Warrior General Games

You guys should be campaigning for more Fullback run plays. Possibly even a FB counter?

Originally posted by Mysterio

FB's break less tackles than HB's even with equal power running/balance. The lack of a lead blocker gives lots of opportunity for gang tackles. Only useful for short yardage.

Not only that but since he's closer to the line he has less room to build momentum which I believe plays a factor in broken tackles for a power runner.

Originally posted by USC_Trojans
Not only that but since he's closer to the line he has less room to build momentum which I believe plays a factor in broken tackles for a power runner.

Then take Surge.

Originally posted by Absolut Zero
You guys should be campaigning for more Fullback run plays. Possibly even a FB counter?

I don't mind it how it is. I am working on a build concept right now with my next PUP test for a S* FB that can return kicks/run, lead block and catch.

Originally posted by DeeVee8
Which should be a good indication that high balance isn't the answer. I wonder what he would have looked like with 50 balance and 80+ conditioning? Stay tuned...

I do think balance plays a part.

Originally posted by Absolut Zero
You guys should be campaigning for more Fullback run plays. Possibly even a FB counter?

I cannot believe how few FB plays are in the Diamond formation. I mean, wasn't the whole point of Diamond to get 2 FBs on the field?

Originally posted by USC_Trojans
Not only that but since he's closer to the line he has less room to build momentum which I believe plays a factor in broken tackles for a power runner.

He gets plenty of momentum for the 2 plays I linked:

http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/292672/3741163
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/291631/3510057

Originally posted by Cuivienen
Then take Surge.

Duckbeard had gold surge lol didn't help

Originally posted by Cuivienen
Then take Surge.

Surge isolates you from your blockers, it works for mbp cause of how we use the runs.Originally posted by Galactic Empire
He gets plenty of momentum for the 2 plays I linked:

http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/292672/3741163
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/291631/3510057

Compare that to http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/290600/3283051 clearly there is a difference

Originally posted by USC_Trojans
Surge isolates you from your blockers, it works for mbp cause of how we use the runs.

Not really, no.

Hey now this is the kinda conversation I was looking for. Glad to see this thread has come alive.

Originally posted by Mysterio

FB's break less tackles than HB's even with equal power running/balance. The lack of a lead blocker gives lots of opportunity for gang tackles. Only useful for short yardage.

Originally posted by USC_Trojans
Not only that but since he's closer to the line he has less room to build momentum which I believe plays a factor in broken tackles for a power runner.

I appreciate your post Mysterio & USC, but I think you might be assuming that my rFB lined up as FB. The key is to get him in as HB. Once I got the depth chart trick settled and the conditioning imbalance of my 2 FBs to fall in line with it so my rFB became essentially the HB, then I was able to usually utilize the bFB for him. This only took only a few games and certainly by first star, when the rFB had so much conditioning that it worked. By season end my bFB got 1-8 carries/g I believe. Having my bFB get more carries early on meant I took more sprint for him early than I usually do for FB, but that worked too because my rFB was a speed guy and the bFB had to stay in front of him anyways. I could do this better probably next time.

One could lean heavy on pass plays early on to negate the bFB getting too many carries in the first couple games. Yet in rook passing sux, so I went with my rQB. I had planned on going rQB for 2/3rds of the season anyways, before springing the pass QB on an unsuspecting opponent. Happened to be BB and that worked well for us. (Not having to pay for a HB could help a team carry a 2 headed QB monster).

Originally posted by Absolut Zero
You guys should be campaigning for more Fullback run plays. Possibly even a FB counter?

I would like this. It would add more complexity and hence fun. As Detroit Leos as put it: more rock, paper, scissor match-up possibilities. But of course if my rFB is playing OOP HB then I have all the HB plays available.

So I am psyched that some of you guys are doing PUP rFBs, but a key is controlling depth chart and plays. I have a Pow rFB in parallel rook Dev Lg that I was considering switching in for TT, but of course he is being used in the FB position and isn't getting the carries.

Here are the 2 TT FB's links:

rFB
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/player/203754
(plan is to boost conditioning at least 2x)

bFB
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/player/203749

and here is my Pow rFB in Dev Lg build for what it is worth
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/player/203756
(the plan is to boost Conditioning 2x and balance 1x)

The depth chart surprise I had was that without a HB I assumed I would have the option of placing my rFB in as HB and have my bFB in as FB. Yet I couldn't put anyone in as HB. Maybe Devs could change this. So I ended up putting my rFB in as starting FB and set to infreq. I did also play more Singleback for certain games too. It definitely wasn't perfect, but I am still pleased with the results. My rFB avg 4.1 y/g which is ok for a rook when teams are suspecting that you lean run (over 80% run most of season) and when TT had the handicap of a poor OC (me).

You mean bFB in as starting FB?

Sorry if I was unclear. My depth chart at FB position is rFB starter and infreq substituted by bFB, no one in depth chart under HB position. This lead to the rFB getting most of the starts at HB actually and bFB getting most snaps at FB yet with each dot getting some snaps at the the opposite position too. Not very intuitive and understandably confusing. That is why it took me a game or 2 to figure what was best (and maybe someone else can find a better way).

I am sharing this to save someone some of the difficulties I had, if they chose to bag all those overrated HBs (LOL).

I don't see it working. There is already an especially large penalty for playing out of position, which seems even larger when you force a player into a position of higher flex value. My HB played QB once and it was awful. Couple that with the fact FB's don't break tackles as well as HB's even with equal levels of Power Running and you have saved a bit of salary at a huge skill cost