agenda / consensus.

I'll try to edit this original post with concrete details noting developmental philosophies that gain a lot of support as they offered / listed. Please feel free to discuss!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TAKEN FROM BRUDDOG'S IDEAS IN THE ORIGINAL STYLE BASE ROM THREAD...

 

GRAPHICS

Other than the correct helmet designs, midfield logo, and maybe updated player faces most of the graphics stuff wears off quickly.

 

[As referenced in the ORIGINAL STYLE BASE ROM thread] Accurate helmet designs, accurate on-field jersey colors, accurate NFL logo screens, updated mid-field logo, updated player faces. I agree with all of this. Player faces are, clearly, the most difficult aspect of this list. Most of us, to my knowledge, don't even know how to properly edit the faces in the puzzle that is the HEX code where they're stored in TSB. Each tile is used multiple times, in various player portraits. A program that edits faces would be amazing, but I'm not going to hold my breath for it. I'd say all of this was more easily possible than not, save for the faces. Maybe we could update a few faces to reflect more traditionally modern changes in facial hair, longer hair for different ethnicities and etc.., simply to provide for more wiggle room in assigning new player portraits to contemporary players? Also, I get that graphics are a very surface change, but let's not throw the baby out with the bath water just because peoples priorities are different in what they find appealing about an updated ROM.

 

GAMEPLAY

 

weighted grapple hack -  essential because defensive players on average make tackles in the NFL. I won't bust out all the numbers but in the nfl on average the defensive player is making the tackle 80-90% of the time. Its not representing current nfl play if you can't ever tackle another player one on one. Broken tackles are the exception not the norm. 

 

What does this mean for popcorning? I agree with everything that you'd said, particularly as it concerns an authentic NFL experience, but players of TSB love thier popcorning. Does popcorning still exist, but less frequently? Can you elaborate on this a little?

 

In-game playbook hack  - tecmo's useable plays are so small as it is its nice to be able to change things around

 

Definitely. This goes without saying in any remade ROM iteration.

 

Player 2 conditions fix - simply fixing something that is broken

 

Ditto.

 

Better interception returns - one of the more exciting parts of the nfl totally whiffed on by normal tecmo

 

I think this is a must for a hack-centric ROM.

 

My Hack that allows QBs to have completion rating / interception rating, defenders to have stop completion / incterception rating.

 

I love this. Does this edit replace the long-standing PC/PA hack? Can you provide a very brief rundown for why it's better than the PC/PA hack?

 

QB fumble rate increased- tecmo doesnt even come close to representing the rate QB fumble on sacks in the nfl.

 

I love this. I think players would have to employ all different sorts of offensive strategies if they new how much more vulnerable (and realisticly so) their QBs were. Clearly, this would add variety to defensive strategies employed to. Awesome.

 

Adjusted pass arc- this makes it so guys with high passing speed don't suck at deep passes. and guys with lowish PS aren't great

at it

 

I love it for every reason that is self-explanitory.

 

Harder to gain good positive yardage running consistently. The median run in the nfl is like 2 yards and 

20% of runs go for 0 or negative yardage. 

 

How much harder is the question. I'm in a full agreement, but if finding a balance between ultra-realistic 2-yard gains means incredibly slow running backs, that might get tiresome quickly. If it doesn't mean that, great. But I'm fully in favor of this design philosophy. Do you have any more you can share with us about the details of this concept?

 

***********************************************************************************************************************************

 

 OL/DL hack

 

Of course! Love it.

 

 Shorter max FG distance

 

Yes!

 

Injuries on in preseason

 

Does this mean that Pro Bowl rosters experience the 'injuries turned on' error? In which case, I might say that bug creates a gap in my interest of this hack being added in. Don't get me wrong--I don't play with Pro Bowl rosters, but it seems like a strange glitch to turn our heads on. In the end, I'd be personally happy to see this added in, because I agree with you that it's a sensible and worth while enough addition.

 

 adjusted probabilities for fumbling, passing, pass block, field goal block

 

Yes!

 

************************************************************************************************************************************

no one would agree on what these would be for a base rom and most think this maddenizes tecmo to much but

I'll put them here anyways

 

new plays

 

selectable defenses

Again, I think there is just too much to debate in this to be realized effectively, nevermind the amount of coding needed to make it happen properly. I think it also changes the structure of Tecmo Super Bowl beyond recognition (although I personally love custom defenses). I just don't think these changes would make for a good BASE ROM.

