Warrior General Games

To be clear, WL was used as an example over NattyPro or RegPro due to the relatively equal competition and lack of gutted teams.

GLB Passing is too risky

Some statistics from the World League...

In WL through 4 games there have been 132 Passing TDs, 170 INTs, on 3844 attempts and 128 team games played.

That means WL teams average 1.03 Passing TDs/game and 1.33 INTs/game.

That is 1 TD every 29.1 attempts and 1 INT every 22.6 attempts. Keep in mind this means INTs are even more common than this on non-screen passes, as screens are very rarely INT'd.


Due to risk, the top levels of the game are shifting towards more rushing

Through 4 WL games there have been 3844 passing attempts and 5107 rushing attempts. That breaks down to 42.9% passing and 57.1% rushing.

Passing there have been 3844 attempts total for 24036 yards. That is 6.25 YPA passing.

Rushing there have been 5107 attempts total for 25386.5 yards. That is 4.97 YPA rushing.

However note that there have been 30 fumbles lost total in WL this season, however 11 of these were on STs so that is 19 fumbles lost on rushes. That comes out to 1 fumble lost every 268.79 rushes.

So passing is slightly more effective from a yards standpoint (though the difference is much closer than the NFL), it is far more risky. Once every 23 passes you will throw an INT however you can rush 268 times for every fumble. Keep in mind the INT rate on non-screen passes is even higher than this, and since TE/HB/FB passes are picked off a good bit less than WR passes, I imagine the INT rate to WRs be insane (though I am unwilling to mine the data needed to compute this).


CONCLUSION

Due to the current state of INT-heavy GLB, you should not be passing on 1st/2nd down against equal competition at GLB's top level. While 100% run teams will never be optimal, they are clearly closer to optimal than pass-heavy teams. An ideal GLB offense currently involves being very run-heavy, with perhaps certain key personnel for clear passing situations (3rd and long you force in a passQB, recTE, recFB, recHB, and have a receiving WR at WR3 perhaps)


GLB REMEDY NEEDED

While I understand BORT is working on other projects, this is a HORRIBLE state to leave the current game in. Due to the huge risk of passing downfield compared to rushing. Also keep in mind team's usually have 2-4 rushers total, while they have normally 9 dedicated recievers (5 WR, 2 TE, 1 recHB, 1 recFB). Not only does it make for less interesting dotball and strategy, but it also means as teams shift more and more towards the apparent meta, 9 dots/team will become even more underused than they are currently.

I am not opposed to Warrior General games focusing on other projects, nor do I have a problem with a "stable" sim. I do however have a big problem with an end-game sim that crowds out options and strategies...

less passing = less sacks

I like sacks

wait, what?

Also just as a throw-in that will never happen, WRs should probably be 4-major dots considering how ineffective they are. If WRs were 4-major it would at least make CBs work a little harder to put stuff in coverage stats, rather than having awesome attributes to go along with 70-80 catching.

Though changing arch's is super on the NGTH list, so while I think the change would make sense, I understand it won't happen.

Hood passes effectively in WL

It would be funny to dig up WiSeIVIaN's posts about turnovers back when they were helping him beat better teams, but :effort:

Originally posted by jdbolick
It would be funny to dig up WiSeIVIaN's posts about turnovers back when they were helping him beat better teams, but :effort:

All of your posts were you crying about turnovers because you blamed your losses on them. This literally has nothing to do with my teams performance as I do not blame any losses on the INT prevalence, and have stocked up with INT builds as much as anyone.

While I admit I enjoy passing as an OC, beyond that this isn't a bias-filled post. My opinion may have led to the effort to make this post and open like 11 windows calculators, it doesn't do much beyond that.

it's a classic example of not preparing for what the player will do in games. (not blaming Bort, it's pretty much impossible to imagine some things).

