Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Xars
But for those 5, I don't think there is a magic bullet. And since they are the only plays I run, I have optimized my builds to run them. So there is that too.


So sort of like not having a magic bullet to stop a GL HB sweep, a GL HB OT and GL Slam..

What your doing isn't wrong and I have zero issues with you playing to the strengths. It is just silly that it keeps getting stronger while other strengths get weaker.

Originally posted by crazieveggie
So sort of like not having a magic bullet to stop a GL HB sweep, a GL HB OT and GL Slam..

What your doing isn't wrong and I have zero issues with you playing to the strengths. It is just silly that it keeps getting stronger while other strengths get weaker.

Well I understand the point you think you are making, but it's not intellectually sound.

Dozens upon dozens of teams were abusing QB Rollout from GL. Builds didn't really matter, just spam the plays.

How many 100 Heart QBs are there in Vet besides mine? How many high Heart WR/TE corps?

It's not just the plays, it's the builds around them. My play calling is easily replicable. If it was an instant-win playbook, why is no one else using it?

It's not like Xars playbook is suddenly magical. Those are the core plays used by the best passing attacks now for several seasons. He's built a really nice roster to try and fully exploit them though.

Originally posted by Xars
Dozens upon dozens of teams were abusing QB Rollout from GL. Builds didn't really matter

as someone that ran and played aginst those that did run it, I can tell you... builds mattered for sure

Originally posted by Xars
If it was an instant-win playbook, why is no one else using it?

The five plays you use have been the basis for every good-to-great passing team in GLB2 in recent memory (sure every team added a few extra plays here and there but the 3WR spam was the common thread). You have probably the most extreme example of the play calling but many passing teams have had success running those plays previously.

Eh...just noticed Galithor pretty much said this too...

The powers that be removed the outside Goal Line runs because there were no defensive counters to them and they could just be spammed for easy wins. What will be the answer to the pass spam? Removing the offending plays or adding defensive counters? We wait with baited breath.

Originally posted by Xars
Well I understand the point you think you are making, but it's not intellectually sound.

Dozens upon dozens of teams were abusing QB Rollout from GL. Builds didn't really matter, just spam the plays.

How many 100 Heart QBs are there in Vet besides mine? How many high Heart WR/TE corps?

It's not just the plays, it's the builds around them. My play calling is easily replicable. If it was an instant-win playbook, why is no one else using it?

your 100 heart qb is cute but has nothing to do with the lack of defenses against certain 3 wr plays. the only defense currently is sack that QB as much as you can.

I think this is far less to do with a heart qb, thought i am sure it doesnt hurt the entire process....we will never know how much this played a process....

Originally posted by Danthesportsman
The powers that be removed the outside Goal Line runs because there were no defensive counters to them and they could just be spammed for easy wins. What will be the answer to the pass spam? Removing the offending plays or adding defensive counters? We wait with baited breath.

Its sad but there is one zone difference in ALL of the lurk plays that changes shit against the spam but we dumbly assume that ROLB's or MLB's need to play a retard zone because no REASON.

Originally posted by bhall43
your 100 heart qb is cute but has nothing to do with the lack of defenses against certain 3 wr plays. the only defense currently is sack that QB as much as you can.

I think this is far less to do with a heart qb, thought i am sure it doesnt hurt the entire process....we will never know how much this played a process....

Ok I've been waiting for this...

There are builds and play counters against 3WR passing spam. Though it's not my job to tell you them.

Already this season in Vet, some of the elite passing teams have been held to low scoring numbers.
How did that happen? Dumb luck?

And I wouldn't call Belgarath (a 7000 year old man) cute, but to each his own.

Yeah, lets tap the brakes on calling the passing game overpowered.

When passing teams regularly have punt-less games, then we'll open that discussion.

Part of the problem at veteran right now is defenses have skewed builds massively towards run stuffing in general. The nerfs have made it where you could field a serviceable rushing defense now without having sold out.

I think everyone would have to agree: a team running the same simple playbook for every single game...and winning far and away most of them....is bad for the game.

I said for many seasons - many pass plays just don't have defensive counters.

Teams that ran GL sweep / GL rollout were terrible for the game.

Back when Queen City spammed counters for a few seasons and dominated - that was bad for the game.

Xars running a 5 play passing book for multiple seasons is bad for the game (several other teams besides xars who do this)

The fact that most all passing offenses (including my rookie team) are essentially 'forced' to run the same 5-8 plays in order to put points on the board is bad for the game.


I've yet to see the 'diversity' bonus occur from what I can observe. I don't think that is going to be the answer.

