Warrior General Games

I think Gambler75 might be on to something:

Scale down the effect of catch attribute (or diminishing return it at least), on the FIRST interception roll. Not the one in "step 3" after a successful deflect.

If half the INTs we see as a result of the ball hawk VA firing resulted in a pass deflections rather than an interception, I think everyone could get behind that.

Originally posted by Kurt Davey


All I hear is DB's teleporting to the spot Is the problem yet no one wants to nerf the speed on Ball Hawk because it will hurt other defensive coverages. Get rid of the boost or nerf it in half and then players will have to adjust how they build DB's. No way a 155 speed CB should be able to cover a 170 speed WR.



I'm asking for a small easy to implement change to Ball hawk.

If we take out or nerf Speed, that would likely lead to an entire revamp of the passing game and coverage Ai.

Tbf... It probably could use a revamp, but I don't believe Bort would have an appetite for that right now.

Maybe an increase to the baseline catching difficulty would work. Fewer INTs, and 180 Speed WRs couldn't actually catch a pass. But that would require testing and fine tuning.

We don't actually care if DBs teleport, as long as there's not 500 INTs every season.

Originally posted by TJ Spikes

We don't actually care if DBs teleport, as long as there's not 500 INTs every season.


This, 100 percent.

MPMA! (Make Punters Matter Again!)

Originally posted by Ravenwood
I think Gambler75 might be on to something:

Scale down the effect of catch attribute (or diminishing return it at least), on the FIRST interception roll. Not the one in "step 3" after a successful deflect.

If half the INTs we see as a result of the ball hawk VA firing resulted in a pass deflections rather than an interception, I think everyone could get behind that.

You could honestly nerf ball hawk to 0%, and 10 in Zone Focus will still lead to a truly obnoxious amount of picks

Lowering the first Int rolls scaling on catch, would tone down the truly obnoxious "My catch score is so high, even though I'm 8 yards under the play, now make the play adjust to me winning the sim roll" ones. You'd actually have to play the man, with the deflect enough to get to the second roll. We'd likely see more "missed" dives underneath - so probably would need testing, and as TJ Spikes pointed out - would likely be a BIG boost to possWR types. But it would help the spdWRs as well, making outside WR passing not the "death of an offense."

I really think this would fix the problem, more than nerfing the hell out of ball hawk.

If ball hawk was the only problem, then 99 bullet setting would essentially 'fix it'. We all know it doesn't - if anything Zone Focus (ball hawk BEFORE the pass), is just as much, if not MORE of the problem.

And that doesn't even get into the 'exploity' action of lining up the CBs off the WR, drawing the IMMEDIATE pass, circumventing read orders, throwing to the outside WR even if they were listed as the 5th, final read. Since it makes the CB in almost a direct line, from the QB to the WR, trailing behind the WR in the lane under the pass - and they pick it off, despite being badly beat. That's not about ball hawk, that's about the sim's roll coming up Int, then it making the play match what the sim result was ...

/rant off

I can relate to your offensive frustrations, on the defensive side of the ball.

How do we cut down on the amount of Jukes, Hurdles, Spins, Surge and Power through's.

My thoughts here are there are big advantages/disadvantages on both sides of the ball, a headache I think we're all just going to have to deal with the best we can. Without cheating that is

I coach both sides typically, and yeah. Those can be a pain.

Juke (also Head Fake, Catch Fake, etc.) - AF% gear, building enough vision.

Spin, PowerThru, Stiff Arm, LowerShoulder, etc. - MT% gear, building enough tackling and/or strength. If you are particularly getting destroyed by head on tackle attempts vs PowerThru, try to get players aligned to come from more sideways angles. Front 90 degree arc, changes the sim to weight strength more heavily, both for O + defender, on the tackle attempts.

Also, keep an eye on missed dive tackles, versus non-dives. If you're seeing a ton of missed dive tackles, often that's D dots not getting off the blocks, and making penalized attempts as the back goes through the hole.

Stopping Surge? Let me know if you figure that one out. Short of stacking a goal line type D, basically hit them in the backfield or it fires.

And yes, people cheating dots with tons of extra SAs, - made a LOT of defenders look bad. MM kept them to relatively low scores, because we violently 'overbuild' tackling, and I ran a very boring offense that tried to barely throw at all versus them.

Anywho ... back on topic.

Counter point: https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=88962&pbp_id=322620

Originally posted by RyanCane26
Counter point: https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=88962&pbp_id=322620

Was this an example of the defenders all failing the vision check so they didn't properly see where the ball was going? Or was the pass just thrown really high? What's your take on what you're seeing there without obviously pointing out too much about the builds of the defenders

Aggressive coverage tactic back firing all at once

Originally posted by RyanCane26
Aggressive coverage tactic back firing all at once

Oh so you are saying there is a downside for all players set to aggressive and no safety net, that seems like it’s working as intended then.

But maybe aggressive isn’t penalized enough. We’ve seen it some seasons where there are so many knock looses or pass deflects that it’s just boring as hell too though. I would imagine the intention would be to have some safe players and some play makers.

Ryan would you be willing to share which backfield tactic, if any, tends to cause the most knock looses? I always thought playing loose to get some momentum would be the key but I don’t think that’s the case.


Crap we were talking about ball hawk and interceptions. Nevermind. Carry on.

Fair but why not teleport to where they could jump for the pass

That's a good F'ng question.

Why did all 3 defenders go to that spot?

Check out this one

https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=88369&pbp_id=945543

After the ball is thrown, right when the ball gets to the blue line, the defense breaks towards the INT spot, leaving the WR alone.

The WR makes what I assume is some kind of jumping catch-like thing.

What if the interception spot only gets calculated with X-Y coordinates? And the only Z axis is catching radius?

What if the height / jumping / Z axis calculation gets added on after the X-Y spot is determined?


I have no clue.... Just spit balling.

So .. what if there's like a vision check type of thing, after the catch point is determined, where the QB needs to determine if there's a defender in the way, in order to aim high?

If fail, then ball launches normally to the X-Y spot. If successful, then extra Z axis gets added?

Originally posted by TJ Spikes
So .. what if there's like a vision check type of thing, after the catch point is determined, where the QB needs to determine if there's a defender in the way, in order to aim high?

If fail, then ball launches normally to the X-Y spot. If successful, then extra Z axis gets added?





Look Off fo sho