Back when they took it out of beta, there wasn't as many of the pure INT builds being made. So they sim was built around making a decent amount of ints possible with coverage dots...

now that you are seeing 3rd+ capped catching + 2x int % dots coming out and being very common, they are intercepting at a greater rate than the coverage dots (as they should). However the base chance for int is probably a bit too high


the reverse happened with fumbles, there were a lot of HH dots built, but a lot of the HBs were elusive HBs (about half)... Now you have the vast majority of HBs being pHBs (or at least, the ones that get most of the runs). So basically the sim was built for HBs without as much strength and carrying.

honestly a lot of the interactions should probably be looked at every 5 seasons or so... because good gamers are good at finding out what is the best and using the hell out of it... it's why you see things like MMORPGs having patches and updates every few months, because they have to keep making small tweaks

Originally posted by WiSeIVIaN
All of your posts were you crying about turnovers because you blamed your losses on them. This literally has nothing to do with my teams performance as I do not blame any losses on the INT prevalence
Of course that's what this is about. Last season you thought you were going to be a WL contender, but instead you demoted yet again because your quarterback threw 34 interceptions in 16 games. You want people to believe that it's a total coincidence you started complaining about turnovers at that exact moment?

I pointed out the problem five years ago: http://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/forum_thread.pl?thread_id=2592578

Originally posted by jdbolick

Of course that's what this is about. Last season you thought you were going to be a WL contender, but instead you demoted yet again because your quarterback threw 34 interceptions in 16 games. You want people to believe that it's a total coincidence you started complaining about turnovers at that exact moment?

I pointed out the problem five years ago: http://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/forum_thread.pl?thread_id=2592578


Sigh...

#1 the only reason the Hedgehogs weren't a "WL Contender" is because our DC ragequitted GLB two games into last season unfortunately, and it took time to bring a new guy in and for him to get comfortable. We still were 1 win away from sticking in WL fwiw, and 2 wins away from the playoffs, having 3 losses to playoff teams down the stretch by 3, 7, and 2 points respectively.

This is just my opinion however, and I'd rather this thread not degrade into an argument about how good/bad my team was last year.

#2 Our QB threw 36 INTs in season 39 in WL, so if I was going to make a rage-filled super bias anti-INT post with sweet statistics, that would have been a more fitting time tbh.

I honestly didn't even notice we had 34 INTs last season as it didn't feel like that many. 17 came in a bad bad 3-game stretch midseason, but the other 13 games having 17 INTs isn't something I had much of a problem with considering how much we slung the rock and I was pretty happy overall with the #4 offense in our conference.

Let's get back to this plz

http://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/game.pl?game_id=2331653

Originally posted by Chysil
it's a classic example of not preparing for what the player will do in games. (not blaming Bort, it's pretty much impossible to imagine some things).

Back when they took it out of beta, there wasn't as many of the pure INT builds being made. So they sim was built around making a decent amount of ints possible with coverage dots...

now that you are seeing 3rd+ capped catching + 2x int % dots coming out and being very common, they are intercepting at a greater rate than the coverage dots (as they should). However the base chance for int is probably a bit too high


the reverse happened with fumbles, there were a lot of HH dots built, but a lot of the HBs were elusive HBs (about half)... Now you have the vast majority of HBs being pHBs (or at least, the ones that get most of the runs). So basically the sim was built for HBs without as much strength and carrying.

honestly a lot of the interactions should probably be looked at every 5 seasons or so... because good gamers are good at finding out what is the best and using the hell out of it... it's why you see things like MMORPGs having patches and updates every few months, because they have to keep making small tweaks


There were teams with 60+ catching and 2x Int% gear on the server. The goal of the last attempt through the server was to get players to do things. Interception builds can intercept the ball? weird concept I know. OC's just can't accept that you can't fling the ball 50 times deep into coverage anymore. Which is pretty lol.

Originally posted by bhall43
Let's get back to this plz

http://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/game.pl?game_id=2331653

Not sure what season that is from, but 1 game tearing up my team's pass defense, does not mean that the cold hard numbers/facts are refuted.

Originally posted by bhall43

There were teams with 60+ catching and 2x Int% gear on the server. The goal of the last attempt through the server was to get players to do things. Interception builds can intercept the ball? weird concept I know. OC's just can't accept that you can't fling the ball 50 times deep into coverage anymore. Which is pretty lol.

Should be 70 or 80 catching tbph. Why should a guy with 60 catching get 10 INTs/season against competitive builds? Also I doubt the test server had whole well designed teams with top GLB defensive schemes installed.

Originally posted by WiSeIVIaN
Should be 70 or 80 catching tbph. Why should a guy with 60 catching get 10 INTs/season against competitive builds? Also I doubt the test server had whole well designed teams with top GLB defensive schemes installed.

believe we had 70s but it was awhile ago. as for well designed teams - they were, with bhall and i's team custom built. as for schemes ... well i was a little surprised when i first got on there and saw many of my DPC already installed without my consent but whatevs