Warrior General Games

Originally posted by jakedood
as quite often when in tight coverage they just let the receiver take it without contest

This was suppose to be fixed in the latest changes.

Originally posted by Galactic Empire
This was suppose to be fixed in the latest changes.

It still needs some adjusting.

Originally posted by McLovinCowboys
The numbers are close but passing game is nothing like nfl, its a false similarity, for several reasons:

1-Almost all passes (but screens) are 10 yds+, and doesn't matter the situation, AA proved that its worth to always try the first down on every single play, you don't need screens, short passes or running, if you have a 33% comp rate you always get the first down, so if pure passing or major passing teams have a 50%+ comp rate, the game is broken, how do you stop an offense 3 times if they pass 10+ yds plus? Specially since teams have no pass rush or blitzing?

2- You don't need to have a running game to stabilish the pass, vice-versa, but passing is way better, AA proved it, there is barelly no effect on the pass sim if you have a bad running game, a great running game, 0 running game, besides energy/morale.

3- Pass rushing is atrocious, blitzing or d-line pressure, if on the NFL a team passes 100% of the snaps, they wont win a single game, its simple as that, AA won almost every game.

4- Pass coverage is really bad, there are a lot of covered receivers that on the sim are actually open cause the defender doesn't close on him, and so many CIT, receivers don't get free using jukes or good routes, they get free cause the coverage is retarded, or due those improvisation hooks that the defenders don't turn back.

5- Other exemple that GLB is nothing like real football, here on very short (2 or less yards) situations, you should always run, on the NFL they pass like 90% of the time, unless its for inches, but they still will either run (not very high sucess, on GLB its virtually unstopable), do a qb sneak, a short play action or a SHOTGUN pass on a lot of plays, maybe on the majority.

And you can say, using the GoD vs GE80s, 120 passes, 28-25 game, with normal NFL numbers, but watching the sim its nothing like it, we just spam the same pass plays, but watching the sim is completelly different, here we just spam 5ish pass plays for 10-15 yard passes, catch and fall, and the pass coverage/pass rushing is very frustrating to watch.


The average yards per completion in the NFL is 11+ though. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2017/passing.htm

Both GLB2 & the NFL's yards/attempt and yards/completion are identical. Completions percentage are the same. Saying a 33% QB will be hard to stop from getting first downs is like saying a RB rushing for 3.4 ypc will be hard to stop, neither is the case. The probability of the QB getting a first down is 33% for the first set of downs, but declines after each 1st down significantly. Auto Pilot's CPU QB is throwing for 40%, an anemic 5.5 Y/A, and their offense is horrible despite using the same gameplan that AA did. AA's success had more to due with coaching/builds and teams not being built for an offense like that. By far, teams that feature a RB as the main offense do better than pass heavy teams season to season. I mean Derek Jeter is rushing for 10.9 ypc right now, and BB is #1. In the Top 10 there are only 2 teams that favor the pass over the run. The need to throw for a team that can have their HB mow down defenders all game long, isn't any greater than a heavy pass team's need to run. In the NFL you don't have 100 conditioning RBs who can get 30-40 power carries and not be winded. There's a ying & yang to the sim.

I agree that pass coverage could definitely be tweaked like defensive patching was, the deep pass change has defenders too loose on short/medium throws.

Originally posted by BoDiddley
The average yards per completion in the NFL is 11+ though. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2017/passing.htm

Both GLB2 & the NFL's yards/attempt and yards/completion are identical. Completions percentage are the same. Saying a 33% QB will be hard to stop from getting first downs is like saying a RB rushing for 3.4 ypc will be hard to stop, neither is the case. The probability of the QB getting a first down is 33% for the first set of downs, but declines after each 1st down significantly. Auto Pilot's CPU QB is throwing for 40%, an anemic 5.5 Y/A, and their offense is horrible despite using the same gameplan that AA did. AA's success had more to due with coaching/builds and teams not being built for an offense like that. By far, teams that feature a RB as the main offense do better than pass heavy teams season to season. I mean Derek Jeter is rushing for 10.9 ypc right now, and BB is #1. In the Top 10 there are only 2 teams that favor the pass over the run. The need to throw for a team that can have their HB mow down defenders all game long, isn't any greater than a heavy pass team's need to run. In the NFL you don't have 100 conditioning RBs who can get 30-40 power carries and not be winded. There's a ying & yang to the sim.

