Warrior General Games

yeah it usually dont take much scouting to determine when
the opp is using no pass D whatsoever...
yr QB could have thrown for a million TDs with proper scouting

To me, things worked as they were supposed to...the cb's were blitzing and the wr looked for a block after a few steps forward. Had the cb's not been blitzing, they would have been blocked as normal.
This is not likely a bug.

Originally posted by j_reimy
To me, things worked as they were supposed to...the cb's were blitzing and the wr looked for a block after a few steps forward. Had the cb's not been blitzing, they would have been blocked as normal.
This is not likely a bug.

So not being able to block a guy b/c he is blitzing makes it not a bug? That's stupid. Regardless of what the defender is doing, it's the WR's job to block him. It's not like the defender hit the gap well or was too quick to block...they just don't even try.

I understand if it's a failed vision check every once in awhile, but for them not to be able to block a guy b/c he's blitzing is definitely a bug.

Originally posted by Pwned IRL
Originally posted by Rage Kinard

On pretty much every running play QB or not the WR starts out going straight up field like he is running a route, and if CB is set to cover will start out trying to cover the WR. The amount of time he spends going straight up field varies, but almost every time the first 2-3 ticks the WR goes straight ahead.

Which is how the plays are drawn.

If the WR was drawn to immediately seek someone to block the straight line would be much shorter before the blocking symbol. It would look more like a T instead of a longer vertical line.

Example:

T

or

T
I
I
I

Look at the play again. Neither wr1 or wr3 are to go any further up the field than an OL on the diagram. By that logic, an OL would never block a rushing DL or blitzing LB until he's run up the field a few yards.

I think you're wrong on this.

Exactly ping.

You're telling me that the WR just shouldn't block the CB? the play clearly has him blocking him too...

I'm going to have to disagree with the first two guys on this. On the diagram, the end point for the "routes" of the WR's is the same place as the O-lineman, which leads me to believe WR3's blocking is meant to be immediate, and WR1's should start when he gets to the LOS. At that level, it would be a difficult block to make for the WR1, but the WR3 should have been all over him. Even if they can't make the block, it seems pretty obvious that they didn't try.

Needs Coordinator

Sweet

Looks like they were doing what they are supposed to do. I don't see this as a bug.

Marking for Admin review.

Receivers are doing what the play design tells them to do (which is to start running a route and then engage the defender). There is something to be said for having them engage the defender immediately rather then act as a decoy (by running a route), but that is a suggestion as the play is currently working as designed.

Closing but will leave this up for review for a couple of days before moving.