Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Ghanima
Mayby tie arc of ball with pass tech ? If U got a good spiral ball will naturaly got arc. Wobbly passes are slower and they tend to float to much.

To boost zone against it mayby add some SA connected to deflecting for zone ? Let us specialize for deflections or ints.

Also pls add some zone plays that match trips and 3 wr spread for zone.

only problem is there aren't really many zone plays that would even in real life.

Originally posted by Myrik_Justiciar
Doesn't Toughness mitigate pressure from off the Pass Rush?

Toughness seems to do a lot of things all over the place so it certainly could.

For QBs, Toughness specifically does mitigate Trash Talk and we know it's the offset to Intimidation.

For non-QBs, in my testing, Toughness helped with fumbles on HBs.

Originally posted by BoDiddley

50 Acc at Soph is more than fine, because defenders have lower skills too. But what QB is throwing well at Vet with 50 Acc?

Case in point, Xar's QB threw for 60%...at Soph. But is sub-50% now in Vet.

51 30 107.1 1146 712 9905 62.1% 8.6 330.2 78 211 41 15 35 -38.5 -1.3 -1.1 0
52 30 89.7 1419 796 11341 56.1% 8 378 86 275 77 43 22 -22 -0.7 -1 0
53 30 86.3 879 481 7405 54.7% 8.4 246.8 53 132 25 35 42 -65.5 -2.2 -1.6 0
54 30 77.5 832 415 6200.5 49.9% 7.5 206.7 42 116 23 28 34 -48 -1.6 -1.4 0

Yup the steady decline. His YPA didn't really decline until Vet though.

Originally posted by Xars
This is along those same lines.

Guys, if you don't think Zone INT rates are too high - using formation & personnel packages that don't match the Offensive's scheme - then make the argument.

But you're complaining instead of making the case.

The argument isn't "well Zone sucked for so long don't make it bad again". The argument is that formations and personnel packages that don't match the Offensive schemes aren't being penalized enough for the current INT bonus. If you don't think the above is correct, then post some data and use some analysis.

Now the primary time where all this become apparent is the Pass Power Throwing Arc. Fixing that will probably lower Zone INTs - but we don't know. It may lower Zone and Man equally - again we don't know.

So let's just have the Devs fix it and find out.

Then we can work on balancing the overall effectiveness of Man = Zone and vice versa, but with different inputs.



You might think it's lazy, but I think you're being obstinate or worse you just don't care about consequences as long as you get your issue resolved. The argument is inadvertently about "making Zone bad again" whether you want to admit it or not, sorry to say.

The problem is you're only arguing for nerfing Zone LB Int rates across the middle without mentioning the fact that we have QB's still completing passes at exceptionally high rates against them. I've shown by using all the top LB's that the Pass Power buff from a few seasons ago was effective in comparison to Rob's who didn't play under this change. These dots are built to get Ints and you would make the builds useless. If Pass Power arc was changed, adjusting the 2 Zone SA's to compensate would allow CB's with EotP to have a better chance to make up for LB's getting nerfed and Zone Shark can be applied to safeties effectively (it's about useless in its current form, it needs love either way).

Regardless of your data, I've tried to make the point about game balance to you. I don't like this "let's just have the Dev's fix it and find out" nonsense, we absolutely know what it will do based on what your asking (there is no probably to it). That's a piss-poor solution, you don't break one thing to fix another.

Originally posted by BoDiddley

50 Acc at Soph is more than fine, because defenders have lower skills too. But what QB is throwing well at Vet with 50 Acc?

Case in point, Xar's QB threw for 60%...at Soph. But is sub-50% now in Vet.

51 30 107.1 1146 712 9905 62.1% 8.6 330.2 78 211 41 15 35 -38.5 -1.3 -1.1 0
52 30 89.7 1419 796 11341 56.1% 8 378 86 275 77 43 22 -22 -0.7 -1 0
53 30 86.3 879 481 7405 54.7% 8.4 246.8 53 132 25 35 42 -65.5 -2.2 -1.6 0
54 30 77.5 832 415 6200.5 49.9% 7.5 206.7 42 116 23 28 34 -48 -1.6 -1.4 0

At Vet he threw for 49% with little to no Accuracy skill correct? If so, it seems like accuracy is OP to me.

Originally posted by Xars
Guys, if you don't think Zone INT rates are too high - using formation & personnel packages that don't match the Offensive's scheme - then make the argument.

You seem to be getting really caught up on this. From what I've seen, you're mostly mad that "one CB can cover three WRs" and that trips isn't absolutely destroying zone.

I feel like we've had this conversation before, but like, that's not how zones work? The CB isn't covering 3 WRs, the CB is covering that part of the field. If three WRs happen to be in that part of the field it doesn't really matter? It's not like they can tackle him so he can't make a play.

