Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Mezirah
I wouldnt mess too much with long passing because short passing is too much of a gamble with the back peddling and high interception skill. Usually the deep ball is the scary gamble, but right now its short.

Most of the problems with deep passing is simply wrong coverage and the separation from the turns. As I continue with my coverage thread in bugs it appears that Corndog may just have to scrap the Heuristic coverages and go through and do it play by play manually so that everything makes sense. Even on plays where the biggest problem is that the TE is being doubled over a WR, some of the solo coverages generally don't make a whole lot of sense as they criss cross fields for no reason.

Originally posted by bhall43
Most of the problems with deep passing is simply wrong coverage and the separation from the turns. As I continue with my coverage thread in bugs it appears that Corndog may just have to scrap the Heuristic coverages and go through and do it play by play manually so that everything makes sense. Even on plays where the biggest problem is that the TE is being doubled over a WR, some of the solo coverages generally don't make a whole lot of sense as they criss cross fields for no reason.

Or allow DCs to choose the assignments for each play? Or is that opening a completely new can of worms?

Ya that's opening up a whole new world. You would need a DPC all together for zone's and blitz's. Offense would then need progressions. Would be going right into GLB1 with complexity all over again and this game currently is having a hard time with the simple things.

Originally posted by Galithor
This is a general issue above and beyond the coverage turns being discussed. There's definitely a big problem with the fact that it's almost always in your best interest to throw deeper than shorter because your completion % on shorter passes is not demonstrably better than on deeper passes. In many cases, shorter passes have considerably worse completion %.

eh, that is true, but the interceptions are out of hand on short/medium right now. It can cost you a season just throwing short too much.

I dunno if INT's are that out of hand. What short/medium routes are you talking about?

Originally posted by Mezirah
eh, that is true, but the interceptions are out of hand on short/medium right now. It can cost you a season just throwing short too much.

Uh...which of your QB's are you talking about?

MMA's QB has thrown 3 INT's all season.
Tampa's CME has thrown 2.
Tampa Drunk's QB has 2.
Sacramento's QB is the closest to being something akin to reality with 8, and that'd still be a phenom veteran season in real football.

The reality is that interceptions are way, way below what reality should be producing from rookie-journeyman type QB's.

Just to give you some kind of perspective, Peyton Manning threw 10 INT's out of 659 attempts. That was a really, really good season. Sacramento's QB has his 8 INT's out of 902 attempts which would be an amazing NFL season (just the 902 attempts would do that...).

The reality is that GLB2 QB's can throw into double coverage with little fear of being picked off. But that's a discussion for another day. First things first is to get defense to play correctly and see where we are with that.

How many CBs have really invested that heavily into int? I know a lot with 70+ deflecting but none with 50+ int.

Ton of guys with 50+ int.

Originally posted by bhall43
Ton of guys with 50+ int.

Where? I haven't seen any.

Originally posted by Parab00n
Where? I haven't seen any.

I have one. He has a whole 5 INT's this season. It's ridiculously underpowered, but again, that's a discussion for a different thread.

First things first is to get DB's actually able to cover their guy.

I've got a CB with the following:
Intercepting: 55
Deflecting: 66
Man Awareness: 74
Cover Tech: 76

So far this season hes had 152 targets, 67 receptions allowed (~44% completion rate), 2 pics, 30 passes deflected. Haven't bothered with Int on any other DB I've made, just not worth it.

Rather just go with power hitting and strip tech to get fumbles IMO, turnovers from running plays as well as passing plays.

Originally posted by bhall43
Corndog may just have to scrap the Heuristic coverages and go through and do it play by play manually so that everything makes sense.

Nope.

Originally posted by Xavori
I have one. He has a whole 5 INT's this season. It's ridiculously underpowered, but again, that's a discussion for a different thread.

First things first is to get DB's actually able to cover their guy.

So he's on pace for 6-8? 5 CBs with 7 INTS would be more than 1 per game. Toss in some safeties and LBs with INT builds, and it'd be a couple INTs per game.

Seems OK to me.

Originally posted by Parab00n
Where? I haven't seen any.

Was just assuming I guess as my seasoned guys have 45 and journeyman has 49 and they all were going hard until this footwork faze.

Originally posted by Aeir
I've got a CB with the following:
Intercepting: 55
Deflecting: 66
Man Awareness: 74
Cover Tech: 76

So far this season hes had 152 targets, 67 receptions allowed (~44% completion rate), 2 pics, 30 passes deflected. Haven't bothered with Int on any other DB I've made, just not worth it.

Rather just go with power hitting and strip tech to get fumbles IMO, turnovers from running plays as well as passing plays.

That doesn't really say anything however as none of those attributes tell us how often your CB is even in the vicinity to making a play let alone giving one up.