Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Myrik_Justiciar
Lately me, Ph33p, and Ghanima were talking Zone in there... unless Xars snuck back in today while I was out.

so its a mildly safe place to speak about zone?

Originally posted by ellix
Admittedly I poked my head in for a few minutes just to look around again since I haven't bothered in probably 2 or 3 months. And its just Xars complaining about Zone still, so I don't feel like I'm missing much.

Started with responding to Myrik who posted a 4-4 Big Zone play to deal with 3WR TRIPS.

Heaven forbid someone should have a different viewpoint than think that you have to run a 1 CB/ 4 LB personnel formation against 3WR TRIPS.

There are no, and can never be, any good Zone plays against TRIPS that don't use 4 LBs!!!!!

I made the Baseball analogy to ellix.

You want to play a Baseball game but you want to use 9 First Basemen. What do you mean I need to play a SS? a 2nd Baseman? a Catcher? Don't you know that 1Bs generate more offense than SS, 2B, C?

It's just a computer game! It's not a Baseball computer game; it's a here's 9 players that generate stats game. The stats happen to be baseball stats and they happen to come from First Basemen. It's not a Baseball game - it's the 9 First Basemen game. Oh, you don't want to play the 9 First Basemen game? You want to play a Baseball game? Well just because the game owners called it a Baseball game there shouldn't be any expectation that it is a Baseball game. It's really the 9 First Baseman game.

I should be able to play any lineup I want and not only not have any penalties for players out of position, god dammit, I want bonuses!!!

Now do you all see how ridiculous you're being?

Why can't you, at least try, to match formation and personnel?

Originally posted by Xars

Heaven forbid someone should have a different viewpoint than think that you have to run a 1 CB/ 4 LB personnel formation against 3WR TRIPS.

There are no, and can never be, any good Zone plays against TRIPS that don't use 4 LBs!!!!!




We are working within the confines of the game, those 4 LB plays are the best Zone plays in GLB2 because of how strong zone LBs are in relation to CB/S/FS. Its not like when I play Madden I run 4-4 defense all day, I run what works best (usually nickel).

Originally posted by Myrik_Justiciar
We are working within the confines of the game, those 4 LB plays are the best Zone plays in GLB2 because of how strong zone LBs are in relation to CB/S/FS.

Ask for new plays. There's not a single post from you for new plays.

Yet you're the guy with his name on 3-4 Cover 3 Tiger. How did that happen?

You're also under some weird assumption that CBs should just be better at playing Zone than LBs. There is no real life equivalent to a team that plays 100% Zone. Just like there also is no real life equivalent to stat caps and being predisposed to having inflated SP costs for certain skills solely because of your role on a team. It is a game. It plays like a game. Stop trying to put it in a box because it makes your OCD feel better.

If CBs were better at playing Zone, people would care about your suggestion. They aren't, so its shouting into the void for a change no one plans to use.

Originally posted by Xars
Ask for new plays. There's not a single post from you for new plays.

Yet you're the guy with his name on 3-4 Cover 3 Tiger. How did that happen?



I did ask for about half dozen new plays, they got lost in the shuffle of all the debating. I would have made more but it looked like this wasn't the season it was going to happen.

And I came up with 3-4 Tiger Blitz when they had a design a play contest a long time ago and I won the defensive side of it.

Originally posted by ellix
You're also under some weird assumption that CBs should just be better at playing Zone than LBs.

Originally posted by ellix


If CBs were better at playing Zone, people would care about your suggestion. They aren't, so its shouting into the void for a change no one plans to use.


On the edge, and deep, they should be. If they aren't, then those are the changes you should be asking for. Why haven't you?

Where are your Suggestion posts?

Originally posted by Myrik_Justiciar

And I came up with 3-4 Tiger Blitz when they had a design a play contest a long time ago and I won the defensive side of it.

Yeah I know, that's why I referenced it. They add plays. They add new formations.


Originally posted by Myrik_Justiciar
I did ask for about half dozen new plays, they got lost in the shuffle of all the debating. I would have made more but it looked like this wasn't the season it was going to happen.


Post them in Suggestions. I post stuff on the main forums and cross post to Suggestions all the time.

Originally posted by Xars
Post them in Suggestions. I post stuff on the main forums and cross post to Suggestions all the time.




