I'll add that to the test post...I think that's an extremely valid point
Edit: both the post here and on the test server updated
Edit: both the post here and on the test server updated
Edited by PP on Jan 6, 2010 13:28:44
Forum > Test Server Discussion > tinkering with zone test
WiSeIVIaN
offline
offline
Very glad to see some work being done on zones.
Even so PP, as someone with borts ear, I really think Ball Hawk and ZS need to be tuned down as well. (hear me out)
When ZS is giving the average defender +11 spd/agi/vision from the time the ball is snapped til they realize the ball is thrown.
and BH is giving the average defenders +22 spd/agi/vision from the time they realize it to the ball being deflected/incomplete.
Choices is good, but imo if you cut both of these values by half (0.5% per level on zs, 1% per level on bh) they would both still be used a fair percentage of the time and be viable VA's.
My biggest fear with ZS/BH which are still a hugely powered VA when playing zone is you are gonna end up with 1 of 2 scenario's once zone code comes out....
1. ZS/BH teams do well in coverage, but if you put players in zone w/o zs bh they suck.
2. Players without zs/bh play zones fine, but with ZS/BH it is overpowered (this is closer to what is is now, though I know they aren't really fine. The fact that every top WL defense is forced to play primarily zone is a testament to it).
Imo, a lot of stuff gets messed up if you try to fix a dynamic in a game which greatly changes based on whether a team invests heavily in 2 very powerful VA's....
Even so PP, as someone with borts ear, I really think Ball Hawk and ZS need to be tuned down as well. (hear me out)
When ZS is giving the average defender +11 spd/agi/vision from the time the ball is snapped til they realize the ball is thrown.
and BH is giving the average defenders +22 spd/agi/vision from the time they realize it to the ball being deflected/incomplete.
Choices is good, but imo if you cut both of these values by half (0.5% per level on zs, 1% per level on bh) they would both still be used a fair percentage of the time and be viable VA's.
My biggest fear with ZS/BH which are still a hugely powered VA when playing zone is you are gonna end up with 1 of 2 scenario's once zone code comes out....
1. ZS/BH teams do well in coverage, but if you put players in zone w/o zs bh they suck.
2. Players without zs/bh play zones fine, but with ZS/BH it is overpowered (this is closer to what is is now, though I know they aren't really fine. The fact that every top WL defense is forced to play primarily zone is a testament to it).
Imo, a lot of stuff gets messed up if you try to fix a dynamic in a game which greatly changes based on whether a team invests heavily in 2 very powerful VA's....
ijg
offline
offline
Originally posted by WiSeIVIaN
Very glad to see some work being done on zones.
Even so PP, as someone with borts ear, I really think Ball Hawk and ZS need to be tuned down as well. (hear me out)
tbh Wise, I think that will backfire. Tautology said it well on the main forum and some people here as well...the problem isn't zone D, it's the QB's decision making. If Bort is working on the QBs, the problem will resolve itself.
If we change the QBs and nerf zone D, then we'll get like the s6 DEs and it will be over-nerfed, imo.
Very glad to see some work being done on zones.
Even so PP, as someone with borts ear, I really think Ball Hawk and ZS need to be tuned down as well. (hear me out)
tbh Wise, I think that will backfire. Tautology said it well on the main forum and some people here as well...the problem isn't zone D, it's the QB's decision making. If Bort is working on the QBs, the problem will resolve itself.
If we change the QBs and nerf zone D, then we'll get like the s6 DEs and it will be over-nerfed, imo.
PP
offline
offline
Honestly, I don't know what exactly is being changed to make dots in zones "more human." I don't recall Bort ever saying specifically, but the results in those test games seem to indicate adjustments to BH & ZS being part of it, to me. However, that's just based on what I saw any of you may have a different read on it.
ijg, I think you and Taut have very valid points. Personally, if we're going to try to make this game realistic at all (as in dot behaviors, not stats...If dot behaviors are realistic the stats will fall in line, when 2 comparable dots go h2h. I really think worrying about stats has caused far more harm than good, but that's another story), zone Ds just are ridiculous. I mean, seriously, how many times have any of us seen 5 D guys swarm a WR before the ball gets there at any lvl of football, even PeeWee, yet we all have seen it here. In the NFL, observers and coaches complain about throwing into double coverage, yet throwing into tripple coverage here is not uncommon in the least. It isn't that the D really has 3or 4 dots covering that 1 WR. It's that the bonuses are so insane that 3-4 dots can get to the WR before the ball does. I think Taut is one of the best minds in this game, but I'd argue that one with anybody and not be afraid of losing the argument.
To me, the real keys to not hosing things is to make sure that 3 things happen...Zones are brought closer back to earth, QB targetting and decision making are improved (those 2 things have been/are being worked on), but that the pass coverage guys get a buff too (more effective at PDs withing their radius, more effective at ints and, as Add has mentioned, have them actually play the ball). all 3 of those things happen and we can end up in good shape, but I think all 3 need to occur.
The part that makes me nervous is that most everyone agrees that the QB targeting/decision making and zone effectiveness need to be improved. However, ssn is slipping away and the QB porition needs more adjustments and tests before it can/should go live....AND, the bumps to the coverage guys need to occur and be tested before this goes live. Time is slipping away for all of this to happen
ijg, I think you and Taut have very valid points. Personally, if we're going to try to make this game realistic at all (as in dot behaviors, not stats...If dot behaviors are realistic the stats will fall in line, when 2 comparable dots go h2h. I really think worrying about stats has caused far more harm than good, but that's another story), zone Ds just are ridiculous. I mean, seriously, how many times have any of us seen 5 D guys swarm a WR before the ball gets there at any lvl of football, even PeeWee, yet we all have seen it here. In the NFL, observers and coaches complain about throwing into double coverage, yet throwing into tripple coverage here is not uncommon in the least. It isn't that the D really has 3or 4 dots covering that 1 WR. It's that the bonuses are so insane that 3-4 dots can get to the WR before the ball does. I think Taut is one of the best minds in this game, but I'd argue that one with anybody and not be afraid of losing the argument.
To me, the real keys to not hosing things is to make sure that 3 things happen...Zones are brought closer back to earth, QB targetting and decision making are improved (those 2 things have been/are being worked on), but that the pass coverage guys get a buff too (more effective at PDs withing their radius, more effective at ints and, as Add has mentioned, have them actually play the ball). all 3 of those things happen and we can end up in good shape, but I think all 3 need to occur.
The part that makes me nervous is that most everyone agrees that the QB targeting/decision making and zone effectiveness need to be improved. However, ssn is slipping away and the QB porition needs more adjustments and tests before it can/should go live....AND, the bumps to the coverage guys need to occur and be tested before this goes live. Time is slipping away for all of this to happen
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