I agree that pass coverage could definitely be tweaked like defensive patching was, the deep pass change has defenders too loose on short/medium throws.

yes but in the NFL you can blitz those pass heavy teams with moderate success. you also dont have teams who throw 90x a game (especially from 4/5wr sets) but you do have teams that run 40x per game. i do agree that one single HB should not be able to have 40-50+ carries per game, the recent "snap count/conditioning" adjustment should have fixed that but didn't. until its changed of course teams, mine included, will exploit that to min/max salary cap.

the AA point is a very silly one for obvious reasons, you are comparing superstars to CPUs and not factoring in the state of the game last season compared to this season. their gameplan was set to exploit the meta last season, so of course after the changes, running the same gameplan with no adjustments and full team of CPUs isnt going to provide any form of good results or even worth comparing as an example.

the point of my arguments over diversity bonus/diversity penalty is exactly what i believe you are trying to get at, there needs to be a ying/yang or a rock to the scissors, so i mostly agree with you. right now for 90% of teams its just spam 5-7 passing plays 10-20x each per game and run off-tackle on 3rd and 2, rinse repeat.

i am fine with changes that effect (affect?) my team, other teams, all teams - i just want the game after 30 something seasons to stop providing the ability for coaches to exploit certain flaws that forces an entire meta to shift to either counter or copy-paste. if there was just a penalty for running the same plays over and over it would fix all the issues you listed with the run game, most of the issues mclovin listed with the passing game, as well as all the issues i listed in my suggestion post in regards to past exploits.

if you cant spam exploitable plays without a penalty, it forces adjustments per game, any adjustments come with human error, adjustments and human error can be countered or game planned against. end of story

Originally posted by Sov.
yes but in the NFL you can blitz those pass heavy teams with moderate success. you also dont have teams who throw 90x a game (especially from 4/5wr sets) but you do have teams that run 40x per game. i do agree that one single HB should not be able to have 40-50+ carries per game, the recent "snap count/conditioning" adjustment should have fixed that but didn't. until its changed of course teams, mine included, will exploit that to min/max salary cap.

the AA point is a very silly one for obvious reasons, you are comparing superstars to CPUs and not factoring in the state of the game last season compared to this season. their gameplan was set to exploit the meta last season, so of course after the changes, running the same gameplan with no adjustments and full team of CPUs isnt going to provide any form of good results or even worth comparing as an example.

the point of my arguments over diversity bonus/diversity penalty is exactly what i believe you are trying to get at, there needs to be a ying/yang or a rock to the scissors, so i mostly agree with you. right now for 90% of teams its just spam 5-7 passing plays 10-20x each per game and run off-tackle on 3rd and 2, rinse repeat.

i am fine with changes that effect (affect?) my team, other teams, all teams - i just want the game after 30 something seasons to stop providing the ability for coaches to exploit certain flaws that forces an entire meta to shift to either counter or copy-paste. if there was just a penalty for running the same plays over and over it would fix all the issues you listed with the run game, most of the issues mclovin listed with the passing game, as well as all the issues i listed in my suggestion post in regards to past exploits.

if you cant spam exploitable plays without a penalty, it forces adjustments per game, any adjustments come with human error, adjustments and human error can be countered or game planned against. end of story




My experience as a active play caller for the last three seasons- There are only a handful of plays that actually have a decent level of success to them...so now if you penalize me for using them as my priorities you are just pushing me to use plays that don't work in the game.

Originally posted by Bretto007

My experience as a active play caller for the last three seasons- There are only a handful of plays that actually have a decent level of success to them...so now if you penalize me for using them as my priorities you are just pushing me to use plays that don't work in the game.



to be honest (and don't take this the wrong way) your experience is a limited one and many of the reasons other plays might not work may be due to player build issues, when you are firing those specific plays, which primary receiver is set, how you are incorporating them into your playbook, or tactics settings. this is a game that takes time to learn the intricacies and nuances and even little oversights here and there can make certain plays seem unusable (example: big I te crosses on 3rd and 12, etc)

yes, there are plays like TE post which will always be a staple in almost every passing playbook, but there is at a minimum of probably 30+ high success ~10ypc passing plays, tons of good short yardage passing plays, and countless amounts of good running plays which are all available to choose from for any offensive playbook.

edit: i would be happy to help you more with specific info if you want to send a PM

So all I can say is that I went the Goal Line Scout route and studied other teams. Of the top of my head there are probably 10 Offensive plays that really work well and get used over and over by the best teams.

