Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Cybertron
Xars loves to leave out player builds in his equations. It's like every player is a clone in his diatribe against zone defenses. I tried to explain this to him when he was saying 3 WR trips toss weak would destroy my zone defense. Uh...not if my strong ass CB is laying out your weak WRs.

Of course builds matter. Hence why I posted both teams data.

At the same time, both teams are executing the play very well with Myrik’s team executing it exceptionally well.

And it’s not just that play. Or is no one else looking at GLB2Scout data?

Hence the discussion point.

So we play a football game, and yet no one thinks negative yardage given up by a defense over the course of the season is an outlier?

Just checking everyone’s frame of reference.

Originally posted by Ghanima
if we got some zone plays designed to stop all trips... It would be fun to play chess game there. Just like any other formations.

I think I made a 3-4 play that might work, let me know... I'm just seeing what Bort makes before going all out.

Originally posted by Xars

So we play a football game, and yet no one thinks negative yardage given up by a defense over the course of the season is an outlier?


I don't see it any differently than cheese leg sweeps from mortal kombat, or Shiva jumps from MK11. With any amount of skill or game planning it's not as good as the alternatives.

Originally posted by Myrik_Justiciar
While your great at getting data, unfortunately I think sometimes you get TV and miss some context.

Nah. He just likes to stir shit, especially if he thinks it'll benefit him. He's a master debater.

Originally posted by Xars


Hence the discussion point.

So we play a football game, and yet no one thinks negative yardage given up by a defense over the course of the season is an outlier?

Just checking everyone’s frame of reference.



The larger issue is that passing itself is weak. So while Cover Tiger which has always been a heavily spammed play is even better in this meta, it's not alone. Nerfs have a culminative impact, and the stats in Vet tell that story. Half of Oak league is under 50% completions. Only three at above 60%. In Heart league only two are above 60% and one of those QBs has just 36 attempts.

Which goes back to my point earlier, there's been a huge amount of defensive plays added the past few years, while passing in particular has stagnated in the playbooks. Even this offseason I see a ton of largely zone defense plays asking to be added, which has been the trend. What will be the result? Well when designed plays are added in mass to counter offensive playbooks with very few options/plays.....you defacto have the GLB1 defensive play editor in effect.

Is the zone plays you point out a problem, yes. But it's generally across the board because most passing sucks. Unless you have a S* QB, and a S* receiving core. Changing the salaries of LBs and CBs will do nothing to fix this. You have to balance the offensive playbooks which are seriously lacking in comparison to defense. The way to counter plays like Cover Tiger is....to actually have plays that can counter it.

Originally posted by BoDiddley
The larger issue is that passing itself is weak. So while Cover Tiger which has always been a heavily spammed play is even better in this meta, it's not alone. Nerfs have a culminative impact, and the stats in Vet tell that story. Half of Oak league is under 50% completions. Only three at above 60%. In Heart league only two are above 60% and one of those QBs has just 36 attempts.

Which goes back to my point earlier, there's been a huge amount of defensive plays added the past few years, while passing in particular has stagnated in the playbooks. Even this offseason I see a ton of largely zone defense plays asking to be added, which has been the trend. What will be the result? Well when designed plays are added in mass to counter offensive playbooks with very few options/plays.....you defacto have the GLB1 defensive play editor in effect.

Is the zone plays you point out a problem, yes. But it's generally across the board because most passing sucks. Unless you have a S* QB, and a S* receiving core. Changing the salaries of LBs and CBs will do nothing to fix this. You have to balance the offensive playbooks which are seriously lacking in comparison to defense. The way to counter plays like Cover Tiger is....to actually have plays that can counter it.

Truth.

Originally posted by Myrik_Justiciar
Xars, I have a well built team with S* players in the right spots to run certain plays I like very well. I build to my scheme/style and it's not like I spammed Tiger (128 times out of over 1400 plays or whatever). Tiger is a great play but it isn't the game changer you make it out to be or I'd run it 1400 times a season and nothing else.