MY ADDITIONS:

CPU Kickoff Lengthening. I think it's rediculous that TSB kickoffs MANY times only go twenty yards. It's entirely unrealistic. I think the CPU kickoff lengthening hack is a must.

4/3 Formation Hack? If I remember right, the hack that Jstout made makes the size of the TSB file larger than what is capable of being put nto a cart, correct? If the answer is yes, than I say this shouldn't even be brought up in conversation. If the answer is no, and adding this hack still allows for the game to be put on a cart, then I say it's worth discussing.

LOLB move forward? In OG TSB, the LOLB (bottom outside LB) is positioned back a slight distance behind where the ROLB is. I think this is worth changing. This has always bugged the living hell out of me.

Kickoff positioning. Self-explanitory.

Shorter punts.

Move kickoff returner starting position back further, closer to the endzone.

 

Decrease or increase injury rate as needed.

ROM CHANGES I DON'T THINK FIT:

Probabilities is one thing, but changing player stats is another. I think changing the base player stats for TSB might be too specific and personal a want to say, make "RP" more significant in-game for a BASE ROM. I'm definitely open to discussion on this, however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bodom's Thoughts


 


1) Everything hack bruddog mentioned.


 


2) Updated graphics, jerseys, helmets, NFL logo, yes, yes, yes, yes.


 


3) I could care less about player faces. Use QB Bills and QB Eagles for black/white.


 


4) A QB Completion/Interception hack exists?? Need more info....NOW!


 


5) Will shorter FGs mean the CPU will still go for a 65 yarder and miss every time? If there's a way to update the logic around this, I'm for it.


 


5b) Updated CPU logic, in general. In the SB sim that Dave posted, the Ravens tried for a 60+ yard FG in the 4th, down 7 with little time left. C'mon man.


 


6) Kickoffs, if you want realistic, should go from as short as the 10 yard line to out of the back of the endzone for a touchback. Running out of the endzone for a touchback would be like taking a knee.


 


7) Updated playbooks and defenses, yes. But for the love of God, would someone create defenses where a certain defender mirrors the ball carrier! It's way too easy to scramble with the QB in Tecmo.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

[Tecmonster, I tried move your response from the ORIGINAL BASE ROM THREAD into this one, but the forum tech didn't work properly. So I've re-posted your thoughts & .PDF below.]

 

Tecmonster wrote...
 

I couldn't agree more about the need for a new playbook.  In my opinion, that was the original Tecmo's greatest weakness.  When my group played in the 90's, we were basically all forced to use the run-n-shoot playbook exclusively because that was the only one that had proper left/right balance and enough plays so that you weren't tipping your hand pre-snap.

 

I would love to introduce perfect balance to all the major offensive sets, and also bring in four solid shotgun runs and a new "spread option" set (4 runs, 4 passes using a pistol QB and a RB on each side).  Both the shotgun and spread option would involve some zone read plays.  Here's my idea, attached in pdf.

Playbook 1.2.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IN RESPONSE TO BODOM'S THOUGHTS...

 

1. Agreed.

 

2. Agreed.

 

3. I agree that player faces are secondary in this converation as a whole. I would still like to see them eventually updated, but it's not paramount.

 

4. I believe he's talked about it in other threads of his own development. But a quick synopsis would be great!

 

5. I agree that being able to change the logic about when the CPU thinks it's feasible to attempt a FG is very important for this concept to work.

 

5b. I'm not sure how much the logic can be changed. Jstout posted some information on it a while back, and there aren't many known variables to tinker with. I would need someone smarter about this tuff than myself to chime in here, however.

 

6. I don't know if it's possibe for kickoffs to work exactly as the NFL uses them in today's game. It's possible to get kickoffs further back intot he endzone, but I'm not sure if it's possible to re-code kickoffs going out of the endzone as a touchback. As it is now, I think kickoffs leaving the back of the endzone (if you change the kickoff positioning, for instance) end in a safety. If we can change them into a touchback, great. There is also the touchback hack that Buck uses, which has a bug about running out of the endzone, I think. Hopefully, he or Bruddog can chime in about that.

 

7. Again, I'm in favor of playbook and defensive coverage changes for a hack-centric ROM, but would question if its feasible to put them into a base ROM. See my response to Tecmonster's thoughts below...

 

IN RESPONSE TO TECMONSTER'S THOUGHTS...