Originally posted by Sov.
yes but in the NFL you can blitz those pass heavy teams with moderate success. you also dont have teams who throw 90x a game (especially from 4/5wr sets) but you do have teams that run 40x per game. i do agree that one single HB should not be able to have 40-50+ carries per game, the recent "snap count/conditioning" adjustment should have fixed that but didn't. until its changed of course teams, mine included, will exploit that to min/max salary cap.


There have been great heavy pass teams like the Warren Moon Oilers & Dan Marino Dolphins. Granted they didn't throw 90 times a game lol, but this is just a game afterall. Within GLB2 there's already a higher degree of difficulty for heavy pass/run teams since defenses can really focus on one aspect. I felt the big advantage AA had over defenses were high-quality speed WRs in leagues where most defenses were thin in the secondary. A hazard of S* rich teams with 1 SS/FS and maybe 2-3 cover CBs is that they suffer morale/energy loss over the course of a game against 4WR/5wr sets. The conditioning of AA's WRs also allowed them to keep up the pressure when defenders tired out.

This was actually a topic when 8+ S* player teams started becoming the norm way back when. Against 2TE/2WR/3wr sets its easy to cover, but once you get to 4wr/5wr it's problematic. Dream only played AA once before last season, and the strategy of playing the deep pass worked well. We also had lots of depth in the secondary to cover all game long. https://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/game/462771

Originally posted by

the point of my arguments over diversity bonus/diversity penalty is exactly what i believe you are trying to get at, there needs to be a ying/yang or a rock to the scissors, so i mostly agree with you. right now for 90% of teams its just spam 5-7 passing plays 10-20x each per game and run off-tackle on 3rd and 2, rinse repeat.

Too be fair, AA actually ran 15+ pass plays against BB last year. But you're right about the need for more plays on both offense and defense. 100% with you on that. Particularly more blitzing plays, and better short pass plays.

As far as a diversity penalty goes...from using scout over the seasons I would say there's less diversity among running plays than passing plays. So the end result will only make passing teams better. Outside rushing(only a few solid plays you can depend on) would suffer the worst.

Originally posted by

i am fine with changes that effect (affect?) my team, other teams, all teams - i just want the game after 30 something seasons to stop providing the ability for coaches to exploit certain flaws that forces an entire meta to shift to either counter or copy-paste. if there was just a penalty for running the same plays over and over it would fix all the issues you listed with the run game, most of the issues mclovin listed with the passing game, as well as all the issues i listed in my suggestion post in regards to past exploits.

if you cant spam exploitable plays without a penalty, it forces adjustments per game, any adjustments come with human error, adjustments and human error can be countered or game planned against. end of story

I always prefer teams that spam plays versus those that actually mix it up. Mainly because it's easier to stop those select plays, as opposed to a diverse gameplan. But I do see your point. The ultimate question for any penalty is what it would consist of. Are we boosting awareness for the defense....and will that really do much to stop play spam? Adding coverage tactics similar to the new pathing additions might be a better way to go. Fixing some of the CB mechanics bhall pointed out, would help too.

increase the play minimum per package if you want to force people to use more plays.

Originally posted by bhall43
increase the play minimum per package if you want to force people to use more plays.

I mean, that's an easy change if that's what people want.

I never did it because people spent many seasons asking to lower the play minimum even further.

i dont think raising the minimum plays per package would work to fix the issues because essentially it would be more a hit to balanced teams who need to run key plays in specific areas (outside runs, inside runs, short yard runs) more than to passing teams who can just toss in plays like SG TE drive at 1 priority, etc, to fill the package up to the minimum.

Originally posted by BoDiddley
The ultimate question for any penalty is what it would consist of. Are we boosting awareness for the defense....and will that really do much to stop play spam?

according to CD the diversity bonus is the single biggest boost offered in the sim, so I would think it would be the exact same in reverse. the issue is we do not know exactly what triggers the diversity bonus (different types of plays such as a run or a pass? different formations? a different play than the one used before? how many times can the same plays be ran before the diversity boost doesnt apply? what exactly does the diversity bonus boost specifically? etc etc etc)

the way i envision the penalty would be to defensive awareness/pursuit. playaction would be a good example. apparently the more inside runs that are called (in general or just for the formation the PA play is out of?) the better the QB will do to "sell" the PA pass and the better result. as we saw recently in the GE vs GOD game that wasn't really the case, but the logic behind it is solid.

my thought process would be that there would be a stacking multiplier of 5%/10%/15%/20%/25% boost to something along the lines of man/zone awa and pursuit. the more one specific play is fired in short order, the stacks increase. lets say stacks increase each time the initial play is called until 5 other plays (any play other than the exact same play - but no multiples of the same one play) are called, at which time the penalty is reset to 0%.