Also, your comparison of our teams is apples to oranges. They will not perform plays the exact same way considering we have different builds and different star players in different positions. I even tested all this awhile back when Hawaii was still around by running the exact same defense against him with Lex and KY and got vastly different results... Lex got wrecked and KY steam rolled them.

While your great at getting data, unfortunately I think sometimes you get TV and miss some context.



Exactly.

You're builds perform better. Didn't the data show that? Yes it did. Newsflash - You're results are NEGATIVE yards per play. Mine aren't at that level but they are UNACCEPTABLELY low for Passing.

So let's recap:

GOOD NEWS! You broke the game.

BAD NEWS! You broke the game.

Originally posted by Adderfist
I don't see it any differently than cheese leg sweeps from mortal kombat, or Shiva jumps from MK11. With any amount of skill or game planning it's not as good as the alternatives.



Here's the Top 4 plays from Myrik's KY team through 31 games:


Nickel Cover 3 Sink: Plays 162 - Comp 36.4% - Int 11.1% - Sack 8.0% - YPA of 4.1 - YPC 11.4 - Net YPA (1.41) - yep, negative.
5-2 Cover 3 Sink: Plays 153 - Comp 45.8% - Int 5.2% - Sack 11.8% - YPA of 5.7 - YPC 12.5 - Net YPA 2.56.
4-4 Cover 3: Plays 141 - Comp 46.1% - Int 7.8% - Sack 10.6% - YPA of 4.9 - YPC 10.7 - Net YPA 0.68.
Cover 3 Tiger: Plays 128 - Comp 37.5% - Int 4.9% - Sack 21.9% - YPA of 3.5 - YPC 9.4 - Net YPA (1.88) - yep, negative.

Top 4 plays:

Top 4 Plays: Plays 584 - Comp 41.4% - Int 8.2% - Sack 12.6% - YPA of 4.6 - YPC 11.1 - Net YPA (.04) - yep, negative.
All Plays: Plays 1482 - Comp 42% - Int 8.6% - Sack 21.90% - YPA of 3.5 - YPC 10.2 - Net YPA (.03) - yep, negative.

Now go look at each of those plays on Play Analyzer and see how many Passing plays are posting acceptable numbers to you.

And since it will come up:

The global numbers are the starting point for a discussion, not the end point.

Hence, the discussion.

Originally posted by Corndog
Nah. He just likes to stir shit, especially if he thinks it'll benefit him. He's a master debater.

Cdog: I'm so happy this post is on record TODAY. Yes, TODAY. God you're a fool.

Anyway, how about this then:

I never again buy FLEX.
I never again have any association to a team.
I give all my FLEX away to others. You can even suggest some!

And then I still come on these boards and post issues that I see. What perspective would I have then?

Originally posted by BoDiddley
The larger issue is that passing itself is weak.

And so the question is why?

Sacks and INTs are too big to just ignore.

Here's LogZilla's season results for 5-2 Over Mike Edge

5-2 Over Mike Edge: Plays 221 - Comp 37.1% - Int 2.3% - Sack 26.7% - YPA of 4.6 - YPC 12.4 - Net YPA 1.70.

You're all free to tell me how this data is an outlier and/or my S* blitzer build sucks (with a 26.7% Sack rate) or my CBs are too slow to cover receivers 12.4 yards down the field or whatever, but these numbers are a joke.

I've said it before: the NFL doesn't throw 40+ times a game because they expect 1.70 yards per attempt net of Sacks and INTs.

So, what's wrong with the Passing game at Vet?

Because an All-Rushing team looks like a viable idea again.

To CDog: Feel free to nerf my team first - like last season's Changelog. I've got 2 more seasons at Vet. Feel free to tell everyone how I just post to benefit myself, while you're nerfing my defense and no one else's. Because you're the altruistic one.

Clear?

Originally posted by Ghanima
if we got some zone plays designed to stop all trips... It would be fun to play chess game there. Just like any other formations.

