This guys points out an exploit that could happen to you and you just start bitching? Damn...the GLB IQ level has lost some points.
Forum > Suggestions > a different exploit hit
mrvweegit
offline
offline
Originally posted by dmfa41
I'm for a multi-factorial, exponential decay function (similar to pharmacological dosing/excretion) of giving a bonus to the defense based on the offense's play selection.
So take strong I slam. +X (whatever value ends up being correct) is added to the "repeat-o-meter" for run, strong I, right, and HB slam. Each play, the bonus decreases by half. So, if the next play, they run a single back pitch play to the left, the defense only gets a +X relative bonus, but if they run the same play again they'd receive a +4X bonus since all four categories - run/pass, formation, direction, and play - match. So, given good play variety, the decay would occur enough so that it would hardly ever trigger, and if it did, the bonus would remain minimal.
This deserves some consideration. Excellent idea.
I'm for a multi-factorial, exponential decay function (similar to pharmacological dosing/excretion) of giving a bonus to the defense based on the offense's play selection.
So take strong I slam. +X (whatever value ends up being correct) is added to the "repeat-o-meter" for run, strong I, right, and HB slam. Each play, the bonus decreases by half. So, if the next play, they run a single back pitch play to the left, the defense only gets a +X relative bonus, but if they run the same play again they'd receive a +4X bonus since all four categories - run/pass, formation, direction, and play - match. So, given good play variety, the decay would occur enough so that it would hardly ever trigger, and if it did, the bonus would remain minimal.
This deserves some consideration. Excellent idea.
fallingmercury
offline
offline
Originally posted by mrvweegit
Originally posted by dmfa41
I'm for a multi-factorial, exponential decay function (similar to pharmacological dosing/excretion) of giving a bonus to the defense based on the offense's play selection.
So take strong I slam. +X (whatever value ends up being correct) is added to the "repeat-o-meter" for run, strong I, right, and HB slam. Each play, the bonus decreases by half. So, if the next play, they run a single back pitch play to the left, the defense only gets a +X relative bonus, but if they run the same play again they'd receive a +4X bonus since all four categories - run/pass, formation, direction, and play - match. So, given good play variety, the decay would occur enough so that it would hardly ever trigger, and if it did, the bonus would remain minimal.
This deserves some consideration. Excellent idea.
This isn't a bad suggestion at all. I recommend elevating it to Bort's attention.
By the way, where are the mods here? Want to know why these forums are a hostile, disrespectful place? It's because you mods allow people to get away with put downs, personal insults, and needless flames. You condone it and therefore you encourage it.
Originally posted by dmfa41
I'm for a multi-factorial, exponential decay function (similar to pharmacological dosing/excretion) of giving a bonus to the defense based on the offense's play selection.
So take strong I slam. +X (whatever value ends up being correct) is added to the "repeat-o-meter" for run, strong I, right, and HB slam. Each play, the bonus decreases by half. So, if the next play, they run a single back pitch play to the left, the defense only gets a +X relative bonus, but if they run the same play again they'd receive a +4X bonus since all four categories - run/pass, formation, direction, and play - match. So, given good play variety, the decay would occur enough so that it would hardly ever trigger, and if it did, the bonus would remain minimal.
This deserves some consideration. Excellent idea.
This isn't a bad suggestion at all. I recommend elevating it to Bort's attention.
By the way, where are the mods here? Want to know why these forums are a hostile, disrespectful place? It's because you mods allow people to get away with put downs, personal insults, and needless flames. You condone it and therefore you encourage it.
fallingmercury
offline
offline
Originally posted by kretchfoop
Best to just nerf the defense and call it a day.
Like so many other scenarios in this game, nerfing isn't the way to go. Better parity would address 75% of the problem.
I reported a bunch of level 1-13 slow build teams in AA and AAA before the season started. Admin sat on the support requests though instead of looking into the matter. When they finally got back to me they said, "oops, you're right they should have been demoted but now it's the new season so it's too late".
This all shows a lack of commitment to creating and maintaining parity in this game. Once Bort dedicates significant resources to getting similarly-talented teams to play each other on a more regular basis, we'll see issues like this become much less problematic.
Best to just nerf the defense and call it a day.
Like so many other scenarios in this game, nerfing isn't the way to go. Better parity would address 75% of the problem.
