Warrior General Games

Originally posted by KCChiefsMan
you know, IRL and especially the NFL. Runningbacks get benched if they aren't good pass blockers and picking up blitzes, fwiw. Maybe do something with that and people can make a RB with blocking and vision so they can pick up blitzes, add a SA or VA that works for it.

Gasp! But that would require that people build complete players.

Better than total removal I suppose.

Originally posted by Catch22
And as I mentioned somewhere previously - we'll be adding a few more defensive formations to the mix (5-2 for sure). We'll also still be adding more preset GLB defensive plays for users to use... who knows maybe Engage Eight won't be the only preset defensive play ever used after we do that.

formations?! now we're talking, always wanted a 5-2!

Originally posted by Catch22
LB free movement causes as many or more issues then DL free movement.

What we've been talking about is this:

3 alignments for the DL: Strong/Middle/Weak
9 possible alignments for the LB'ers: Strong/Middle/Weak + Shallow/Medium/Deep
Secondary: Dragable box smaller but have presets that go in logical spots that are outside of the box

I would suggest 5 DL alignments...Standard, Strong, Weak, Tight, Wide.

I think the same 5 alignments would work for LB's, but then also have a secondary choice for LB's only of Shallow, Medium, Deep.

That combo would cover most situations needed, but for this to truly work and be well accepted, more defensive formations probably need to be introduced.

There are plenty of anti-pass formations, we need more anti-run formations. A couple formations based on 5DL would be great for inside run containment. But what we really need is a way to contain outside runs, both RB & QB. I think a 3-3 or a 4-2 with TWO SS's, one on each side, would be ideal. You still have a FS over the top and either a 3-3 or 4-2 in the box to stop inside runs. Plus the SS's could help with pass coverage, making that a great defensive option. The 3-3 would be very similar to the Nickel 3-3-5, but instead of a 3rd CB, you have a 2nd SS on that same side. The 4-2 would be similar to a 4-3, but loose one of the LB's for an extra SS on the weak side. Sorry, got side tracked here.

Originally posted by Catch22
We'll also still be adding more preset GLB defensive plays for users to use...

Will they be as bad as the current ones?

Originally posted by drewd21
Will they be as bad as the current ones?



Is that possible?

Originally posted by razor9
Better than total removal I suppose.

This is like your company paying 100% of your insurance, and then one day putting out a memo saying you will lose all coverage at the end of the yr, and if you want health coverage get obama care, and then coming back later on in the day saying we will offer it but you will have to pay 95% of it. Its better than the initial plan, but it still sucks

Originally posted by Catch22
Originally posted by drewd21

Will they be as bad as the current ones?



Is that possible?

good point they can't get much worse only better

The only thing on defense that really needs fixing is the reduction of interceptions, and that could be accomplished simply by making catching more important to ... you know ... catching the ball.

LOL...Changed from total removal to limited DPC in a matter of hours???I like that idea better but that's a quick decision with such a big subject

Couldn't we set up a few test leagues and then copy 5 - 10 games from each level (Pee Wee - WL) and run the proposed changes using the previous days tactics to watch how the proposed changes do???

Then we can determine if the proposed changes would work. We can also watch how an exploited play is handled the next day with the proposed changes.

I hope that this is already happening...but nowhere I read it was stated that we tested removing the DPC and the results are very promising. It sounds like GLB is just deciding to maybe eliminate it before testing it versus actual tactics.

I took 7 seasons off after watching all my dominating DT's get nerfed....it sucked building stud DT's for 6 seasons and final watch them perform for 1 season...hen have people complain that they were unstoppable and they got nerfed....I wasted 6 seasons and a lot of FP's on failed DT experiments for 1 season of fun. (sorry for the rant). So I am not up to speed but still had to question why or how are proposed changes TESTED before being elevated???

Thanks...hoping to get back the GLB bug I once had.....

Originally posted by Dpride59
Originally posted by razor9

Better than total removal I suppose.

This is like your company paying 100% of your insurance, and then one day putting out a memo saying you will lose all coverage at the end of the yr, and if you want health coverage get obama care, and then coming back later on in the day saying we will offer it but you will have to pay 95% of it. Its better than the initial plan, but it still sucks

hahahaha
man that is real it sucks a large one.( I own a few businesses)that is the idea behind the OHP

Originally posted by Gerr
I would suggest 5 DL alignments...Standard, Strong, Weak, Tight, Wide.



Sounds like my first five girlfriends.

Originally posted by Catch22
Is that possible?

lolCasual games don't usually seem to be much higher scoring than Minors games, so I'd say it's quite possible.