Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Galactic Empire
I'm assuming they are having slow, time and play consuming drives that eat your defense's stamina and morale?

Take the ball out of their hands. Win the T.O.P. by a ton. Keep your defense fresh.

Also, if you build your defense a certain way, you can counter tough, strong O-Lines with tough strong D-Lines and still generate a decent pass rush against passing teams.

you can try but you'll just watch your lbs, cbs, and safeties pancaked to oblivion

Originally posted by USC_Trojans
there seriously needs to be a way to balance specialized offenses. There is literally no reason for the stunners to put up 56 points running right into my defense (even with me botching the 4 wr defense) There needs to be some weakness to building extreme like that. Defenses just dont have the points to deal with this without completely sacrificing pass stopping abilities


we got lucky with 2 turnovers in the 1st quarter

your spread defense was terrible - giving up 213 yards on 18 carries - and to be clear - that is 213 yards UNTOUCHED - that isn't a broken tackle leading to an 80 yard TD.

your offense didn't score after their very first drive of the game

40 minutes time of possession for me -- 20 for you

I think there was a lot going on that game -- more than just "running is overpowered"

Take away the spread silliness you were running - and we'd have averaged 7 yards per carry (which did include some long TD's late as we wore you down). You averaged 5.6 - your team is balanced --- mine is pure run -- and you think an extra 1.4 yards per carry is too much of a bonus for my commitment to the run?

Originally posted by Corndog
Well, I'm guessing Tx was serious testing. He used Dookie's normal tactics, and would be silly for him to set up a scrimmage with himself then run joke tactics.

Though, you did not mention what I was expecting you to...the level difference. The way the skill system works, every skill gives diminishing returns on investment, so the Stunner's front five will get less of an advantage on their investment in run blocking compared to defenses investing in run stopping.

Romo's team, which is basically the vet equivalent of the Tx's, have been held to reasonable scores by teams not entirely dedicated to run stopping.

I tested a lot. Having access to Dookie (and permission to play around with the team from CD) - I ran 2-3 games trying to figure out some way to stop your diamond counter / 2 wr screen without killing myself inside. My coach also ran 2-3 games trying to evaluate it. I couldn't say I really did a GREAT job -- I might have been in trouble if you'd spammed them more (I was expecting more sweeps as well). But I would definitely give us an A for effort...we did put in time and spend a couple hundred flex on scrims

Originally posted by USC_Trojans
Defense is something I do, and usually do well (always a bad couple of games but when you coach over 600 games you'll have a few stinkers). Even running a perfect gameplan I can tell you easily that no one will beat the stunners unless they straight up have devoted 100% of their points to run stopping on their front 7 or put up 60-70 points on their d.

this is completely untrue.

we have been very lucky in one specific area for a season+ -- we've been on the winning side of close games.

this season we won a game by 3 -- another by 7 -- and many of those are middling vet teams -- not top vet teams and not top pro teams.

Originally posted by Corndog
Well, I'm guessing Tx was serious testing. He used Dookie's normal tactics, and would be silly for him to set up a scrimmage with himself then run joke tactics.

Though, you did not mention what I was expecting you to...the level difference. The way the skill system works, every skill gives diminishing returns on investment, so the Stunner's front five will get less of an advantage on their investment in run blocking compared to defenses investing in run stopping.

Romo's team, which is basically the vet equivalent of the Tx's, have been held to reasonable scores by teams not entirely dedicated to run stopping.

If I have learned anything level doesnt mean much aka bulls, salty and the stunners. He was most likely testing something and wasnt something he normally runs. I do that a lot with ground assault where Ill plug in plays to test as we get more points into stuff. At the Vet level. As for Queen City Its hard to really qualify him as the vet equivalent since romo's team is basically a counter niche team. Id compare them to DD's team but even then im pretty sure DD has points into pass but my biggest issue is the fact that that front five while getting weaker vs the defense's front 4 they are still pancaking lbs. safties, and cbs on some plays which are guys who dont have the stats to handle a block from a linemen because they also have to put points into other stats that keep them from matching these lineman. I mean honestly you dont even want to have your lineman break a block on the olinemen for fear of them finding a linebacker to pancake. It may help if we had some more specialized blitzes that let us attack a certain side better, Like being able to have a blitz that shifts the linebackers to favor a different side of the field. It may even out in vet but do we let it run rampant in other levels and just wait for it to correct itself?

