New Categories
2 years ago
Washington, USA

Hello everyone, I have recently taken over moderation of this game and have decided to do something I feel has been long overdue: I will be adding new categories to run. "Win A Single Game" is a fun concept, trying to avoid tackles, but I was thinking of a way to encourage more realistic play and thought of a category I dubbed "Comeback%". Then I saw the forums had a few great ideas that went unnoticed as well.

I will be implementing one immediately: Single Game - Points%. The objective will be simple: win the game with at least 49 points. With this said, I would like to list several other ideas for categories and get feedback from anyone interested in this idea:

Lose A Game - This was an idea mentioned only because Tecmo Bowl has the category. It was rejected by a previous mod and I'm inclined to agree, because compared to other ideas I've seen, we have much better options.

Pro Bowl% - This is basically the same as "Win A Single Game", except in the Pro Bowl. It was rejected by a previous mod, but I want the community's thoughts on this. While it is very similar to something that exists, it does take the best players from each division and throw them against each other, and that is different.

Division% - Timer stops when you see the screen telling you that you have clinched your Division. Really just a mid-way between the single game and the whole season.

Week 1 Challenge - Pick one team from every game in Week 1. Win every game. Timer begins when you start your first game and ends when you finish the last of the week. This would be 14 games, so another mid-way between single and whole. But having to use 14 different teams would make this much more challenging than floating home with the over-powered monster teams in this game.

Comeback% - Pick any teams for a preseason game, give the CPU 21 (or some other amount) points as fast as possible, then win the game. This is means you could still kill the clock after you've scored enough to secure the win.

Also if you have any category ideas yourself, feel free to share them here!

DrMooCowz likes this
Washington, USA

I will give a few quick opinions on the categories myself:

Division% and Week 1 Challenge are both mid-length challenges. If people feel they are different enough we could consider adding both, otherwise one or the other could also be acceptable. Too many categories could diminish the value of the WRs in a way, but at the same time adding categories only encourages more ways to compete and play, and that's overall a great thing.

This is the same reason I leave my Comeback% idea up on the idea board for now. I think SchmidttyGames' idea of Points% accomplishes the same goal as Comeback%, without forcing you to let the CPU score. But maybe that could add another layer to the whole thing. I'll see how you guys feel before I do anything further.

Minnesota, USA

exciting :o week 1 challenge and especially Division% sound pretty interesting to me

Edited by the author 2 years ago
HowDoUPlay likes this
Washington, USA

Appreciate the input! I agree that Division% and Week 1 Challenge offer the best differences in gameplay and runs. Week 1 Challenge especially because it would force you to choose a team on every game in the first week, and you'd have to play 50% of the teams against the other 50%. And ofc Division% would be a nice longer run for those who don't want to run the whole Super Bowl.

zekeSSB likes this
United States

Lose A Game - I don't think it's that much different than win a game on how it plays out. Figure out some way to let the computer score (can force a safety if you run out of bounds in the end zone), then just the avoid tackles thing. I don't think it's different enough than Win A Game.

Pro Bowl% might be "ok", but I'm guessing dodging tackles with Jackson or another really good RB probably isn't drastically different than Win A Game. The data reset should still be encouraged, as I think player status from an ongoing season will be a factor in the Pro Bowl and you can completely edit the "All Star" rosters and put in trash players/backups from teams if you really wanted to take the time to manipulate it. And obviously, that would be against the spirit of the idea. I'm lukewarm on this one overall.

Division% could be interesting. You'll likely want to be undefeated to increase the chances of the division being won faster, but it's very dependent on the records of the other teams in the division on when this happens. Maybe you don't get it until week 17, maybe you get it super early in like week 12. Very random on how that could play out and picking your team/division could be a big factor. I could see this also being a "bonus" run where times are just submitted as a bonus for a Win the Super Bowl% run.

Week 1 challenge sounds interesting. 14 games is still a lot (Super Bowl is 19-20, depending on earning a Bye). Little bit of menu manipulation, too, for picking which 14 teams to set to "Man" (and making sure you don't pick 2 that play each other!) before kicking off the Game Start.

Comeback% - I think the Points% idea is pretty similar to this idea for the mechanics of how it plays out.

And thank you for taking the lead on moderating!

Florida, USA

I could see "Comeback%" being infuriating, as it would rely on the CPU actually doing smart things in a Preseason game for a minute before you start to pulverize them.

I've always been a fan of the Division% and the Week 1 Challenge ideas for variety, though it's worth noting that Division% will pretty much roll down to 3 specific teams and one entire division as the only ones really worth using (S.F., Hou, K.C., any NFC Central Team you can win with as their divisions lack any real competition within the known simulator "attitudes").

I may already be doing a version of Pro Bowl% with my current Points% strats. I would offer that any real "Pro Bowl%" category be restricted to original selections only, including starters and playbooks. That restriction by itself would radically separate it from any other category where using Pro Bowl teams to manip rosters comes into play.

