Warrior General Games

What do you guys think about it? Me, I'm glad they decided for a "stay of execution" of the entire thing.
I do wonder sometimes if the powers that be have lost touch with the user base. IMO, rule #1 in software development is do not take away existing functionality the user base likes, in order to "improve" things .
Been there, done that, got the breakout session wounds to prove it. lol

I was pretty upset when I first read they were getting rid of it. I'll hold off judgment until I see what kinds of changes will be made, but I think they were swinging a sledgehammer to kill a mosquito on this one.

as an OC I should love this, but I feel like the DPC was a great way to keep the games close and to stop certain plays that some defense's have trouble with. there were so many other options they could of used to stop the exploits in the dpc, and this was probably one of the worst ones,

If they do away with the creative options for the defense they are dooming the game......I see now that they are talking about just limiting the movement of some of the defense and I would have to see what the limitations are to comment on it specifically but overall the idea of limiting the defense will kill the game IMO. What they are really trying to do is make it so that the average person who puts forth little effort can compete with the ones who put forth hours of time coming up with defensive schemes to stop the explosive offenses. The complaining about defensive coordinators coming up with new schemes that have made it difficult for the offense is making them make radical decisions without thinking it out. Of all the serious players I know the reaction has been the same, if they go to those lengths and make changes that limit the ability of the defensive coordinators to make different defenses then I'm gone. What would be the use of playing, they might as well go to all casual leagues and have 65 to 62 games and everybody can say wow great game. They say that the defense can now run over load blitzes that are difficult to block....sounds like football to me. Quick passes, keeping in backs and TEs to block, sounds like the decisions coaches and coordinators make every week.

Originally posted by tautology


I agree with this.

D-line can have discrete set up positions, that makes sense.

You can have a whole second row of positions where you can assign players to blitz from pre-determined spots (making blitzing very regulated).

But a player who does not have a blitz assignment as either a primary or secondary fucntion ought to have very free movement...this allows all sorts of defenses that utilize zones, half-zones, and double coverage on certain spots.

Makes a ton of sense to me.... retains the ability for DCs to be creative and use non-traditional builds in interesting ways, and still provides plenty of ammunition to control "exploit" blitzing.

Originally posted by stockswami
They say that the defense can now run over load blitzes that are difficult to block....sounds like football to me. Quick passes, keeping in backs and TEs to block, sounds like the decisions coaches and coordinators make every week.

would agree totally IF an audible system was installed, and/or hot routes were installed.

Madden's got em, they cant be THAT hard to code, and they are INTEGRAL to the game of football.

someone in that thread also suggested allowing the dc to move the arrow of blitzers so they dont just blitz straight ahead. +1 to that.

I also think

-more o plays

-hot routes

-audibles , maybe even 1 audible each for both sides, meaning the defense gets to audible too, IF the O audibles AND MLB passes vision check.

honestly I'd rather the defense blitz at times. I think they really hurt the game with this new rule and hope they come to their senses, and this is coming from someone that rarely does defense instead comes from someone who works with offense.

Originally posted by Charlie Wooters
honestly I'd rather the defense blitz at times. I think they really hurt the game with this new rule and hope they come to their senses, and this is coming from someone that rarely does defense instead comes from someone who works with offense.

?... they arent taking away blitzes, just alignments, so exploit blitzes are harder to do. defenses can still bring the haus if so desired.

catch22s original announcement was revised, btw. DPC got a stay of execution.

yeah, i know they aren't taking away blitzes, but i feel like now DC's will not have the same success with not moving the players and therefore just double up everyone, or certain plays are going to work better now as you have more restrictions, really I feel like the defense should get to do whatever they want to do with the movement of their players, just my opinion.

Originally posted by crave681
someone in that thread also suggested allowing the dc to move the arrow of blitzers so they dont just blitz straight ahead. +1 to that.

I also think

-more o plays

-hot routes

-audibles , maybe even 1 audible each for both sides, meaning the defense gets to audible too, IF the O audibles AND MLB passes vision check.

I completely agree! More offensive flexibility will eliminate crazy unbalanced defensive schemes. Give the offense a counter to some of the blitzes and more audibles and prob solved.

Originally posted by sbudke1
I completely agree! More offensive flexibility will eliminate crazy unbalanced defensive schemes. Give the offense a counter to some of the blitzes and more audibles and prob solved.

I agree as well. I have always tried to get them to think about a OPC or offensive play creator where you can move every one around and change the formations a bit.

I don't think that we need an OPC for offensive coordinators, would just complicate things more, I think the defense needs it, but offense I think we just need a few more plays added, but NOT playaction or "trick" plays.

Audibles. Audibles! AUDIBLES!