No- I was exactly testing ways to contain the wr screens and diamond counter. I wasn't completely successful- but did better than 2 man under would have.

(And you didn't run them as much- probably because your trailing offense kicked in pretty early)

We don't run too many counters because to me it feels too cheesy....but also not this game because I've read your posts several times stating that you can shut down the counters (and from watching your games- you can)

Originally posted by TxSteve

we got lucky with 2 turnovers in the 1st quarter

your spread defense was terrible - giving up 213 yards on 18 carries - and to be clear - that is 213 yards UNTOUCHED - that isn't a broken tackle leading to an 80 yard TD.

your offense didn't score after their very first drive of the game

40 minutes time of possession for me -- 20 for you

I think there was a lot going on that game -- more than just "running is overpowered"

Take away the spread silliness you were running - and we'd have averaged 7 yards per carry (which did include some long TD's late as we wore you down). You averaged 5.6 - your team is balanced --- mine is pure run -- and you think an extra 1.4 yards per carry is too much of a bonus for my commitment to the run?


I do think the extra 1.4 is too much when i gameplan to literally send my defense right at your hbs and they still average that kind of yardage. You for the most part played a passive defense that gave my hbs room to run. If I had averaged that kind of yardage with you keying in on stopping our run game then Id agree with you but when your playing passive? no way and even then we are about 70% run focused on our line and 30% pass so its not like we are completely balanced but we feature a fast passing attack where we can get away with being slightly more run focused. Its not running in general its pancakes and power backs with like 90 power and balance. My hb allen is a perfect example of what Im talking about. Allen is built not as extreme as some of the power backs we see running around and the past 3 seasons hes averaging about 2.7 yards after contact which I feel is right where it should be. Now you go look at a back like twerk whos averaged 7 yards after contact the last two seasons thats just absurd. Its not just one team either. You have an elusive back averaging 3 yards after contact, a power back averaging 8.4 and another power back? avg 4.3. On top of that you have two backs averaging 12 yards a carry and one just barely below 10 yards a carry Thats just not balanced anyway you shape it.

Originally posted by TxSteve
No- I was exactly testing ways to contain the wr screens and diamond counter. I wasn't completely successful- but did better than 2 man under would have.

(And you didn't run them as much- probably because your trailing offense kicked in pretty early)

yea Paul was running a more balanced playbook because we felt youd key in on our running game but we still need to get some games under our belt before we are a threat to pass on teams as we replaced 3 wrs this season (chem is brutal).

Originally posted by TxSteve
We don't run too many counters because to me it feels too cheesy....but also not this game because I've read your posts several times stating that you can shut down the counters (and from watching your games- you can)

Im glad someone pays attention, its really all about getting a lb or de to penetrate that side the counter is actually going to though the diamond counter is amazing with the right personnel (actually having 2 fbs helps a lot.) Think of it as an isolation play, there will almost always be one player unblocked and we rely on my hbs to read the play and either beat them on the edge or cut it up field and make the guy miss.

RUn defense is very broken right now. You put guys in Man coverage and they'll spend the majority of the play backpedaling until the RB gets right on top of them. Outside run blocking is way too overpowered, Power RBs are too over powered, etc, etc. There is a reason that rushing teams fill the top of each tier. LBs and Secondary players need ot have cheaper SPs across the board. To stop outside rushing teams you have to pump up a lot of areas that you just cant afford.

I disagree. Or moreso - I think: we can't really know yet.

I think the root of the current issues is: people don't want to build to stop the run. You can easily build CB's to play like LB's -- but no one wants to (just like I built my WRs to play like TEs). People could easily build run stopping focused DE's...but people like sacks. Same with safeties and DT's.