Back in 2009-2010, I was working with XPLOZV on a ROM where were trying to update the in-game playbook to take better advantage of the formations within it, creating more diversity, but not entirely changing the playbook around. Essentially, we were trying to balance out the strategy by adusting the playbook. Xplozv was going all of the offensive heavy-coding, and I think I eventually burned him out from my nit-picking on details (I don't blame him.) But, the effort was there, and it was working great. I think what Tecmonster is talking about, is essentially this same concept. If you check out the .PDF file that he attached, he's done some great work on the concept.

Definitely give him some feedback on his .PDF if you can! It's worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6. I don't know if it's possibe for kickoffs to work exactly as the NFL uses them in today's game. It's possible to get kickoffs further back intot he endzone, but I'm not sure if it's possible to re-code kickoffs going out of the endzone as a touchback. As it is now, I think kickoffs leaving the back of the endzone (if you change the kickoff positioning, for instance) end in a safety. If we can change them into a touchback, great. There is also the touchback hack that Buck uses, which has a bug about running out of the endzone, I think. Hopefully, he or Bruddog can chime in about that.

I have a test ROM that I've been tinkering with for a few months and have implemented this.

I moved the kickoffs to the 35.

Kickoffs go anywhere from the 10 to about 5 yards out of the back of the endzone for a touchback.

If you run out of the endzone or get tackled in the end zone it's a touchback.

If you run into the field of play, then back into the endzone and out, it's still a touchback.  That's the only bad part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a test ROM that I've been tinkering with for a few months and have implemented this.

I moved the kickoffs to the 35.

Kickoffs go anywhere from the 10 to about 5 yards out of the back of the endzone for a touchback.

If you run out of the endzone or get tackled in the end zone it's a touchback.

If you run into the field of play, then back into the endzone and out, it's still a touchback.  That's the only bad part.

Well that's pretty damn rad. That final point is unfortunate. How does everyone else feel about that? Do the positives outweigh the negatives (of that one setback to the hack)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BRUDDOG DISCUSSES THE CURRENT PA/PC HACK, AS WELL AS HIS OWN INT/COMPLETION HACK...
 

Bruddog
 

*******************************************************************************************************************************************

As it stands the interception rating on defense both determines if a ball is completed/intercepted/batted away. You "know" that a 75int guy is good at stopping passes as well as intercepting them. Under my system a 75int guy is still as good at intercepting passes as he was before.

But if he has 38 quickness or "coverage" as I would rename it, well he will allow completions and deflect passes like a 38 int defender would. It's splitting the singular INT rating apart like the pass control/ pass ability does.


*******************************************************************************************************************************************


On a side note, the original version of the PA/PC hack makes it s a LOW-ish PC high PA QB is better than a high PC high PA qb because he will be better at throwing deep bombs. That doesn't make much intuitive sense to the average person.  

Current PC/PA hack


PC= is ball on target/overthrown/jj intercepted

PA= is ball completed/deflected/intercepted on non-dive or jump attempt with defender in coverage

My PC/PA hack


PC= is ball on target/overthrown/jj intecepted/intercepted on non-dive or jump attempt with defender in coverage

PA= is ball completed/deflected

*******************************************************************************************************************************************

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Maynard.  I wanted to be as realistic about my idea as possible so I included as many of the original plays as possible to expedite programming.


 


I've actually sent this to jstout.  He said it was doable but that the defense would be the hard part.  I ask him for clarification and what I would need to do about that but haven't heard back yet. 


 


I'm trying to make this as simple as possible because I know there's probably a lot more to it than I could ever imagine.  The goal is just a balanced playbook in all respects.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's probably partly referring to assignments / reactions of the defensive players. For every offensive player's assignment you change for the playbook, there needs to be an equal and opposite defensive player reaction in return. Make sense? If you haven't yet, you can get a really good introductory lesson to this if you download the TSB Playmaker application.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

bruddog's PC/PA hack

 

PC= is ball on target/overthrown/jj intecepted/intercepted on non-dive or jump attempt with defender in coverage

PA= is ball completed/deflected

 

Awesome.  I like how this works!

 

Questions...

 

Is there a hack for it yet?  I'm assuming there's a post somewhere I missed...

 

How does this work in game?  Does it take PC first, then PA?

 

Let's say....

QB PC = 50

QB PA = 69

WR RC = 50

D INT = 44

 

QB throws to covered WR.  Go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's undocumented.  I have to go back and spend time actually figuring out completely what I did again because I didn't write detailed notes the first time around or they are since lost. 


 


But it works best in conjunction with the defender hack where


 


defender INT= only for determining interceptions/ jumping deflections 


quickness= for determining completions/non jumping/diving covered deflections


 


 


I need to double check again but I'm pretty sure this is the order. So in your example it would take PC (avoid interception) first to determine if the ball was on target. It would also use this and the defenders INT if the DB had a chance to jump intercept the pass.


