Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Mysterio
Rate of upfield turn is not the same thing as tendency to cut inside due to an outside defender.

Rate of upfield turn is not the same thing as tendency to turn upfield due to an outside defender?

Originally posted by Cuivienen
Rate of upfield turn is not the same thing as tendency to turn upfield due to an outside defender?

No, rate of upfield turn only determines the angle he turns, not the initial choice to turn in the first place. I was hoping for a tactic to set how often the ballcarrier cuts the route upfield early, not tactics for how sharp of an angle he takes.

Damn...the 2 games I played after the change are the best I've played all off season. 397 and 325 yards against some good teams.

http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/game/199285

http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/game/199283

Originally posted by Mysterio
No, rate of upfield turn only determines the angle he turns, not the initial choice to turn in the first place. I was hoping for a tactic to set how often the ballcarrier cuts the route upfield early, not tactics for how sharp of an angle he takes.

Yes - having the option is still ideal because on some plays (most notably PS HB Sweep) the decision-making by the HB is still awful. From my small sample size test the other outside runs were much improved (only minor instances of speed loss due to indecisiveness)

Originally posted by FairForever
I can say it now since they've fixed the problem - before the fix tonight I was just planning on running pure Middle Overload vs every pure running team.

I just destroyed Middle Overload in this game:

http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/game/199285

Check out all that open green. Too bad my HBs are slow. He is set to elusive. If he was set to power, he would have cut inside the WR and probably scored a TD.

http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/199285/2933737

Originally posted by Galactic Empire
Damn...the 2 games I played after the change are the best I've played all off season. 397 and 325 yards against some good teams.

http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/game/199285

http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/game/199283

most of the yards you got against Omaha was against defenses you won't see all season.

Originally posted by bhall43
most of the yards you got against Omaha was against defenses you won't see all season.

Yeah and before the fix, those defenses would have shut me down.

The running right now is for sure a lot different than it was but we'll have to see what happens.

Perfect world: it makes the game more balanced. Right now it seems like 0-5 yard gains on outside runs are the norm. Don't see too many home runs because of the inside cutting. At the same time you see less TFL because they run closer to the LOS. Needs more data to see though, who knows what people will come up with now with the new mechanics.

Originally posted by USC_Trojans
The same kicker never failed to make at least 1 field goal on 3+ attempts the rest of the season, fluke is fluke. Second clearly you dont understand anything, this isnt a pass offense our aim isn't to score as quick as possible and run up the score. GA is all about control, designed to eat up top and wear teams down. Anything over 21 points is exactly where i want ga which means 23 out of the 31 you listed met that which means you basically beat yourself in this arguement.

It's a good thing you guys only have a goal of 21 points on GA or you most likely would get fired from yet another team. Maybe this season with running be a little stronger your offense will actually be decent.

Originally posted by Parab00n
It's a good thing you guys only have a goal of 21 points on GA or you most likely would get fired from yet another team. Maybe this season with running be a little stronger your offense will actually be decent.

you do really know nothing, I expected at least a bit more from you. GA was designed with the intent of control, we would take a 14-0 slug fest where we control 40+ mins of possession over a 35-27 shootout where we only had 33 mins of possession. Football isnt a game of score x amount of points or you lose, its score more points than the other team. One way is to pile on the points yes but controlling the game and dictating the game is another. Though I guess for someone who hasnt been relevant since retiring his first team wouldnt understand that there is more than one way to win a football game.

how is this following roster even legal?

http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/roster/75

Originally posted by TDiddy8701
how is this following roster even legal?

http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/roster/75

It's the New England Patriots.....fuck the rules!

Originally posted by USC_Trojans
you do really know nothing, I expected at least a bit more from you. GA was designed with the intent of control, we would take a 14-0 slug fest where we control 40+ mins of possession over a 35-27 shootout where we only had 33 mins of possession. Football isnt a game of score x amount of points or you lose, its score more points than the other team. One way is to pile on the points yes but controlling the game and dictating the game is another. Though I guess for someone who hasnt been relevant since retiring his first team wouldnt understand that there is more than one way to win a football game.

My irrelevant team completely embarrassed you last season and if I'm not mistaken I owned half the players on the #1 team in the game. If that's not relevant, I guess no one is...

Originally posted by Parab00n
My irrelevant team completely embarrassed you last season and if I'm not mistaken I owned half the players on the #1 team in the game. If that's not relevant, I guess no one is...

Your team also got embarassed by GA a season before, basically your vet team got embarrassed by a pro team. In all homesty its sad how much you cling to a single win that happened early in the season after a large run nerf, i dont think youd be able to shut us out again, i know you wouldnt cause you ran the same defense in the DA game and it failed pretty hard. Also trying to say your relevant because you own players on a good team is the same as saying your a good football player cause you play on a good team. The reality is builds only contribute a small portion to a teams success, stark proved it many times over by staying a top 10 team with rather sub par builds by todays standards. Hell dan is proving it right now with him team, he doesnt boost at all yet his team is very successful (good builds in reality but technically bad cause of the sp difference). In reality there are also numerous agents who id ask about builds before you strictly cause they are better. Hell to bring stats to prove my point DA was 13th in total defense yards and 9th in total points allowed, so the half you own isnt even top 5 worthy.

Originally posted by USC_Trojans
Hell to bring stats to prove my point DA was 13th in total defense yards and 9th in total points allowed, so the half you own isnt even top 5 worthy.

USC, I'm not here to join Para in the bash fest, but your stat comment isn't really relevant. Other stats may be so I'd encourage you to look elsewhere.

Stobie's Power Ranker now tracks Yards and Point Differentials. To talk about Total Defensive Yards and Total Points Allowed is referencing incomplete stats.

DA was #1 in Yard Differrential for S11. The Power Ranker didn't update after the last Ladder Game, but with my quick look at the top teams and adding in the last game, I think my LZ Boys came in 2nd, moving up from 5th or so.

And DA was something like 2500-3000 yards ahead of me/everyone else.

The community needs to start looking at Differentials rather than Totals.

Stobie does compile Yards per Play data on Defenses and that's the next metric I believe the community should move to in evaluating Defenses. I look forward to what research/ thoughts you might bring to this discussion. Truly. (No sarcasm)