Warrior General Games

Originally posted by _OSIRIS_
This is a huge mistake I see so many teams make. I see so many teams with 5-6 LBs, 4 DEs, 6+ WRs. That's when agents get irritated and want released because they only see a few plays a game and wrecks your salary cap.

This is why I only carry 2 human WRs. I know where I want to target every play and I want to target my best WR generally a star. The third WR may get just 2-3 targets a game. That's no fun for them. May as well play a TE as the third WR and give that agent's TE some extra plays and 2-3 extra targets.

I have 3 star LBs on my team so I have a CPU as my forth. If it's only going to play in 4LB sets may as well have it cover the FB.

Too much depth is a very common problem.




I run 3DE and two star DT's. I use 4 CB because most teams rarely run 5wr plays. I use 4wr because I don't run a lot of 5wr plays either but if I do I use a TE in one of the spots. I could probably get away with 3wr and not use a star spot on a QB and save enough salary to fit a couple more stars but Ive been happy with the 7 or 8 I am able to fit for what I'm trying to do. I might change it up a little the next run and instead of a star qb use 2 star LB depending on how the new break sack SA works out. I think it would probably help my defense a lot more than a star QB helps the offense.

Originally posted by rackhound
I run 3DE and two star DT's. I use 4 CB because most teams rarely run 5wr plays. I use 4wr because I don't run a lot of 5wr plays either but if I do I use a TE in one of the spots. I could probably get away with 3wr and not use a star spot on a QB and save enough salary to fit a couple more stars but Ive been happy with the 7 or 8 I am able to fit for what I'm trying to do. I might change it up a little the next run and instead of a star qb use 2 star LB depending on how the new break sack SA works out. I think it would probably help my defense a lot more than a star QB helps the offense.

7-8 stars is not a bad number. Plenty of room for some defensive specialists.

Originally posted by _OSIRIS_
7-8 stars is not a bad number. Plenty of room for some defensive specialists.

I agree on this for sure. You can make some really efficient specialists when you do have extra depth.

Now on the WR i have never thought about the using the second string TE as a WR. Something new to try for sure. I have liked having three solid WR just so when the QB doesn't target who i want its still a good WR.

Originally posted by rackhound
I run 3DE and two star DT's. I use 4 CB because most teams rarely run 5wr plays. I use 4wr because I don't run a lot of 5wr plays either but if I do I use a TE in one of the spots. I could probably get away with 3wr and not use a star spot on a QB and save enough salary to fit a couple more stars but Ive been happy with the 7 or 8 I am able to fit for what I'm trying to do. I might change it up a little the next run and instead of a star qb use 2 star LB depending on how the new break sack SA works out. I think it would probably help my defense a lot more than a star QB helps the offense.

Now a star QB could be very plausible if the break sack SA really does work. If at vet you really could reduce half the sacks you take and make a good throw. Shit that would win a few more games for sure then.

From what i remember ph33p saying from his test with a QB and break sack was you needed to invest a decent amount into drop back power for it to be effective

Originally posted by Bengals4ever
From what i remember ph33p saying from his test with a QB and break sack was you needed to invest a decent amount into drop back power for it to be effective

Balance also, but it seems pretty effective.

Originally posted by dredgar
Now a star QB could be very plausible if the break sack SA really does work. If at vet you really could reduce half the sacks you take and make a good throw. Shit that would win a few more games for sure then.

The biggest benefit if shedding sacks is super effective would be playing with other plays which are more sack prone. Could potentially find some other pass plays that result in good completion rates and yardage. You would have to feel real confident in the sack shedding though to run some of them.

Originally posted by dredgar
Now a star QB could be very plausible if the break sack SA really does work. If at vet you really could reduce half the sacks you take and make a good throw. Shit that would win a few more games for sure then.

Originally posted by Detroit Leos
The biggest benefit if shedding sacks is super effective would be playing with other plays which are more sack prone. Could potentially find some other pass plays that result in good completion rates and yardage. You would have to feel real confident in the sack shedding though to run some of them.

Originally posted by Bengals4ever
From what i remember ph33p saying from his test with a QB and break sack was you needed to invest a decent amount into drop back power for it to be effective

Originally posted by BoDiddley
Balance also, but it seems pretty effective.

I saw his tests and it was very effective from what I could tell but he had a lot invested into those two stats. I didn't add it until this season for vet once I had built my QB to a point where I was happy with his passing skills so I knew what I could afford to put in it without gimping him and was able to get both balance and drop back power to 52 so this season is pretty much a test to see if it can be effective at that level. If it is then it should open up the playbook to some of the sack prone plays that are good If not for taking so many sacks running them, and also for helping to avoid sacks in general. If it works I think it will be a must have SA. Ive got my fingers crossed

Originally posted by rackhound
I saw his tests and it was very effective from what I could tell but he had a lot invested into those two stats. I didn't add it until this season for vet once I had built my QB to a point where I was happy with his passing skills so I knew what I could afford to put in it without gimping him and was able to get both balance and drop back power to 52 so this season is pretty much a test to see if it can be effective at that level. If it is then it should open up the playbook to some of the sack prone plays that are good If not for taking so many sacks running them, and also for helping to avoid sacks in general. If it works I think it will be a must have SA. Ive got my fingers crossed
Don't think 52 will be enough. 80+ seems to be good mark, like with power rushing

Originally posted by BoDiddley

Don't think 52 will be enough. 80+ seems to be good mark, like with power rushing



I'm hoping its enough to be somewhat effective, but if it scales the way power rushing does your probably right.