User Pass
Home Sign Up Contact Log In
Forum > Goal Line Blitz 2 > S57 Changelog Requests - and some State of the Game stuff after it
Page:
 
Xars
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Xars


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 Xars


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?


I don't see any comment regarding how it would make your day that I never buy FLEX again. Or the lack of people mentioned in my potential FLEX giveaway program.

Don't you want me gone? I'm clearly selfish and only interested in my personal success.
 
Corndog
Admin
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Xars
I don't see any comment regarding how it would make your day that I never buy FLEX again. Or the lack of people mentioned in my potential FLEX giveaway program.

Don't you want me gone? I'm clearly selfish and only interested in my personal success.


No, you're lovely. Why would I want you gone? If this game was only for people who didn't want to win there would be nobody left.

Besides, we live in a capitalist society, selfishness is a virtue. Embrace the madness.
 
vipermaw82
offline
Link
 
I'd like to reoffer GIFs as a suggestion at this point...
 
Corndog
Admin
offline
Link
 
Hey, it's pretty civil this time. The last changelog discussion was Xars calling me stupid in every response.

The indignation is an interesting turn this time anyway. Admittedly in response to something probably poorly worded...was less about in game success and more about winning the discussion.

Which, again, I suspect he knows that given the context of the post I was responding to. Despite his tendency to hyperfocus, he is one of the smarter people in the room.
Edited by Corndog on Dec 13, 2021 10:39:44
Edited by Corndog on Dec 13, 2021 10:25:20
 
Adderfist
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Xars
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.




I don't disagree that passing short and medium need a buff vs zones. It's an issue with how zones are thrown into as opposed to man. Again, not the blitz. Things like people sitting down in the gaps between zones don't happen here, You don't have WR's slow down coming out of a zone so they can be targeted before they're into the next one.

Uncovered WR's aren't overriding priority.

Originally posted by corndog

as exampled by people's demands that we add options to never hold in blockers.


I'm not really against holding blockers in, I don't like the lack of control. If we could have some of the plays hold the HB or FB in to block, by play design, I'd be all for it.
Edited by Adderfist on Dec 13, 2021 13:24:27
 
4chanCitizen
offline
Link
 
Oh fuck yes is it that time of the season where everyone starts arguing? Did I miss it? Please tell me I didn't miss it.
 
Adderfist
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by 4chanCitizen
Oh fuck yes is it that time of the season where everyone starts arguing? Did I miss it? Please tell me I didn't miss it.


Fashionably late.
 
4chanCitizen
offline
Link
 
Here's a request.

Someone just sent me a chat asking if I would be interested in recruiting their player for my team. I opened the chat to see what it was but didn't respond right away because I went to go check my teams roster to see if I had space, check the salary, y'know that stuff. Problem is since I closed the chat and he wasn't my friend or anything it's not gone forever I have no clue how to find him again

It turns out I wasn't able to add him to my team but I would rather message him than just leave him hanging. Can we adjust the chat conversations so that if non friends message you they stay on current conversations unless you manually remove them from the current conversations list?
 
Corndog
Admin
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Adderfist
I'm not really against holding blockers in, I don't like the lack of control. If we could have some of the plays hold the HB or FB in to block, by play design, I'd be all for it.


Yeah, that was more or less my point. Lack of control in game adjustments are generally disliked. The problem might be helped by plays that do those things, but I'm also not super confident in that. Like there's already short pass plays, but they aren't used. Most plays aren't "good".

Making short passes better without making medium-long passes OP has eluded us for a long time. Especially since like, a pass to the WR at the line of scrimmage is the same distance as a TE 10 yards deep, that's a thing I don't have a good idea on how to reconcile. One relies on yards after catch, the other relies on being blanketed in coverage to not be brokenly strong.

Don't know man.
 
Corndog
Admin
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by 4chanCitizen
Here's a request.

Someone just sent me a chat asking if I would be interested in recruiting their player for my team. I opened the chat to see what it was but didn't respond right away because I went to go check my teams roster to see if I had space, check the salary, y'know that stuff. Problem is since I closed the chat and he wasn't my friend or anything it's not gone forever I have no clue how to find him again

It turns out I wasn't able to add him to my team but I would rather message him than just leave him hanging. Can we adjust the chat conversations so that if non friends message you they stay on current conversations unless you manually remove them from the current conversations list?


I thought they only went away if you clicked the X?
 
Adderfist
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Corndog
Yeah, that was more or less my point. Lack of control in game adjustments are generally disliked. The problem might be helped by plays that do those things, but I'm also not super confident in that. Like there's already short pass plays, but they aren't used. Most plays aren't "good".

Making short passes better without making medium-long passes OP has eluded us for a long time. Especially since like, a pass to the WR at the line of scrimmage is the same distance as a TE 10 yards deep, that's a thing I don't have a good idea on how to reconcile. One relies on yards after catch, the other relies on being blanketed in coverage to not be brokenly strong.

Don't know man.


What about increasing the route elusiveness (effectiveness) the closer to the LOS breaks are? That would help on the short man plays at least.
Edited by Adderfist on Dec 14, 2021 14:33:13
 
4chanCitizen
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Corndog
I thought they only went away if you clicked the X?



omg I get it now
 
Xars
offline
Link
 
Let’s try to recap what’s going on:

On Passes that have YPC of 8-12 yards, the INT rate, Sack rate and Comp% are all too low. This results in YPA numbers that are horrible. It’s bad with a Man D and it’s worse for Zone. There are certainly a bunch of mechanics going on under the hood due to builds, physics and whatever causing this and fixing one or many of them is probably difficult. However, somehow it has to be addressed because we’ve created the all-run meta.