I reported a bunch of level 1-13 slow build teams in AA and AAA before the season started. Admin sat on the support requests though instead of looking into the matter. When they finally got back to me they said, "oops, you're right they should have been demoted but now it's the new season so it's too late".
This all shows a lack of commitment to creating and maintaining parity in this game. Once Bort dedicates significant resources to getting similarly-talented teams to play each other on a more regular basis, we'll see issues like this become much less problematic.
The Angry Beavers
offline
offline
ok, so to sum up this thread...
1. buckeyes is a big pansy that's complaining cause 'he cant gameplan for a game when the offense changes its strategy"
2. and "laser/lazer" team is horrible anyhow, so skip that speech.
3. boo hoo cry baby. step up and try to be a man, even if you are only 15.
the end.
1. buckeyes is a big pansy that's complaining cause 'he cant gameplan for a game when the offense changes its strategy"
2. and "laser/lazer" team is horrible anyhow, so skip that speech.
3. boo hoo cry baby. step up and try to be a man, even if you are only 15.
the end.
fallingmercury
offline
offline
Originally posted by The Angry Beavers
ok, so to sum up this thread...
1. buckeyes is a big pansy that's complaining cause 'he cant gameplan for a game when the offense changes its strategy"
2. and "laser/lazer" team is horrible anyhow, so skip that speech.
3. boo hoo cry baby. step up and try to be a man, even if you are only 15.
the end.
If you're an irrational mess and can't think clearly enough to articulate a different position, yes this is a good summary.
Not saying that there isn't a good counter-argument but that posts like yours are asinine.
ok, so to sum up this thread...
1. buckeyes is a big pansy that's complaining cause 'he cant gameplan for a game when the offense changes its strategy"
2. and "laser/lazer" team is horrible anyhow, so skip that speech.
3. boo hoo cry baby. step up and try to be a man, even if you are only 15.
the end.
If you're an irrational mess and can't think clearly enough to articulate a different position, yes this is a good summary.
Not saying that there isn't a good counter-argument but that posts like yours are asinine.
Edited by fallingmercury on Jun 14, 2009 02:13:48
parker01
offline
offline
Originally posted by Raiders12
Originally posted by catspaw27
First of all, you aren't a 15-year old kid. No 15-year old kid calls themselves a 15-year old kid. You are a grown man living in your mom's basement.
Secondly, I am looking at some plays and the other team's rushing wasn't why you lost in a blowout. Here are reasons you lost by suck a large margin:
Your Punter sucks and you lost field position often
The FS is backing up from a deep set even after the ball is handed off.
Your QBs were looking long even though they were taking sacks, and one has a really bad QB rating
Dude, stop your whining, get a job, move out from your mom's house and run the ball yourself if you don't like it
Your Def really does suck...but this is just a useless flame...
Its the punter fault....LMAO
and as far as dropping names...sometimes you have to call a troll a troll.....They are and this guy is as well.
your a troll...
Originally posted by catspaw27
First of all, you aren't a 15-year old kid. No 15-year old kid calls themselves a 15-year old kid. You are a grown man living in your mom's basement.
Secondly, I am looking at some plays and the other team's rushing wasn't why you lost in a blowout. Here are reasons you lost by suck a large margin:
Your Punter sucks and you lost field position often
The FS is backing up from a deep set even after the ball is handed off.
Your QBs were looking long even though they were taking sacks, and one has a really bad QB rating
Dude, stop your whining, get a job, move out from your mom's house and run the ball yourself if you don't like it
Your Def really does suck...but this is just a useless flame...
Its the punter fault....LMAO
and as far as dropping names...sometimes you have to call a troll a troll.....They are and this guy is as well.
your a troll...
Originally posted by The Angry Beavers
ok, so to sum up this thread...
1. buckeyes is a big pansy that's complaining cause 'he cant gameplan for a game when the offense changes its strategy"
2. and "laser/lazer" team is horrible anyhow, so skip that speech.
3. boo hoo cry baby. step up and try to be a man, even if you are only 15.
the end.
I doubt your team could beat the laser cats tbh
ok, so to sum up this thread...
1. buckeyes is a big pansy that's complaining cause 'he cant gameplan for a game when the offense changes its strategy"
2. and "laser/lazer" team is horrible anyhow, so skip that speech.
3. boo hoo cry baby. step up and try to be a man, even if you are only 15.
the end.