HowDoUPlay likes this
Washington, USA

I agree with Division% and the 1 Week Challenge being the most diverse from what we already have. Division% as mentioned could be a bit RNG depending on your season record, but also a nice middle-ground between a single game run, and a full-season run. As DrMoo said, you could do a full-season run, and submit the video up until Division is clinched to get two runs in one if you choose.

Now I will say, with Week 1 Challenge: I feel like forcing people to reset their rosters/data before running this is a necessity. From my perspective, Week 1 Challenge seems most fair and fun if people cannot modify rosters/playbooks, and everything is default as intended.

I will let this sit for a while longer, to garner as many responses as possible from the community. But to those who have already replied: do you agree with my idea that Week 1 Challenge should require a data reset in the video before the run? If not, feel free to present your reasoning. I will consider everything before I add any more categories.

SchmidttyGames likes this
Florida, USA

I agree with it. Otherwise it's just 14 different versions of the "Fumble Playbook", as it is. That would be a little dull, in my opinion. I'm really interested to see what people come up with to drain clock when you can't just run faster than everyone else.

HowDoUPlay likes this
United States

Yeah, I would say require the data reset and clock officially starts at "Game Start" for both 1 week challenge and Division%, just like the Super Bowl%.

HowDoUPlay likes this
Washington, USA

Alright I have added "Week 1 Challenge" as another category. Currently the rules are posted, and it requires you win every game in week 1 as one of the two teams in every matchup against the AI.

My only further question would be: should we require every single game in week 1 to be won? There are 14 games in week 1, and currently if a runner were to lose a single game, it kills the run. Should we allow some leeway in this? Or does everyone feel winning every game is a fair requirement?

As it stands though, you must win all 14 games in the first week.

SchmidttyGames likes this
Florida, USA

I'll give this a spin this weekend between the Link to the Cure Marathon runs I have. See how it feels. I've always been a fan of having a "more difficult" challenge category, especially in sports games. Having to win each game won't be to difficult for most of us who love the game. The real challenge will be in how to do it quickly with teams we otherwise never have a reason to use. Being allowed to lose games would change bad situations from something to work through into something that's "fine as long as the clock is running."

Personally, I'd prefer to keep the winning bit, but I'll abide by the choices of the community :)

EDIT: I just realized that one of the Week 1 games is N.E vs IND. I could be persuaded to be allowed to lose that one. :P

Edited by the author 2 years ago
HowDoUPlay likes this
Washington, USA

I'm still checking your video now. In regards to a comment you made about changing players in-game, it is allowed yes. My logic being if a player is injured, I'm not going to disqualify a run because you had to substitute. Extending this logic further, swapping uninjured players would be fine too, as long as the clock is running and it's during the game.

EDIT: After reviewing the first run of this new category, I've decided to change the clock start. Originally I was thinking people would change all their teams to "Man", then reset, then the clock would start on "Start Game" at the main menu.

But I see it was a bit confusing as there is also a "Game Start" option on the season menu, and that's when the clock was started. Instead of add time to the run, I will frame count all runs starting at the first fade from the pressing "Game Start" on the season menu from now on. The main thing is you show a reset before starting the season ofc. Rules will be updated to reflect this change.

Edited by the author 2 years ago
SchmidttyGames likes this
Michigan, USA

I have a suggestion for a win-1-game in the pre-season: Win a pre-season game with somebody other than the Raiders.


if you want to make it a real challenge, Win a pre-season game as the Steelers. According to, Pittsburgh is by far the worst offensive team as far as player speed. The best player on their offensive roster ranks 79th place out of all players in the league, no player has an attribute higher than 38 for either hitting power, max speed, or rushing speed, and their quarterbacks are both just as bad, each clocking in at a max speed of 13 (they rank 43rd and 44th overall among all league quarterbacks).

Washington, USA

While that is a good idea, and would add more challenge, I feel that it doesn't deviate from existing categories enough to justify making another category that is basically, "Win Single Game but with any team other than the Raiders". Referencing as well, you could almost accomplish the exact same thing with Jerry Rice, and Barry Sanders that you can with Bo. Someone could easily argue that if we're going to ban the Raiders because of Bo, we should also ban the 49ers and Lions.

In regards to your last bit, I like the idea of playing one of the worst teams, that could be a good idea for a Low%, but would require all players to play the exact same low-tier team. I will definitely consider this one, along with a possible Division% as well. But as it stands, I've added 2 categories recently and want to see how many people participate in those before I add any more.

Game stats
Latest news
Clarity and Consistency (Recent Changes & Fixes)

When I took over moderation of this game 2 months ago, I decided to make a few changes. For example, data resets were initially required to be shown in Single Game by previous moderators. I met this requirement myself in my first submission, then I became a mod and realized that half the accepted ru

2 years ago
Latest threads
Posted 2 months ago
16 replies
Posted 4 months ago
Posted 8 months ago
2 replies
Posted 2 years ago
13 replies
Posted 3 years ago
9 replies