Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Xavori
I readily accept the new information because I didn't get to be the smartest guy in so many rooms by ignoring reality.

An old man in a bar once told me that the smartest guy in the room usually doesn't feel the need to announce that he is.

Originally posted by Xavori
Rofl.

So when I call you on your bs claims without evidence, that's uncivil? I should just politely sit with my hands folded in my lap while you make up whatever nonsense you want? I should never expect that you be prepared to substantiate your arguments with data that could support those arguments?

You're right. You shouldn't engage me anymore if that's your approach to argumentation. I demand that claims have backing, warrants and other such evidence types to support them in order to be taken seriously. And I mock the hell out of people who don't meet that very minimal standard.

Normally this makes me very easy to convince. Simply present evidence that shows the flaws in my arguments or supports yours, and I readily accept the new information because I didn't get to be the smartest guy in so many rooms by ignoring reality.

Evidence and you do generally mix very well.

Originally posted by kirincnj
An old man in a bar once told me that the smartest guy in the room usually doesn't feel the need to announce that he is.


He was prolly drunk and trying to get you to buy him another beer.

Originally posted by Xavori
I'm not relying on luck to stop it. Nor do I consider 0 yards every time the standard for success against it. Anyone who thinks otherwise has set an impossible bar for evaluation, and one that they are likely not using to evaluate any other play in the game. Heck, even if your standard was the much easier, "doesn't allow 50+ yard TD's", it's a bad standard that would make Yorick's entire playbook OP.

If you really want to watch a team that has that play down pat defense-wise, watch Sexy Dance Fighters sometime. They really do shutout quite a few teams that run it (including Yorick last season), and have won practically every game they've played where that was the centerpiece of their opponent's offense.

So the team you just had me go watch gave up 11. 10, 14, & 30 on the very first plays I could find. I finished watching that game and they ended up giving up over 125 yards to a QB who has 0 Stam & O Chem(along with his blockers) the rest of that game. The times the defense did stop it was when his SS beat the block...which was rare.

Originally posted by bhall43
Evidence and you do generally mix very well.

please tell me that was a typo

Originally posted by Parab00n
So the team you just had me go watch gave up 11. 10, 14, & 30 on the very first plays I could find. I finished watching that game and they ended up giving up over 125 yards to a QB who has 0 Stam & O Chem(along with his blockers) the rest of that game. The times the defense did stop it was when his SS beat the block...which was rare.

ya, but show some evidence Paraboon...show some evidence...

Originally posted by Parab00n
So the team you just had me go watch gave up 11. 10, 14, & 30 on the very first plays I could find. I finished watching that game and they ended up giving up over 125 yards to a QB who has 0 Stam & O Chem(along with his blockers) the rest of that game. The times the defense did stop it was when his SS beat the block...which was rare.

Sexy's only loss is to a passing team. No running team has gotten close to them.

And the game you watched...a QB getting 125 yards is OP? But your HB's who all average more than that, aren't? And what about Romo's Speedy Fly at almost 250 yards per game against defenses that have had 3.2 seasons to build to stop him?

Maybe the problem really is I'm the only one who has a definition of overpowered along the lines of "makes you almost unbeatable". Maybe if I went with the "occasionally gets a long TD run" that everyone else seems to be using we'd be in agreement?

'Course, there'd be a whole lot more OP plays using the definition...

This is where they shut that play down last season??? 6.5 YPC?? You didn't lose because they shut it down, you lost because you didn't run it enough.

http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/50173/2455716 - -4
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/50173/2455728 - 14
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/50173/2455792 - -4
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/50173/2455952 - 26
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/50173/2456090 - 10
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/50173/2456208 - 4
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/50173/2456287 - -3
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/50173/2456454 - 1
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/50173/2456655 - 28
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/50173/2456865 - 7
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/50173/2456916 - 5
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/50173/2457012 - 18
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/50173/2455966 - 6
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/50173/2456106 - -2
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/50173/2456479 - -2 (only because your QB ran into his own blocker causing that CB that had been pancaked enough time to get up and make the tackle)
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/50173/2456929 - -1 (why are you using this QB, he sucks balls compared to the other one)
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/50173/2457100 - 7

Originally posted by TxSteve
ya, but show some evidence Paraboon...show some evidence...



