User Pass
Home Sign Up Contact Log In
Forum > Suggestions > Choosing the position of the WR for each play
Page:
 
budokee
offline
Link
 
I know we got like 5 WR depht chart positions.
But they all must go exactly at the same way in all the game.

So i was thinking, at the packages, we could add Specific WR1,2,3,4,5 Depht Chart.

Why ?

Because if i could choose which WR i would like to play in my WR1 spot in one play, and change it totally for the next play, it would level up the difficulty for OC and DCs on the game. And in my opinion, the difficulties goes together with the pleasure to play


I tried to find any Suggestion at the forum like this one, but i didnt
So, what you guys think bout it ?


ps: im brazilian, so im sure i wrote some english mistakes around the post
 
.spider.
Lead Mod
offline
Link
 
I dont know why the suggestions forum still exists....they are done making changes to the game. Just FYI
 
budokee
offline
Link
 
yeah, i know... but at least im trying haha
 
jdpbernal
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by budokee
I know we got like 5 WR depht chart positions.
But they all must go exactly at the same way in all the game.

So i was thinking, at the packages, we could add Specific WR1,2,3,4,5 Depht Chart.

Why ?

Because if i could choose which WR i would like to play in my WR1 spot in one play, and change it totally for the next play, it would level up the difficulty for OC and DCs on the game. And in my opinion, the difficulties goes together with the pleasure to play


I tried to find any Suggestion at the forum like this one, but i didnt
So, what you guys think bout it ?


ps: im brazilian, so im sure i wrote some english mistakes around the post


Good idea! But its NGTH
 
madmal
Prez SWO
online
Link
 
Originally posted by .spider.
I dont know why the suggestions forum still exists....they are done making changes to the game. Just FYI


 
budokee
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by jdpbernal
Good idea! But its NGTH


 
darncat
offline
Link
 
You'd need to implement custom CB positions as well if you did this-
for teams would be putting BTEs in at WR just to block on outside run plays,
and it'd open up a whole new can of cat out of the bag. pretty sure i
remember them saying something to this affect when this was suggested BITD
it'd be cool as i remember a couple of NFL teams have tried this gimmick
but if it was NGTH then its surely NGTH now
 
jdpbernal
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by darncat
You'd need to implement custom CB positions as well if you did this-
for teams would be putting BTEs in at WR just to block on outside run plays,
and it'd open up a whole new can of cat out of the bag. pretty sure i
remember them saying something to this affect when this was suggested BITD
it'd be cool as i remember a couple of NFL teams have tried this gimmick
but if it was NGTH then its surely NGTH now


I see teams put BTEs at the WR slot for run plays.
 
budokee
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by darncat
You'd need to implement custom CB positions as well if you did this


why is that?

You can create the Defensive play the way you want to. you can place the CB2 on your left or your right side. You can tag the opponent players and use it on your AI.
A good DC could beat or be at the same page w/o new custom CB positions
 
jdpbernal
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by budokee
why is that?

You can create the Defensive play the way you want to. you can place the CB2 on your left or your right side. You can tag the opponent players and use it on your AI.
A good DC could beat or be at the same page w/o new custom CB positions


 
darncat
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by budokee
why is that?

You can create the Defensive play the way you want to. you can place the CB2 on your left or your right side. You can tag the opponent players and use it on your AI.
A good DC could beat or be at the same page w/o new custom CB positions


You're joking. you could put max strength players at WR custom spots
and there is NO WAY on the custom play creator to put a DL or LB covering them,
so your CBs would get CONSTANTLY pancaked on outside run plays,
YOU CAN'T TAG WRs(!!!) in the Playcalling AI so you'd be utterly defenseless against this
except for way too strong CBs who'd get burnt every passing play, without custom CB spots
in which to place them. This is an utterly horrible idea and it was stated in Q&A ages ago
WHEN CHANGES WERE STILL BEING MADE that these were some of the exact reasons
that this idea was NGTH in the first place.

