Warrior General Games

Originally posted by bhall43
My main difficulty is that every decent zone play is medium.

Every decent man blitz play is short. Most good outside run plays aren't really a good outside run play. Then there are some really solid coverage plays that are short/medium for reasons I can't really understand.

The people calling it easy are using about 4-5 plays in the book. That isn't interesting at all. That is actually really stupid.

This is exactly it. The tags generally make little to no sense. Most inside run defenses are terrible at stopping inside runs but are good for blitzing in long yardage. Short and medium plays look and act pretty much the same. If you blitz every down in one set you can not call any blitzes any where else. Run/Pass/Blitz/Inside/Outside/Upside Down it's real funky.

Originally posted by Xars
Totally agree in that Man Blitzes are overwhelmingly Pass Short and Zones are overwhelmingly Medium. That's what needs to be changed up. We need some new plays but we really need a better mix of distances across all formations.

I use a lot more than 4-5 plays throughout a season. But there are some games where I only use 4-5 plays. I don't think its stupid.

What's really happening is that most offenses are really easy to scout. It's their play calling mix that results in a DC only using a few plays to win the game,



Most offenses are really easy to scout because there isn't really a whole lot you can successfully use. The game moves way too slow for HB's and FB's to do anything of consistent success on pass plays so most of the various i form plays are useless for passing teams. All you are worried about when facing a passing team is holding the WR's and TE at bay. You care zero about anyone else. Some people even leave the FB or HB wide open if they can.

But ya I don't mind the current system as much as I mind how the tags are placed and how you are shoved into a box of small amount of plays you can viably use from game to game.

The play calling seems to have evolved into something really familiar:

http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r7/meatlove/DSCI0007.jpg

Originally posted by bhall43
But ya I don't mind the current system as much as I mind how the tags are placed and how you are shoved into a box of small amount of plays you can viably use from game to game.

I would be ok with a tag overhaul. I'm not a fan of the one size fits all AI, but if there was more freedom from the tags it would be a huge improvement. 28 plays in the 4-3 man Available Plays alone yet I have 13 total plays in my entire playbook just 11 are unique plays.

Originally posted by Majestic Gent
The play calling seems to have evolved into something really familiar:

http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r7/meatlove/DSCI0007.jpg

XD

I think too many DCs are coordinating from the playbook and not with the players. A simple plan is better but the staff needs to grow into working with each other. How can you ask players to build a certain way? Do you want DTs to be building pancake champions that can deflect passes or will you have them hold ground and break run blocks? What kind of MLB will you need to make those choices work? How can the DEs make the OLBs better? The real fight is won by growing the players into each other rather than stacking playmakers.

All you want is everyone to tackle, break blocks, and cause turnovers. Pretty damn simple.

Originally posted by CPatricoo68
I think too many DCs are coordinating from the playbook and not with the players. A simple plan is better but the staff needs to grow into working with each other. How can you ask players to build a certain way? Do you want DTs to be building pancake champions that can deflect passes or will you have them hold ground and break run blocks? What kind of MLB will you need to make those choices work? How can the DEs make the OLBs better? The real fight is won by growing the players into each other rather than stacking playmakers.

My players are fine. I don't have a problem with my shitty play calling, it is the lack of ability to even call them. I try to call plays for them but I keep ending up with this due to not being able to call more than two plays per set.
http://i.imgur.com/sbyb2jX.gif

That is the whole point of using a simple playbook. Small taps in different directions have big results.

Of course I get it. Half the playbook is rendered useless this way but we already saw the call for new plays. Im optimistic about the next offseason.

Originally posted by _OSIRIS_

http://i.imgur.com/sbyb2jX.gif



As an OC I approve this playbook. +1

Originally posted by TxSteve
my system has always been (no I'm not kidding):

- choose 2 plays for each formation (if needed - put one play at 5 priority and one play at 1 priority)
- leave tactics blank except for blitz %s
- hope your players make plays


I don't think it can get any simpler than that.

So by setting tactics this way the sim would just pick a play out of my book based on number of WRs and if a Blitz is rolled for? Would it still call zones if zone was set to zero?

Originally posted by Myrik_Justiciar
So by setting tactics this way the sim would just pick a play out of my book based on number of WRs and if a Blitz is rolled for? Would it still call zones if zone was set to zero?


As long as the only two plays in that section are zone plays, it'll pick between the two zones based on what you set for play frequency.

Originally posted by Absolut Zero

As long as the only two plays in that section are zone plays, it'll pick between the two zones based on what you set for play frequency.

So, say I have a base tactics set to 50/50 zone/blitz... it would have a 50% chance to call anything I put in that WR formation?

Originally posted by Myrik_Justiciar
So, say I have a base tactics set to 50/50 zone/blitz... it would have a 50% chance to call anything I put in that WR formation?

No...it's based on the plays in the formation and how they are tagged.