TE post, SB TE drive, TE post (5%), SG TE drive, TE post (10%), WR hook, TE post (15%), SB TE drive (5%), TE post (20%), SG TE drive (5%), etc.
TE post, run play, different run play, SB TE drive, SG TE drive, WR hook, TE post (0% - 5 different plays ran to reset multiplier)

would be the same for any play in the playbook so that no play could be called over and over in short succession without a boost to the defenses awareness and pursuit. wont 100% guarantee bad results for the offense, but is a significant penalty for not diversifying the playbook and trying to spam the same plays regardless of what plays those are. you could essentially still run the same 5-7 pass plays, but not without mixing in runs or something else to mix up the playbook a bit.

Originally posted by Sov.
according to CD the diversity bonus is the single biggest boost offered in the sim, so I would think it would be the exact same in reverse. the issue is we do not know exactly what triggers the diversity bonus (different types of plays such as a run or a pass? different formations? a different play than the one used before? how many times can the same plays be ran before the diversity boost doesnt apply? what exactly does the diversity bonus boost specifically? etc etc etc)

the way i envision the penalty would be to defensive awareness/pursuit. playaction would be a good example. apparently the more inside runs that are called (in general or just for the formation the PA play is out of?) the better the QB will do to "sell" the PA pass and the better result. as we saw recently in the GE vs GOD game that wasn't really the case, but the logic behind it is solid.

my thought process would be that there would be a stacking multiplier of 5%/10%/15%/20%/25% boost to something along the lines of man/zone awa and pursuit. the more one specific play is fired in short order, the stacks increase. lets say stacks increase each time the initial play is called until 5 other plays (any play other than the exact same play - but no multiples of the same one play) are called, at which time the penalty is reset to 0%.

TE post, SB TE drive, TE post (5%), SG TE drive, TE post (10%), WR hook, TE post (15%), SB TE drive (5%), TE post (20%), SG TE drive (5%), etc.
TE post, run play, different run play, SB TE drive, SG TE drive, WR hook, TE post (0% - 5 different plays ran to reset multiplier)

would be the same for any play in the playbook so that no play could be called over and over in short succession without a boost to the defenses awareness and pursuit. wont 100% guarantee bad results for the offense, but is a significant penalty for not diversifying the playbook and trying to spam the same plays regardless of what plays those are. you could essentially still run the same 5-7 pass plays, but not without mixing in runs or something else to mix up the playbook a bit.


Hmmm, that's a really solid method if possible. Would key on spam plays, and is pretty realistic too.

Only real question is how much on-field impact would higher awareness actually have. I tend to guess that "player knowledge" gives a boost to awareness under the same premise of stopping spam plays...and we still really don't know how much effect knowledge delivers. We've seen the dramatic effect something like balance can have last season, and how a slight adjustment to deep passing this past off-season can make short/med passing more efficient. Defensive positioning is still king, IMO. Pathing got fixed with great results, so if we could set coverage positioning from tight to loose, I think it would go a long way.

Originally posted by BoDiddley

Hmmm, that's a really solid method if possible. Would key on spam plays, and is pretty realistic too.

Only real question is how much on-field impact would higher awareness actually have. I tend to guess that "player knowledge" gives a boost to awareness under the same premise of stopping spam plays...and we still really don't know how much effect knowledge delivers. We've seen the dramatic effect something like balance can have last season, and how a slight adjustment to deep passing this past off-season can make short/med passing more efficient. Defensive positioning is still king, IMO. Pathing got fixed with great results, so if we could set coverage positioning from tight to loose, I think it would go a long way.

we dont really know exactly how diversity bonus works, how player knowledge works, or how alot of specific things work - but it cant hurt to add something that would penalize something that has greatly affected the meta each few seasons, the ability to spam a few plays over and over with no penalty. it would be an equal change across the board and you would still have the option of spamming the same few plays if you wanted, just with a stacking penalty up to 25% which is minimal and may not even make a huge difference, but it could possibly lead to great results and is worth looking into.

i am a fan of the coverage adjustments suggested by a few people. we have them for run pathing, why not for coverage? i think this is a suggestion that could only improve the current sim.

My understanding is that it is just a bonus, meaning there are no penalties. A team wouldn't be penalized for running the same play over and over but would not get any kind of bonus either. Maybe I missed something.