I doubt your team could beat the laser cats tbh
fallingmercury
offline
offline
Originally posted by dmfa41
I'm for a multi-factorial, exponential decay function (similar to pharmacological dosing/excretion) of giving a bonus to the defense based on the offense's play selection.
So take strong I slam. +X (whatever value ends up being correct) is added to the "repeat-o-meter" for run, strong I, right, and HB slam. Each play, the bonus decreases by half. So, if the next play, they run a single back pitch play to the left, the defense only gets a +X relative bonus, but if they run the same play again they'd receive a +4X bonus since all four categories - run/pass, formation, direction, and play - match. So, given good play variety, the decay would occur enough so that it would hardly ever trigger, and if it did, the bonus would remain minimal.
Shameless bump.
Any other opinions on the post above? I think it's a sound idea.
I'm for a multi-factorial, exponential decay function (similar to pharmacological dosing/excretion) of giving a bonus to the defense based on the offense's play selection.
So take strong I slam. +X (whatever value ends up being correct) is added to the "repeat-o-meter" for run, strong I, right, and HB slam. Each play, the bonus decreases by half. So, if the next play, they run a single back pitch play to the left, the defense only gets a +X relative bonus, but if they run the same play again they'd receive a +4X bonus since all four categories - run/pass, formation, direction, and play - match. So, given good play variety, the decay would occur enough so that it would hardly ever trigger, and if it did, the bonus would remain minimal.
Shameless bump.
Any other opinions on the post above? I think it's a sound idea.
greengoose
offline
offline
I think we have all seen games where one team runs the ball and the other team can't stop them - no matter what adjustments they make. Atlanta ran the ball down the Lions throat in the opener last season and there was absolutely nothing the Lions could do to stop it. These were two professional teams (though calling the 2008 Lions "professional" is a stretch I'll admit).
For those unfamiliar with the game, the Falcons ran 56 plays and 42 of them were running plays. Subtract out the rookie Ryans panic runs and they ran the ball 37 times for 320 yards - didn't matter which back was in the game either, they couldn't stop any of them.
In fact, if Atlanta was able to run the ball on anyone last season they simply kept on running it - it's what teams do when the other team can't stop them and they have a rookie QB to boot.
Should be careful about trying to get the game to do something the players on the field aren't capable of doing by themselves and the coordinators calling the shots simply didn't take the time to prepare for.
For those unfamiliar with the game, the Falcons ran 56 plays and 42 of them were running plays. Subtract out the rookie Ryans panic runs and they ran the ball 37 times for 320 yards - didn't matter which back was in the game either, they couldn't stop any of them.
In fact, if Atlanta was able to run the ball on anyone last season they simply kept on running it - it's what teams do when the other team can't stop them and they have a rookie QB to boot.
Should be careful about trying to get the game to do something the players on the field aren't capable of doing by themselves and the coordinators calling the shots simply didn't take the time to prepare for.
steellithium
offline
offline
A lot of this is whining. Somewhere someone said a free safety is not supposed to be run support. Whoever said that never played football. Both safeties are run support at every level of football.
I think some of the fixes are being caused by players, and not the sim itself. I watched this game, and there were a 34 missed tackles on the defense by the losing team. There were 0 missed tackles by the winning team. Now this player is claiming running the ball a ton against players that are only built for speed is an exploit. In the NFL that is called good game planning. The Colts for years had a speed defense that couldn't stop the run. Most of their losses came to teams running right up the gut 60% of the time.
There is a logic that early on speed and agility is all that matters on defense. If you can't get to the ball carrier, it doesn't matter how well you tackle. Well the reverse has to be true at higher levels. What good does getting to the ball do, if you can't make the tackle. Now these players are angry that their builds are so unbalanced, and they want to blame the game mechanics.
I think some of the fixes are being caused by players, and not the sim itself. I watched this game, and there were a 34 missed tackles on the defense by the losing team. There were 0 missed tackles by the winning team. Now this player is claiming running the ball a ton against players that are only built for speed is an exploit. In the NFL that is called good game planning. The Colts for years had a speed defense that couldn't stop the run. Most of their losses came to teams running right up the gut 60% of the time.
There is a logic that early on speed and agility is all that matters on defense. If you can't get to the ball carrier, it doesn't matter how well you tackle. Well the reverse has to be true at higher levels. What good does getting to the ball do, if you can't make the tackle. Now these players are angry that their builds are so unbalanced, and they want to blame the game mechanics.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