I'm working on a lot... been jotting now notes as I talk to other zone guys and look through the Playbook. We need a lot more Cover 3, prob some Cover 4 too, and some hard flat. A majority of the blitz plays are Cover 2 and that's a problem.

Boy this escalated

Originally posted by ellix
You're also under some weird assumption that CBs should just be better at playing Zone than LBs. There is no real life equivalent to a team that plays 100% Zone. Just like there also is no real life equivalent to stat caps and being predisposed to having inflated SP costs for certain skills solely because of your role on a team. It is a game. It plays like a game. Stop trying to put it in a box because it makes your OCD feel better.

If CBs were better at playing Zone, people would care about your suggestion. They aren't, so its shouting into the void for a change no one plans to use.

Plus, I would never put 3 CBs on the weak side of a zone against trips simply because you would be killing the most important reason people run a zone...to stop strong side tosses.

Originally posted by Cybertron
Plus, I would never put 3 CBs on the weak side of a zone against trips simply because you would be killing the most important reason people run a zone...to stop strong side tosses.

There is not other reason to run zone than to defend what I want. I got no way to defend weak side toss. And I want a choice. That's it. I know I will make some other holes - I will deal with that.

Originally posted by Cybertron
Plus, I would never put 3 CBs on the weak side of a zone against trips simply because you would be killing the most important reason people run a zone...to stop strong side tosses.

Right because no one else can cover the Strong side pitch....

Then you're asking to be lit up in the Passing game, which is precisely my point.

An Overload formation is the Offense's attempt to force the Defense to make a choice: Those choices come with risk.

You can protect against the Strong Side pitch and get lit up in the Passing game
OR
You can match the formation and be exposed to the Strong side pitch.

The problem with Zone today is that the people are trying to defend using plays that don't have anywhere near enough risk, when there clearly is for Man.

You don't get both. Man Defense doesn't get both. So how can you be all for "Game Balance" when you refuse to have the same risk/reward?

Say it everyone. Just say it.

"Xars is right."

Just give us our plays Give us more plays everywhere ! More ZONE, More long passes from any formation, more run plays! MOAR!

Originally posted by Xars
Started with responding to Myrik who posted a 4-4 Big Zone play to deal with 3WR TRIPS.

Heaven forbid someone should have a different viewpoint than think that you have to run a 1 CB/ 4 LB personnel formation against 3WR TRIPS.

There are no, and can never be, any good Zone plays against TRIPS that don't use 4 LBs!!!!!

I made the Baseball analogy to ellix.

You want to play a Baseball game but you want to use 9 First Basemen. What do you mean I need to play a SS? a 2nd Baseman? a Catcher? Don't you know that 1Bs generate more offense than SS, 2B, C?

It's just a computer game! It's not a Baseball computer game; it's a here's 9 players that generate stats game. The stats happen to be baseball stats and they happen to come from First Basemen. It's not a Baseball game - it's the 9 First Basemen game. Oh, you don't want to play the 9 First Basemen game? You want to play a Baseball game? Well just because the game owners called it a Baseball game there shouldn't be any expectation that it is a Baseball game. It's really the 9 First Baseman game.

I should be able to play any lineup I want and not only not have any penalties for players out of position, god dammit, I want bonuses!!!

Now do you all see how ridiculous you're being?

Why can't you, at least try, to match formation and personnel?


I think you should probably think outside the box a little bit. you're operating under the misconception that 4-4 Big is using 2 DE, 2 DT, 4 LB, 1 SS, 1 FS and 1 CB when in game its played more like 4 DL and 7 DB.

4-4 Big is getting looked at for trips simply because there isn't a CB positioned opposite side of the trips. 4-4 Big cover 3 has four Defenders in coverage on the trips side usually bracketing the pass on that side and 3 on the left side one generally covering the TE and two covering air for the most part. Once the HB breaches the line and proceeds upfield the LILB plays up leaving the TE free in the seam.

I suspect this is do to the weak side Deep Zone playing at the same depth as the strong side rather than playing more shallow on the non overloaded side. That's kinda the thing with zone right. coverage is pretty good for the first 30 ticks and then it falls apart.

Man does not have that problem coverage works a bit better throughout the play at least until a ball is thrown for some reason lol