As a starting point - even though I'm not certain how much it would help - I'd like to see some simple defensive plays added:

- cover 2 / double cover WR1
- cover 2 / double cover WR2
- cover 2 / double cover WR3
- cover 2 / double cover WR4
- cover 2 / double cover TE1
- cover 2 / double cover TE1 & BTE

- possibly even triple coverage for some positions that would allow it (ie not leave anyone else uncovered)


Say what you will about the running game over the last 11 seasons -- but except for Queen City and the counter spam -- a running offense does require scouting and custom offenses to succeed at a high level. It is my opinion that we need to get the passing game to a place where scouting and custom offenses are required to succeed at a high level - and the answer likely lies in new defensive plays.

Originally posted by Galithor
It's not like Xars playbook is suddenly magical. Those are the core plays used by the best passing attacks now for several seasons. He's built a really nice roster to try and fully exploit them though.

Originally posted by Danthesportsman
The five plays you use have been the basis for every good-to-great passing team in GLB2 in recent memory (sure every team added a few extra plays here and there but the 3WR spam was the common thread). You have probably the most extreme example of the play calling but many passing teams have had success running those plays previously.

Eh...just noticed Galithor pretty much said this too...



Yeah and how many times did a Passing Team employing them end up at #1 on the (Vet) Ladder in the first 10 seasons?

Here's the comparison of Global Data (at Vet) vs. LZ Boys Data for the 5 Passing plays I use so far this season:

SB Trip WR Posts:
Comp% of 47.9% for LZ and 48.2% for non-LZ
YPA of 7.3 for LZ and 7.4 for non-LZ
YPC of 15.1 for LZ and 15.37 for non-LZ

SB TE Drive:
Comp% of 59.9% for LZ and 48.2% for non-LZ
YPA of 8.6 for LZ and 7.56 for non-LZ
YPC of 14.3 for LZ and 15.66 for non-LZ

SB Trip WR Cross:
Comp% of 56.4% for LZ and 43.82% for non-LZ
YPA of 7.8 for LZ and 5.35 for non-LZ
YPC of 13.8 for LZ and 12.44 for non-LZ

SG TE Drive:
Comp% of 58.4% for LZ and 42.02% for non-LZ
YPA of 8.6 for LZ and 6.07 for non-LZ
YPC of 14.7 for LZ and 14.5 for non-LZ

SB TE Post:
Comp% of 62.3% for LZ and 54.9% for non-LZ
YPA of 8.6 for LZ and 6.52 for non-LZ
YPC of 13.8 for LZ and 11.9 for non-LZ


Composite Data:
LZ has a Comp% of 56.6% and YPA of 8.15 and YPC of 14.36
non-LZ has a Comp% of 49.5% and YPA of 6.80 and YPC of 13.86


So this is the question, should the above plays be nerfed (or D buffed against them) when the non-LZ teams are averaging:

Completion% of 49.5%,
YPA of 6.8,
YPC of 13.86?

I don't see the evidence.

Here's the Defense LOLbars for each of the Top 20 Vet teams:

Run Pass
LZ 95 61
Madison 78 66
Richmond 85 69
Default 87 62
FSM 82 70
GA 87 63
Providence 82 61
DA 98 71
WCW 79 68
Whoville 76 73
Beers 92 72
TT 88 74
DD 97 67
Parental Advisory 79 75
Tampa Sandmen 86 67
Winnipeg Wrath 97 67
MMArmy 87 78
Canisteo 75 66
LI Knights 74 72
Houston Gamblers 77 63

AVERAGE 85.05 68.25

With no Team having a Pass D higher than their Run D and a 17 point overall avg difference, doesn't this have an effect?

Originally posted by TxSteve
I think everyone would have to agree: a team running the same simple playbook for every single game...and winning far and away most of them....is bad for the game.

I said for many seasons - many pass plays just don't have defensive counters.

Teams that ran GL sweep / GL rollout were terrible for the game.

Back when Queen City spammed counters for a few seasons and dominated - that was bad for the game.

Xars running a 5 play passing book for multiple seasons is bad for the game (several other teams besides xars who do this)

The fact that most all passing offenses (including my rookie team) are essentially 'forced' to run the same 5-8 plays in order to put points on the board is bad for the game.


I've yet to see the 'diversity' bonus occur from what I can observe. I don't think that is going to be the answer.

I don't agree that a small playbook is necessarily bad for the game. Though I think I understand the point you are trying to make. I'd like to see Balanced Offense's be superior to Run or Pass only, but that's not the game we have. I don't think the argument has to be around 5 plays or 10 plays in the playbook specifically.

The game's problem is that the Offense can specialize in either all run or all pass skills. Building a Balanced Offensive player playing in a Balanced Offensive scheme isn't rewarded. Once it is (not sure exactly how, but most of the changes are in this direction), you'll see the demise of the extreme Offense (and playbook size really won't be the issue).