Im about to get my first S* and I want to make a coverage/run stuffer CB or SS. I tried a few builds and both look pretty solid. My question is which would be more effective if they had pretty much the same stats? (looking like 70+ tt, 70+ tack pwr, 75+ in man or zone, 70+ sprint, 60+ quickness)
Forum > FAQ's, Player Guides and Game Help > Build Help and Discussion > Which S* is more useful, CB or SS
Myrik_Justiciar
offline
offline
Generally S*SS is in more demand for teams and I like the SS for his usefulness when I DC, personally.
Aeir
offline
offline
I would think it'd be easier to put a S* SS in a position to be more effective, more often.
Galactic Empire
offline
offline
S* CBs are so damn expensive plus they are only useful on half of the field.
MileHighShoes
offline
offline
The SS is a lot more useful. They're typically in every play of the game, as they are usually the only SS on the roster as a S*. Plus they are cheaper and allow for more versatility against the run than a CB will.
Most teams are looking for a S*SS, while a lot less are looking for a S*CB. However a S*CB can have a meaningful impact on a team, but thats usually on a D focused more on depth and specialization that can alternate who plays in each game.
Most teams are looking for a S*SS, while a lot less are looking for a S*CB. However a S*CB can have a meaningful impact on a team, but thats usually on a D focused more on depth and specialization that can alternate who plays in each game.
FairForever
offline
offline
Usually SS - but only if you intend on running Cover 0/Cover 1. Salty Runback, one of the best teams in J-Man, almost exclusively runs Cover 2, so they don't need a S* SS: http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/team/398
Reppotimus
offline
offline
On a somewhat related note, what is the minimum tackling tech, stamina, and toughness you would want on a S* SS? And if the SS were playing in zone D, does he need coverage tech? Thanks for the help guys!
Myrik_Justiciar
offline
offline
Originally posted by Reppotimus
On a somewhat related note, what is the minimum tackling tech, stamina, and toughness you would want on a S* SS? And if the SS were playing in zone D, does he need coverage tech? Thanks for the help guys!
I would personally say 50 is the bare minimum in everything but stamina which should be 60.
On a somewhat related note, what is the minimum tackling tech, stamina, and toughness you would want on a S* SS? And if the SS were playing in zone D, does he need coverage tech? Thanks for the help guys!
I would personally say 50 is the bare minimum in everything but stamina which should be 60.
Galactic Empire
offline
offline
Originally posted by Reppotimus
On a somewhat related note, what is the minimum tackling tech, stamina, and toughness you would want on a S* SS? And if the SS were playing in zone D, does he need coverage tech? Thanks for the help guys!
Yes to zone question.
On a somewhat related note, what is the minimum tackling tech, stamina, and toughness you would want on a S* SS? And if the SS were playing in zone D, does he need coverage tech? Thanks for the help guys!
Yes to zone question.
Reppotimus
offline
offline
Tackling wise for end-build I was thinking of having 90+ power tackle, 70+ tacktech, 80+ strip, 60+ grip. Does anyone feel like there's too much committed to any one of them? If so, what could I cut back on to put into something like intercepting?
MileHighShoes
offline
offline
Originally posted by Reppotimus
Tackling wise for end-build I was thinking of having 90+ power tackle, 70+ tacktech, 80+ strip, 60+ grip. Does anyone feel like there's too much committed to any one of them? If so, what could I cut back on to put into something like intercepting?
Yes, cut back on strip. I wouldn't invest in it at all personally. Just focus on getting fumbles from power tackling which can net you 10+ a season with no investment in strip. With all that power tackling you'll be getting a lot of sticks anyways. You could pump intercepting, but it gets expensive, and there isn't much return on investment unless you can get intercepting above 60, and even then it's still spotty. I would prefer if the difference went into physical skills like quickness, footwork, or coverage tech, etc.
I'm not saying strip tech doesn't do anything, you can invest in it and it can at times cause forced fumbles, but it does it much less often than power tackling, and IMO costs too much while only offering an additional 1-3 fumbles a season at vet.
Tackling wise for end-build I was thinking of having 90+ power tackle, 70+ tacktech, 80+ strip, 60+ grip. Does anyone feel like there's too much committed to any one of them? If so, what could I cut back on to put into something like intercepting?
Yes, cut back on strip. I wouldn't invest in it at all personally. Just focus on getting fumbles from power tackling which can net you 10+ a season with no investment in strip. With all that power tackling you'll be getting a lot of sticks anyways. You could pump intercepting, but it gets expensive, and there isn't much return on investment unless you can get intercepting above 60, and even then it's still spotty. I would prefer if the difference went into physical skills like quickness, footwork, or coverage tech, etc.
I'm not saying strip tech doesn't do anything, you can invest in it and it can at times cause forced fumbles, but it does it much less often than power tackling, and IMO costs too much while only offering an additional 1-3 fumbles a season at vet.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