Cherry Picking ..its a logical fallacy.

Also for me I just smile, at the end of the day one of two things will happen

GLB2 fixes it , he'll be the prime cause. The snark or general tone brings more people to the board who complain about it and they stay longer getting upset to argue it. The other thread hit 300+ posts. At the very least that I'm sure got some GLB2 attention.
-That was the point I was trying to relay to him about it, all the pejorative adjectives just make people argue harder. Thats why I stopped using them long ago, its ultimately self defeating.

Option two they don't fix it , the only way to consistently win at the lower levels and possibly higher is with the play we change the name from Goalline Blitz to Goalline Rollout. Who knows maybe there is a market for guys who want to play 1920's football in a single wing variation for 30 games a year. I wouldn't be one of them but I don't judge.

Either way in a season or two I won't have to worry about it.

Originally posted by Xavori
Sexy's only loss is to a passing team. No running team has gotten close to them.

And the game you watched...a QB getting 125 yards is OP? But your HB's who all average more than that, aren't? And what about Romo's Speedy Fly at almost 250 yards per game against defenses that have had 3.2 seasons to build to stop him?

Maybe the problem really is I'm the only one who has a definition of overpowered along the lines of "makes you almost unbeatable". Maybe if I went with the "occasionally gets a long TD run" that everyone else seems to be using we'd be in agreement?

'Course, there'd be a whole lot more OP plays using the definition...

For a self-proclaimed smart guy you are pretty slow some times.

250 yards from numerous plays doesn't compare to 1 play that doesn't have a good counter.

He's just a troll who feeds off of the attention.

When his teams eventually drop down into the 20's and beyond he'll be nothing more than Jampy verson 2.0 (sorry Jampy)

Originally posted by TxSteve
please tell me that was a typo

sorry sarcasm

Originally posted by william78
Cherry Picking ..its a logical fallacy.

Also for me I just smile, at the end of the day one of two things will happen

GLB2 fixes it , he'll be the prime cause. The snark or general tone brings more people to the board who complain about it and they stay longer getting upset to argue it. The other thread hit 300+ posts. At the very least that I'm sure got some GLB2 attention.
-That was the point I was trying to relay to him about it, all the pejorative adjectives just make people argue harder. Thats why I stopped using them long ago, its ultimately self defeating.

Option two they don't fix it , the only way to consistently win at the lower levels and possibly higher is with the play we change the name from Goalline Blitz to Goalline Rollout. Who knows maybe there is a market for guys who want to play 1920's football in a single wing variation for 30 games a year. I wouldn't be one of them but I don't judge.

Either way in a season or two I won't have to worry about it.

Option three.

They fix defensive AI allowing defenders in Pursuit behind the defensive side of the line of scrimmage to keep making Pursuit rolls as they shadow the ball carrier waiting for an actual opening to the ball carrier before attacking rather than the current garbage of just piling into the scrum.

Then they also fix DE/OLB AI on outside running plays to have those players actively working to get a yard or two into the offensive backfield while making sure no offensive player, including blockers who could trap them, get outside of them. For that, the defenders would be using Footwork and Hold Ground rolls (prolly Balance as well so they don't get pancaked, but nothing new to add for that part).

Instead of nerfing one play, we'd have an actual improvement to defense for the entire game. Then we only need another dozen or so improvements on defense to get things on equal footing versus the offense.

Originally posted by Parab00n
For a self-proclaimed smart guy you are pretty slow some times.

250 yards from numerous plays doesn't compare to 1 play that doesn't have a good counter.

He's just trolling you - I crushed Sexy 2 times last year with my all rushing team.


Sorry sweetheart...

Originally posted by Parab00n
For a self-proclaimed smart guy you are pretty slow some times.

250 yards from numerous plays doesn't compare to 1 play that doesn't have a good counter.

lol right? Hey guys the spread playbook is way more OP than GL QB Rollout Strong!