Longer passes aren’t in vogue but with the Pass Power arc change these should be where the action moves to. Longer passes can support higher INT and Sacks rates since the YPC is higher - and will probably need to.

So, do I want the jumping LB INT thing toned down? Absolutely. Does this mean I want all of Zone nerfed? No.

Wanting one aspect changed doesn’t mean I want an entire gameplay option destroyed.

Now is it easy to thread the needle code-wise and fix one thing while not breaking the whole? Probably not. But that’s where developer feedback comes in.

We aren’t typically told what the code can do, and there are good reasons for that because there are plenty of us that would reverse engineer the system. But it’s also bad because we then have no real way to help Bort/Cdog fix the problem.

So I have this theoretical idea with no idea of if/how they could make it work because I don’t understand what’s actually going on.

But spit-balling it’s something like this:

A 10yd pass over the middle has a ball flight of 12 ticks (or whatever) and let’s say that Awareness checks happen every 10 ticks so most Short passes only give the O & D player one chance to pass or fail the awareness check. Passing a check means a 60-70% completion with a 1-2% INT rate and maybe 1-2% Sacks. This is how you get a 6.5-7.5 YPA.

A 30yd pass to the sideline actually flies 55yards and takes 60 ticks (again, example that’s probably wrong but whatever). This means that the O & D player can make/fail 6-7 checks. Now if the YPC is 30, the even a 40% completion from a S* QB to a S* WR guarded by a non-S* CB is going to cause a 12 YPA and blow up the game.

So you create a system that rewards multiple consecutively passed Awareness checks exponentially. This creates the situation where the Offense can be close to game breaking with ideally built S* against normal CBs, but allows a S* CB to counter act things.

So a 50 Awareness player has a 50% chance to succeed. Getting 5 consecutive success checks is a 3.12% event. But a 95 Awareness player can get 5 consecutive success rolls 77% of the time (with a 95% base rate). Add in double teams by playing Man underneath with a S* CB that can run with a S* WR who gets Safety help and things can go to shit fast with really exponential effects.

This allows for short passes to not have absurd levels of INT (or Sacks), but does allow for longer throws to have dramatically higher risk of INT and Sack.

Now can something like this work? I have no idea.

But short passes can’t have 10% INT rates from jumping LBs. (Nor 20%+ Sack rates.). It can’t be 0% either because it’s an element of real games we want represented in GLB2 but the current rate is absurd.

Long passes could have 10% INT rates. They may need even more. We don’t know yet. But Long passes happen in real football and they’ve been missing from GLB.

How this all actually gets done under the hood is a challenge, but we’ve got to start tweaking some things and see how they work.

I want to fix the Salary issue first - and do it respectfully - so teams and players don’t blow up during a run to Vet because it’s a pretty simple game balance fix. It’s a content change more than a code change. It just needs to be done carefully.

At the same time, small tweaks should be made to fix the short pass game with the idea that it may not be enough and multiple change logs will be needed OR arhat it might go too far and have to be corrected back.

But doing nothing isn’t really an option when multiple Zone plays are running a negative net yardage and Man plays are sub-2.

Sorry Myrik, you broke Humpty Dumpty so bad that we have to try and fix it - but at least everyone’s D is getting nerfed. You’ll probably still win the Ladder, just with 3yd Zone D plays and not (.30) Zone D plays.

Then you can get Swat Down - but you might not be enamored either it once you have it (my interest faded on it).


 
Ghanima
offline
Link
 
There are so many ints on short passes cuz current meta are short passes. And every good D is sitting there waiting. Problem is ( in my opinion) that not many people are good at pass protection. If we boost pass protection just for every1 we will somehow fix it.

So lower sp points for pass protections skills. like -10%? That can be non destructive change.
 
Xars
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Ghanima
There are so many ints on short passes cuz current meta are short passes.


That's #, not %.


Originally posted by Ghanima
Problem is ( in my opinion) that not many people are good at pass protection. If we boost pass protection just for every1 we will somehow fix it.

So lower sp points for pass protections skills. like -10%? That can be non destructive change.


S* HB allows for SPs to be put into Pass Pro but almost no one does it. True.

Would it work though if people did?

I'm not sure because on Passing routes the HB is either going out or being held in by the rattle mechanic. Should HB and FB routes be delayed while they scan for blitzers first? Maybe but then that creates other problems.

Blitzing LBs should get picked up by the FB/HB more often and Tiger LBs should almost always get picked up. The FS/SS Tigers should be the "blind" ones, but not the RO since that's the FB/HB actual responsibility.

Here's the game balance thing:

If you reduce INTs, but not Sacks, then Zone D takes a bigger hit than Man. Now some might be warranted, but it can easily go too far.

If you reduce Sacks, but not INTs, then Man D takes the bigger hit and it's already at a NET disadvantage to Zone in the Passing game which is 60-65% of the play calls at Vet.

It's a thread the needle thing. Probably needs continual tweaking over several seasons. Hard to do just once and get it "right".
 
Page:
 


You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.