Originally posted by Myrik_Justiciar
You might think it's lazy, but I think you're being obstinate or worse you just don't care about consequences as long as you get your issue resolved. The argument is inadvertently about "making Zone bad again" whether you want to admit it or not, sorry to say.

The problem is you're only arguing for nerfing Zone LB Int rates across the middle without mentioning the fact that we have QB's still completing passes at exceptionally high rates against them. I've shown by using all the top LB's that the Pass Power buff from a few seasons ago was effective in comparison to Rob's who didn't play under this change. These dots are built to get Ints and you would make the builds useless. If Pass Power arc was changed, adjusting the 2 Zone SA's to compensate would allow CB's with EotP to have a better chance to make up for LB's getting nerfed and Zone Shark can be applied to safeties effectively (it's about useless in its current form, it needs love either way).

Regardless of your data, I've tried to make the point about game balance to you. I don't like this "let's just have the Dev's fix it and find out" nonsense, we absolutely know what it will do based on what your asking (there is no probably to it). That's a piss-poor solution, you don't break one thing to fix another.


I think Myrik is correct here. It's not fair to the owners of Zone team to blow up their team for 1, 2, 3 or more seasons with a fix to Pass Power unless they get compensated in the meantime. Its even more peculiar to me, personally, that someone who sword rattled about Zone being dead and posting about it on the forums last season is now calling for nerfs to Zone. What happened?

Like, I'm pretty sure you're looking at something like this and just fuming
https://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/812223/1472960

"HOW IS ONE CB COVERING THREE WRS?!?!"...because they are all within about 5 yards of each other, right in the middle of the CB's zone? They are all pretty easily within a distance he can reach, and having extra options to throw to doesn't change that? He still just reacts to the one the ball is thrown to, and the other receivers can't tackle him to take him out of the play.

Originally posted by ellix
Its even more peculiar to me, personally, that someone who sword rattled about Zone being dead and posting about it on the forums last season is now calling for nerfs to Zone. What happened?


lol...exactly

Originally posted by Corndog
Like, I'm pretty sure you're looking at something like this and just fuming
https://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay/812223/1472960

"HOW IS ONE CB COVERING THREE WRS?!?!"...because they are all within about 5 yards of each other, right in the middle of the CB's zone? They are all pretty easily within a distance he can reach, and having extra options to throw to doesn't change that? He still just reacts to the one the ball is thrown to, and the other receivers can't tackle him to take him out of the play.

Look at Tick 29. QB still has the ball. No throw started yet. What do you see?

Stop thinking you're a football guy.

Just stop.

Now, make Zone work against 3WR TRIPS using an appropriate formation and personnel. Make it's overall equivalency = to Man.

How am I being unreasonable?

Yet you are clearly being stupid.

Originally posted by ellix
I think Myrik is correct here. It's not fair to the owners of Zone team to blow up their team for 1, 2, 3 or more seasons with a fix to Pass Power unless they get compensated in the meantime. Its even more peculiar to me, personally, that someone who sword rattled about Zone being dead and posting about it on the forums last season is now calling for nerfs to Zone. What happened?


Never advocated that. Stop being emotional.

Zone should = Man in effectiveness. When have I said otherwise regarding intention?

But using the existing Zone plays in Overload situations is stupid.

Create new Zone plays that can work against 3WR TRIPS.

Why do I have to do the work for you?

Originally posted by Myrik_Justiciar
You might think it's lazy, but I think you're being obstinate or worse you just don't care about consequences as long as you get your issue resolved. The argument is inadvertently about "making Zone bad again" whether you want to admit it or not, sorry to say.




The insane rattlings of a man who wants to defend a 10% INT rate without doing the Math.

Stop being lazy.

You've created new plays. Good new plays.

Do it again.

You're smart - but you're being emotionally stupid regarding this.

Zone = Man. Not worse. Not better. Just different.

But trying to do it with ridiculous formation and personnel matchups is beyond stupid.

Stop being stupid.

Be smart. Create Nickel Zone plays with 3 CBs to the Weak side. Why is this so hard when I see it so clearly?

Originally posted by Xars
Yet you are clearly being stupid.

no u

Originally posted by Corndog
You seem to be getting really caught up on this. From what I've seen, you're mostly mad that "one CB can cover three WRs" and that trips isn't absolutely destroying zone.



No I'm an intellectual that knows that a 3-4 zone formation and personnel can't cover 3WR TRIPS.

I've never said that a Nickel Zone play with 3 CBs to the Weak Side can't cover TRIPS.

Completely different argument.

Please use your brain.

Originally posted by Xars
No I'm an intellectual

At least you think you are.

I'm done here. Have a good day.