Warrior General Games

Originally posted by bhall43
Making long passes more difficult isn't a very good suggestion. If they are harder to catch, it isn't going to change much of the gameplay. Play calling doesn't change. If you get to the point it's harder than short passes to complete the passing game will be entirely shit.

The goal shouldn't be hey how can we make passing % under 25%. That's stupid. Let's give cbs better abilities for interceptions and continue to develop defensive plays that are usable for some of the better plays in the game.

When you just constantly nerf shit everyone loses.

I kinda agree on the long passes, it's more of a bad defender reaction to them than it is with catching it. I do think Shorter passes should be a little easier to catch, I may be wrong but it seems there are a lot more drops on very short passes than long ones.

Originally posted by bhall43
When you just constantly nerf shit everyone loses.

Nerfing one thing buffs everything else. It's all relative.

Most of my problem with short passes tends to be the fact that the wr always comes back for the ball and gains next to nothing. If the balance check was easier it would be great too. Generally you just get a lot of 3 or less yard diving and jump fall catches.

Originally posted by Parab00n
I kinda agree on the long passes, it's more of a bad defender reaction to them than it is with catching it. I do think Shorter passes should be a little easier to catch, I may be wrong but it seems there are a lot more drops on very short passes than long ones.

Shorter passes are MUCH harder to catch than longer ones. The Quick Hitter SA seems pretty damn useless too.

WR's on screen passes drop the ball way more than you'd think (I know Quick Hitter doesn't work with screens, that was just in general).

Originally posted by Corndog
Nerfing one thing buffs everything else. It's all relative.

Youve successful whipped the agent pool into a frenzy of anticipation. Wheres the beef?

Originally posted by Parab00n
I kinda agree on the long passes, it's more of a bad defender reaction to them than it is with catching it. I do think Shorter passes should be a little easier to catch, I may be wrong but it seems there are a lot more drops on very short passes than long ones.

I agree 100%, make short passes easier to catch so screens and dump offs are more viable at lower levels, and instead of making long passes harder to catch make pass defenders better: make it easier for them to stay with receiver and to swat balls, especially in double coverage.

Originally posted by Fumblerooski
I agree 100%, make short passes easier to catch so screens and dump offs are more viable at lower levels, and instead of making long passes harder to catch make pass defenders better: make it easier for them to stay with receiver and to swat balls, especially in double coverage.

If you do this then I want Route Elusiveness and Route Tech to be better at creating separation on the cut heavy routes

Originally posted by TehKyou
If you do this then I want Route Elusiveness and Route Tech to be better at creating separation on the cut heavy routes

Alternatively, RE and RT can be buffed for shorter routes. Make it a bonus the closer you are to the Line of Scrimmage.

Originally posted by Corndog
Nerfing one thing buffs everything else. It's all relative.

Corn dog sighting!

Originally posted by Corndog
Nerfing one thing buffs everything else. It's all relative.

I don't agree with this at all, the overall power of players is not relative, it's absolute. In GLB 2 players are just really poor at successfully executing football plays compared to their real life counterparts, they fail constantly at making reads, finding guys to block that are right in front of their face, and have a much higher chance to drop easy passes thrown their way than a football fan would expect to see.

Contrast that with sports games like NFL Blitz or NBA Jam where the players are almost super human and seemingly never fail on their own at football/basketball plays, it takes super human effort from the other team in response to slow them down.

I don't know enough about game design to say that one experience is fundamentally better than the other, but I suspect that it's a real downer to new agents to see their players constantly failing on the field, and it is a lot more fun for them to see their players succeed more often instead. GLB is a simulation and shouldn't have an arcade feel like the other games I mention above, but the pendulum may have swung too far in the opposite direction.

Originally posted by TehKyou
If you do this then I want Route Elusiveness and Route Tech to be better at creating separation on the cut heavy routes

This would be amazing too, it would open up an additional passing meta game that is much needed, it's very stale calling the same few plays over and over.

Originally posted by Corndog
Nerfing one thing buffs everything else. It's all relative.

Only to a degree.

If you nerf running, people move to passing and vice versa.

But if Running generates 2 yards per carry and Passing becomes a 33% comp% game for a YPA of 4 on YPC of 12, the game is going to suck.

So sometimes it's relative; other times it's absolute.

Originally posted by Galactic Empire
Corn dog sighting!

Bort posts the changes though.

Originally posted by Corndog
Nerfing one thing buffs everything else. It's all relative.

Nerfing something is nerfing something. I don't want to nerf passing by making quarterbacks shit. I want to buff coverage players built towards specific natures to do what they are supposed to do. If that inadvertently nerfs passing through interceptions, fine. But at least someone is doing something.

Originally posted by Xars
Only to a degree.

If you nerf running, people move to passing and vice versa.

But if Running generates 2 yards per carry and Passing becomes a 33% comp% game for a YPA of 4 on YPC of 12, the game is going to suck.

So sometimes it's relative; other times it's absolute.


Exactly.