What is the typical response? "but then I won't be able to stop the pass!!" -- this is a game of choices. Player build is important.

Is outside running overpowered? How will we know until some teams build run stopping CB's??? I don't see many CB's with more than 30 break block/hold ground/tackling/grip/power tackle....why not? Because people don't wanna. My WR's have blocking skills all in the 60-70 range. They destroy CB's -- just like they should if builds are going to matter in this game.

Same with power backs -- are they overpowered? Hard to say since so many people ignore tackling in this game...or just want to focus on one aspect of it. And people who focus on tackling have typically gone light on toughness/heart/conditioning.

Defense is DEFINITELY behind the 8 ball. They have to build to be OK at everything. Offenses can choose to be good at one thing. That is the game. Is the goal to get to a point where defenses can stop everything? May as well remove player builds then.

Is it possible there need to be tweaks? Sure. But what is the goal? Have CB's play like linebackers without requiring them to build that way? Have CB's be able to tackle really well without them having to spend points on tackling?

Is it possible that player positions should have had hard caps on some skills? Say a WR...based on the nature of WR's should have all blocking skills capped at 50 (or 40 or 30)? Sure that's possible (and something I pitched in GLB1). Just like maybe DE's and LB's should have speed hard capped at 40-50 or something -- but that's not how they decided to build this one.

If a pure run team blows out teams built to stop the run - then there are clearly problems (unless of course it is a case like I had with DD2.0 this morning where they are running engage 8 against sweep plays...and are already approaching zero morale in the 2nd qtr) , but that isn't happening. The teams we are beating aren't built to stop the run - and even then we're playing close games at times.


Earlier this season - beat Corning Cows (the #36 team in vet - so not a team any top teams 'fear') by 3 - they are currently 7-5. Why did they play us so close? My guess is their builds and game plan were better than the teams we've blown out.
Adams championship last season - I won 31-21 against another heavy, heavy running team (Nebraska).
The season before - Nebraska beat me 16-14 in the championship game.
Because we expect to face off in the playoffs - we've both been building to stop the run. As a result - we've played close games.

Anyway - those are my opinions. Yes - I'm most certainly biased as I've invested a lot of time in an all running team. I'm also very informed since I've likely watched more 'all running' matchups and performances than anyone else in the game (other than maddencoach).

Im gunna throw a massive wrench in your works by mentioning the front 7 for beast town is built heavy (were talking 90% of points) run stopping and yes it was man base because i screwed up tactics (wanted to test something) but we are talking the dts have unstoppable force and shed block, the des have shed block, all of liam's lbs have gold shed block and hell the safeties have shed block ( they need more break run block though). Its really hard to invest much more into the run without screwing over my pass defense and surprise, you ran all over them.

Originally posted by USC_Trojans
come on you know scrims are a terrible way to prove a point, very rarely if ever do teams run a serious gameplan in scrims

Originally posted by USC_Trojans
You for the most part played a passive defense that gave my hbs room to run.

Surely you're not surprised that 3-3 man base turned out to be a poor choice for a run defense? It leaves space inside...and sucks against the outside stuff.

Builds can't make up for bad play calls - just like no matter what the builds on Andes were -- they weren't going to consistently stop the spread inside runs (unless they made a great roll which did happen a few times).

Run it back with 4-4 or 5-2 and I'll run 100% inside - and then we'll see how it goes.

Originally posted by TxSteve
Surely you're not surprised that 3-3 man base turned out to be a poor choice for a run defense? It leaves space inside...and sucks against the outside stuff.

Builds can't make up for bad play calls - just like no matter what the builds on Andes were -- they weren't going to consistently stop the spread inside runs (unless they made a great roll which did happen a few times).

Run it back with 4-4 or 5-2 and I'll run 100% inside - and then we'll see how it goes.


send a scrim to beast town, ill have something up for it, though dont be afraid to run outside as well as I do want to test something