For how long have I beat this horse?

Originally posted by Xars
Cdog: I'm so happy this post is on record TODAY. Yes, TODAY. God you're a fool.

I mean, you gave away the game a season or so ago. Remember when you went on about being loud and obnoxious to get your way, then went on a victory lap after the changelog saying how you were going to abuse the changes? When is that unstoppable QB coming anyway? Or is that on hold for now? I was looking forward to the change of topic.

As for your actual crusade thing of a mismatched number of WRs vs CBs on the field...like I don't really get it, or see the big incentive. It's not like players are built realistically anywhere on the field. TEs are typically the fastest and most dangerous receiving threat, FBs never have any rushing or receiving abilities. Builds are exaggerated all over the field, it seems weird to be worked up that LBs can cover WRs, especially when LBs are expected to cover TEs that are even harder to cover.

It feels like trying to mirror an idealistic realism that doesn't exist in the rest of the game. But, you're an exceedingly intelligent person, so you know all of this. Which, honestly, makes me wonder why Trips is your white whale, as if it's some kind of magic bullet that should make it impossible to play zone. Which, isn't a new perspective, you used to tauntingly post Trips in response to GE years ago when he was running zone before it was cool.

https://www.cover1.net/nfl-film-room-defense-trips/
Here's multiple examples of teams not having a defender lined up across from every bunched WR.
Originally posted by
When Alexander blitzes, Preston Brown (No. 52) sells a fake blitz before dropping into the middle zone, where he has a hook-curl responsibility. Ramon Humber is pattern matching, which is essentially a zone coverage that turns into man if a receiver enters his zone.

It even talks about having an LB cover a middle zone, with a video!
https://streamable.com/dc9m2

What I will say though, is that you might have a point with some of the general passing issues.

The problem with fixing them, though, is the realistic fix doesn't really work. The realistic fix is hot reads and holding in backs to block blitzes. Neither of which really works well in a simulated game, as exampled by people's demands that we add options to never hold in blockers. It's out of the players control, and would more or less just happen randomly during the game, which has gotten complaints in the past.

Which, also, leads to the questionable basis that "stats" play in the game. Most teams and coaches wouldn't just keep doing something that doesn't work all game, but that's more or less how this game works by necessity. You're never going to get the dynamism of actual football, and exaggerated stats are going to reflect that, in one direction or another. Whether that's taking 50 sacks a game because your play calls can't handle the blitz, or putting up 50 points in a game because the defense can't handle your offense play.

More offensive plays might help. Maybe more quick hooks or something to counter the ROLB blitz, but they've been historically unpopular and I'm not confident that will change, and I'm definitely not sure what mechanical changes would need to happen to change it.

Originally posted by Corndog
Here's multiple examples of teams not having a defender lined up across from every bunched WR.

The article you quoted has this picture in it. How many secondary players are on the strong side of the hash mark? https://www.cover1.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/2018-06-12_00-17-37.jpg



Originally posted by Corndog
What I will say though, is that you might have a point with some of the general passing issues.


Might.

Originally posted by Corndog

The problem with fixing them, though, is the realistic fix doesn't really work.

Now we're getting somewhere.

We post stuff and get so little feedback (at times). We don't know your code, but some simple straightforward discussion on that's not possible, or that is possible, would go a long way.

Originally posted by Corndog

Remember when you went on about being loud and obnoxious to get your way, then went on a victory lap after the changelog saying how you were going to abuse the changes? When is that unstoppable QB coming anyway? Or is that on hold for now? I was looking forward to the change of topic.


Same time frame as I stated at the time. And never said it would be unstoppable, just that we'd have a deep passing game. And I also said, that Zone and Man could/would be rebalanced around it so that both would be viable.

Do I have to post the count # of how many times I said that both Zone and Man should be viable defenses?

But congrats on making all-run the new meta.

Ah well, balance is cyclical. I'm fine with the all run meta.