 


If the pass makes it to the WR and THe DB is there as well it will do a  PC/INT check to see if the ball is intercepted. If not intercepted it will to  PA/QUI check to see if the ball is completed or intercepted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I'll suggest two-point conversion (unless I've missed this on a ROM or in the forum elsewhere), and mark a field goal at the spot of the attempt after a miss, instead of the original line of scrimmage.  And is my memory correct, or did I remember seeing actual weather (rain and/or snow) on a few TSB ROMs (non-SNES) some years ago?    


 


Somehow, I get the feeling that the two-point conversion is next-to-impossible to implement.  


Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll suggest two-point conversion (unless I've missed this on a ROM or in the forum elsewhere), and mark a field goal at the spot of the attempt after a miss, instead of the original line of scrimmage.  And is my memory correct, or did I remember seeing actual weather (rain and/or snow) on a few TSB ROMs (non-SNES) some years ago?    

 

Somehow, I get the feeling that the two-point conversion is next-to-impossible to implement.  

The following link begins your journey. It's starts off with great hope, and ends with great sorrow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the playbook that's attached does a good job of this, but definitely reduce the number of deep routes and add more timing patterns (i.e., the Jerry Rice route). 


 


I'm starting to tamper with the PC/INT/REC, etc. table with some limited PFF numbers to see what ranges make sense for CBs and Ss in coverage.  Obviously, you'll have to warp some things, but I think the QBs should be forced into throwing the ball into space.  I haven't gotten far, but I imagine that this will take an overal increase the actual 'on-targetness' of the passing (the PA/PC thing I think could be broken up differently based on the testing I've done--using extremes).  You'd also have to work on the appropriate RP (acceleration) ranges for defenders.  Bombs are no fun, especially because of the way the DBs deal with the deep ball (i.e. over running them).  I think you can force the issue with slot based defenses and reduce YACs using the hex for defensive speed increases (I'm on 2 notches right now, and this also greatly affects YPCarry).


 


Lastly, I'm thinking about actually putting the SLB on the strong side and WLB on the weak side, etc.; safeties also.  This I think would allow the offense to manipulate matchups some in the running game.  The safety designation (for me right now) wouldn't be there in the 3-4, but I think it'd be cool seeing, say JJ Watt, switch from side to side by offensive formation, as would really happen.  You could then negate him if you wanted, but 1) no totally with the HP hacks and 2) this would happen in real life.  You'd likely also not see DEs switching places in the 4-3.  My ultimate goal with this is controlling what LB's are brought blitzing in each defensive slot, being able to double elite WRs and having the defense pay for choosing wrong.  (Somewhere between Bill Walsh and the WB/SB concept in TSC).


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who is the rom aimed for/who would use it?

 

The same people who download Bruddog's, Buck's, and everyone else's ROMs who wish that the top modders would put their heads together and create a Frankenstein base using a palette of combined ideas. Yes, this will probably take more discussion than the vanilla version base we're talking about in the other thread. But considering what's possible, particularly when the ideas that have been developed from people's individual ROMs are potentially spliced together, it creates a unique ROM experience that could act as a great developmental base for new ROM-makers not looking to re-invent the wheel. This ROM benefits the casual fan looking to play a new experience, and the ROM hacker not looking to start from scratch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not worried about the process. And I don't think it needs to be so cut-and-dry. This thread right now is serving as a placeholder for the conversation. We're working our way upwards. In the ORIGINAL-STYLE ROM thread, I think we're closing in on a definitive project. Buck brought up the prospect of a three-tier set of ROMs. Vanilla, Basic Hacks, and Mega Hacks. So this project is at least a little ways off. It makes sense that each ROM builds off the other, especially if the elements should technically be agreed upon.

I do agree with your sense that this conversation might get sticky. Which is why I hope that building upwards will alleviate some of those problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • 2 weeks later...

One step at a time. First up was reflecting on and then altering the most minimal base ROM. Much of the work that has been put in by Keithisgood / Buck / Etc., won't be required for this (hopefully) eventual version. While all new work will be required, I expect more of the effort involved will include the discussion / dissemination of the features used.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

i know for the most part we're not doing a lot of actual source.  But have you guys ever considered a repository like github or sourceforge etc,  for versioning these files and hacks?   It might make it easier for all the work going forward to be kept organized? 


Edited by Dusto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...