Warrior General Games

I getting sick and tired of this game being broken. I finally found a play I could use on defense very effectively against the run and pass vs 2 WR...Under Cover 3. After scrimming some games, there is a HUGE flaw in the CB coverage. Watch the entire drive below against the Double Back Out and Up plays:

http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/205111/496229

EVERY TIME when the ball is on the far side of the field, the CB covers the TE and leaves the WR WIDE FREAKING OPEN!!! Are you kidding me??? There is no other defender on that side of the field and he decides to just leave the WR to cover the TE??? Same damn concept with the Dime CB Blitz I run.

Now I cannot run this play without giving up huge passing gains.

I am seriously thinking about quitting. I cannot keep finding new plays only to find huge flaws in the mechanics of the game.

Try 4-3 Tampa 2

It works fine on this play because the ball is on the close hash mark. The CB plays the WR.

http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/205111/496307

There is no 4-3 Tampa 2. I am trying some 3-4.

Yup, the zone doesn't change field position, but the TE route does depending on which hash the offense is starting from. It's a big difference for sure. The TE will clip the outside zone from the short hash, and never touch it from the far hash. WR2 only steps into the zone when they turn upfield. The spend the first bit of that route running outside, not yet getting into the zone to draw attention.


A 3-4 cover 3 would work if you got 5 under zones across the field. So 3 shells, 5 under zones, 3 pass rushers. That play doesn't exist though. You could run 3-3-5 Cover 6 (there are two of them, pick the right one). It basically does this, but just takes the 5th shell on the weakside and throws it into the flat instead. Might have issues stopping the run though.

I wish there were a 3-4 Cover 3 play like that too.

3 down linemen rush. CBs and FS go into deep third shells. LBs and SS go into under zones. I'd even have the SS come get the under middle 5th too, so he would undercut most of the cool TE crossing type plays. That'd be a play I'd build a SS with Zone Shark for to build a defense around potentially.

Wow, that's bad. Zone's on some of these plays need some serious fixes. Didn't realize lining up on the hash marks were that big of a difference for zones.

I wish the Game of Zones ran this defense. lol

My suggestion would be to make the zone radius bigger but then you would probably just get more of the cover 2 problems of safety running inside, WR running out.

Originally posted by yello43
My suggestion would be to make the zone radius bigger but then you would probably just get more of the cover 2 problems of safety running inside, WR running out.

Why not just make the CB1 and CB2 zones extend further towards the sideline in Cover 3?

Why not abandon Zone and run Man???

Like 8999 other agents.

Originally posted by Absolut Zero
Why not just make the CB1 and CB2 zones extend further towards the sideline in Cover 3?

Well the problem with this play in particular is that the WR is lined up on a deep zone guy. He isn't supposed to cover him. If you just make him run to the sideline the guy will still be wide open.

http://i.imgur.com/jrTMEM7.png

I've been told I have the art skills of a god.

Edit: That guy with the under cover on the WR2 is the SS if that clears up what I meant in my original comment.

Wow I could have further exploited that defense by running the ball on the play before to set the play up on the correct hash mark. I had just thrown an all pass O into that scrim just to see it against your zones, kind of caught the scrim in between other projects.

Theres a word for defenses where the players in coverage specifically pick up their assignments to prevent this sort of thing. What was that word? Hmmm.... MAN COVERAGE!

TE is the only player deep enough for the CB to cover.

SS is in a horrible position to cover sideline routes.

Not sure where the confusion is? Short out routes kill sky coverage.