For all those budding single player gamers out there, Locksley's comments in the below thread have concerned me. ( "a few questions to Locksley or Umosay") The difficulty level is the one thing that rugby games rarely get right, and it looks like rugby 2005 is also way off the mark. Locksley says that normal difficulty is too easy, and hard is unplayable because you can't win possession or make any breaks. However, on hard its still easy to defend, so sounds like games could turn out to be a stale mate in the middle of the pitch. Just wondered if anyone has any suggestions of how the single player game can be made fun, perhaps by using the player creator? Surely if you improve the overall stats of your team, i.e faster and stronger you will be able to find gaps on hard level? But then how about defence? It seems on hard its still as easy to defend on single player as it is on normal. So maybe to get round this you change the stats of your team again, by reducing your player's tackling ability, or making the oppositon much stronger so they break through tackles. I had to adjust the teams stats in rugby 2004 because the game was too easy on hard. By tweaking the teams you could eventually get some competitive games going. Pain in the aÂ£$e to do though! I wonder if this is he answer to rugby 2005? I suppose we can't expect the programmers to get the difficulty level right for everyone. Maybe its up to us to adjust the teams to suit us? Any other thoughts on how you think the difficulty levels could be balanced out?