Warrior General Games

Originally posted by _OSIRIS_
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.

yes correct, my suggestion is since there is a diversity bonus there should also be a "lack of diversity" penalty added. i broke it all down here https://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/forum/thread/5286431?page=last#49677637

Originally posted by Corndog
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.

We could try, wouldn't hurt, if its bad just revert, right?

As i said in other thread, maybe lowering play frequency option to 3 or 4 instead of 5?

I really thing obligating people to choose more plays, even if some of them are bad, will help the game, cause you will need to gameplan and adapt.

This season i'm pretty much afk in gameplanning, for 1980s game, 6 minutes prior the game i changed manually without looking over scout (sorry jake), and GoDs is 13-1, we could have been 14-0, as i know BSB also was on automatic until playoffs.

Playcalling needs to be more important without complicating it.

Originally posted by Sov.
yes correct, my suggestion is since there is a diversity bonus there should also be a "lack of diversity" penalty added. i broke it all down here https://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/forum/thread/5286431?page=last#49677637

We need more incentives for diverse play calling (or penalties for lack of). In real football a defense obviously clues in when plays get spammed.

Originally posted by Corndog
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.

Personally I don't care. But I also don't think the amount of plays people run are that big of a deal. But it does seem that a lot of other people that play this game thing that it is a big deal how many plays you run. So shit...seems like a no brainer. Increase the minimum. I mean at the end of the day we will all find the best of that too. But I am in.

My only problem with that is that you better start pushing these running plays for the formations out. Unless you are trying to do away with rushing all together.

Originally posted by bhall43
My only problem with that is that you better start pushing these running plays for the formations out. Unless you are trying to do away with rushing all together.

Is this quote directed at the diversity penalty suggestion? Could have a point. I only run a handful of plays when running the ball, because they are the plays that work. If they do something like that maybe figure out how to make more plays work better at the same time. My team runs a balanced Offense, a little more pass than run, but our HB has done better this season than any other so far. Almost 200 yards a game, close to 6.5 yards per rush, and hasn’t had the fall down or stuck in the mud issues that were really bad after the balance change. He only has 57 balance not the 70+ Ive seen people say you need, but pretty high footwork. I dont think we have had a rain heavy or snow game yet, so still have to see that, but other than that he’s done pretty good so far.

I still think all we need is a little boost to deflection and coverage rolls, and we'd be swimming
I like the gameplanning as it is right now, as if you spam plays but get caught out, it can ruin the game for you, there is a risk to it as well for sure

I'd say on offense increase the minimum play count while upping frequency minimum to 2 instead of 1...

Fix pass coverage (coverage settings is a good idea like tight or loose) & interceptions again so everyone stops looking like Joe Montana and man coverage CB's can get picks again...

Fix blitzing at high lvls and more blitz packages...

Lastly, more plays (especially on defense).

And thanks for the responses C-Dog!

Originally posted by Corndog
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.

It's a double edged sword.

In some cases, it would prevent 5 play spam.

In other cases, it would force Balanced teams into running too many plays that aren't effective for their rosters. After all, there is a Diversity bonus and if it actually had an effect, people would already be running 40+ different plays per game. They don't today, yet could. When I tested running 30+ different plays, no noticeable improvement existed.

You don't need to change the playbook minimum; You need to increase the Diversity bonus.

Originally posted by Xars
It's a double edged sword.

In some cases, it would prevent 5 play spam.

In other cases, it would force Balanced teams into running too many plays that aren't effective for their rosters. After all, there is a Diversity bonus and if it actually had an effect, people would already be running 40+ different plays per game. They don't today, yet could. When I tested running 30+ different plays, no noticeable improvement existed.

You don't need to change the playbook minimum; You need to increase the Diversity bonus.


Yep. A spam penalty is a decent idea on the surface, though I still think teams that do that are easy to defend in the age of GLB Scout. Teams that don't spam I find are harder to gameplan for. Raising the minimum plays for a set will really hurt balanced teams though, and doesn't allow coaches to key in on defensive holes.

I agree with Xars and BoDiddley. Just add in a slight bump to the Diversity bonus if you are that concerned about it.

Although for the record I'm against tampering with it or changing the playbook minimums. If an Offense wants to spam plays- fine- it's your job as a defense to game plan for that and stop it.

Originally posted by jakedood

I like the gameplanning as it is right now, as if you spam plays but get caught out, it can ruin the game for you, there is a risk to it as well for sure

I partially agree, this was specially true on the outside rushing meta, like if a team went strong side 2 WR heavy and the defense used 4-3 cb blitz, or bi counter sweep left only against 5-2 2 base, but passing doesn't really counter plays, i tried a lot of specialized plays against AA, i watched replays, carefully placed the depth chart to have good matchups, the closest we got was 47-57, yeah we got nerfed by balance and the other season we only had 3 CBs, but still...

Increasing the effect of the diversity bonus is my vote