I get that you want to make the game easier for you, but this idea was stated NGTH for good reason
and in any event there are NO future changes ever going to happen in the game regardless.
 
darncat
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by jdpbernal
I see teams put BTEs at the WR slot for run plays.


and then they have to RUN ROUTES on passing plays-
thus the trade-off. Plenty of teams use Power WRs or even BTEs or ST WRs
to help in the running game- but if you want to not be one-dimensional you need
A GOOD BUILD that can be effective blocking on the outside AND as a receiver.
Instead, you dream about ways you could get around the rules that are literally NGTH
and for good reason. Please just give this up.
 
budokee
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by darncat
You're joking. you could put max strength players at WR custom spots
and there is NO WAY on the custom play creator to put a DL or LB covering them,
so your CBs would get CONSTANTLY pancaked on outside run plays,
YOU CAN'T TAG WRs(!!!) in the Playcalling AI so you'd be utterly defenseless against this
except for way too strong CBs who'd get burnt every passing play, without custom CB spots
in which to place them. This is an utterly horrible idea and it was stated in Q&A ages ago
WHEN CHANGES WERE STILL BEING MADE that these were some of the exact reasons
that this idea was NGTH in the first place.

I get that you want to make the game easier for you, but this idea was stated NGTH for good reason
and in any event there are NO future changes ever going to happen in the game regardless.


i disagree a little
my DC is trying something new this time. he put the defense on 3-2-6, with CB that are stronger than faster, they might break OL blocks, while we got some speedster DB to protect the pass. Never saw this kind of defensive here in GLB, but i think its worthy the test. If it works (and i know it is a BIG "if") , the defensive could beat a tatic like u said

but i agree with you that it NGTH, and its sad
 
darncat
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by budokee
i disagree a little
my DC is trying something new this time. he put the defense on 3-2-6, with CB that are stronger than faster, they might break OL blocks, while we got some speedster DB to protect the pass. Never saw this kind of defensive here in GLB, but i think its worthy the test. If it works (and i know it is a BIG "if") , the defensive could beat a tatic like u said

but i agree with you that it NGTH, and its sad


But are you suggesting that everyone in GLB needs to create a whole new experimental defense
just to allow players to get over playing OTs at WR custom spots, because that is such a common
part of football, when:
there are no audibles
fake punts, FGs or onside kicks
flea flickers, laterals or trick plays of any kind
or even play action fakes-
but OTs playing WRs is so much more important and necessary that we literally should destroy the game for it

Frankly, were the tactics realistic, the defense would only know the offensive personnel
(and not the formation or position those players were lining up) when they come onto the field-
so the defense could only adjust personnel, until the offense lined up. Then the defense would
match up according to the defensive play call as best they can with where the players are lined up.
This is how offenses are able to create mismatches sometimes with TEs or RBs lining up as WRs for example.
However, this isn't real life. Where as usually GLB makes it too easy for the defense
(omnipotently knowing what the exact formation will be and even who will be lined up where in it when You call plays)
if you allowed custom WR spots and not custom CB spots, itd give a much, much worse advantage to the defense,
who can't react to custom spots in WR, and who couldn't, like in real life, adjust on the field when then see OTs line up at WR.
You would have to change so much in the game to make this workable, it was explicitly NGTH for those reasons.

I'm not sure why i'm defending Bort's decision (other than the fact that, barring major changes in the game,
its the absolute right decision) as its irrelevant! I'm simply trying to explain to that guy why it was decided
not to happen in the first place, and his response is showing some basic misunderstanding of how the AI works.
 
budokee
offline
Link
 
yeah, i got it, i think


so im changing my suggestion to add custom wr spots AND custom DB spots...

this would give only more mind thinking to the coords.




How we beat a team better than ours ? Making some stuff they wont be thinking we would be able to do =P
 
Page:
 


You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.