Warrior General Games

Here's how I see it. when WR1 hits the Z in his route, he should be faking (Bort said somewhere, sometime that WRs fake on cuts). At the same time, the name of the play implies that the QB should be pump faking. In that situation, the CB should be biting a hell of a lot more than if he was trailing. If trailing, he shouldn't see the QB at all and, rather than anticipating where the WR is going, he is focused on following. It's a lot harder to get faked when following the WR (or should be). I agree that a stop and go should also create separation, but that's a different animal.

I still stand by what you quoted. If the WRs aren't getting open more (particularly on plays that are specifically designed to fake them open), turning up the PDs will hose the passing game. Taking it a step farther, the CBs appear to need a bump to their PD, particularly on deeper balls. So, you have to give a little to get.

Originally posted by PP
Here's how I see it. when WR1 hits the Z in his route, he should be faking (Bort said somewhere, sometime that WRs fake on cuts). At the same time, the name of the play implies that the QB should be pump faking. In that situation, the CB should be biting a hell of a lot more than if he was trailing. If trailing, he shouldn't see the QB at all and, rather than anticipating where the WR is going, he is focused on following. It's a lot harder to get faked when following the WR (or should be). I agree that a stop and go should also create separation, but that's a different animal.

I still stand by what you quoted. If the WRs aren't getting open more (particularly on plays that are specifically designed to fake them open), turning up the PDs will hose the passing game. Taking it a step farther, the CBs appear to need a bump to their PD, particularly on deeper balls. So, you have to give a little to get.

I guess I am just taking the builds of those guys and thinking about the reality of the situation. Your corners are playing pretty far off the WR and moving back at the same time. It has to be a super fake to create any separation whatsoever in that case...which happens a couple times in that game for sure for against the aggressive corners. If the corners were playing tight the entire time...it would be more about builds for separation and the WR fake would come much more in effect. Agreed that the Pump fake from the QB would do nothing...but pump fakes shouldn't do really anything to Man to Man defense anyways. At least to the guy in man coverage.

Originally posted by bhall43
I guess I am just taking the builds of those guys and thinking about the reality of the situation. Your corners are playing pretty far off the WR and moving back at the same time. It has to be a super fake to create any separation whatsoever in that case...which happens a couple times in that game for sure for against the aggressive corners. If the corners were playing tight the entire time...it would be more about builds for separation and the WR fake would come much more in effect. Agreed that the Pump fake from the QB would do nothing...but pump fakes shouldn't do really anything to Man to Man defense anyways. At least to the guy in man coverage.

Ben has a point, really it should be the guys sitting in zones that get faked out or more than any other from Pump Fakes. CB's in M2M typically have their backs turned and are watching the WR's eyes more than anything. If they are dumb enough to try and peak in the backfield to see what the QB is doing then they usually gives the WR a chance to make a cut and break away.

If we are trying to keep up with the spirit of reality here, separation should be created in a few ways depending upon the coverage:

Zone - pump fakes and jukes by the WR. Very rarely should pure speed help here unless the safeties are pump faked/play actioned into taking a step one way while a WR blows right through their zone and they have to play catch up while the balls in the air.

M2M - pure speed and perfectly run routes. The speed comes into account when a WR just flat out out runs everyone on a fly route or deep post, the routes come into effect on everything whether it is a simple slant, hook, pump and go, etc....but it should take a WR with a lot in RR to pull it off consistently.

Originally posted by bhall43
Originally posted by PP

Here's how I see it. when WR1 hits the Z in his route, he should be faking (Bort said somewhere, sometime that WRs fake on cuts). At the same time, the name of the play implies that the QB should be pump faking. In that situation, the CB should be biting a hell of a lot more than if he was trailing. If trailing, he shouldn't see the QB at all and, rather than anticipating where the WR is going, he is focused on following. It's a lot harder to get faked when following the WR (or should be). I agree that a stop and go should also create separation, but that's a different animal.

I still stand by what you quoted. If the WRs aren't getting open more (particularly on plays that are specifically designed to fake them open), turning up the PDs will hose the passing game. Taking it a step farther, the CBs appear to need a bump to their PD, particularly on deeper balls. So, you have to give a little to get.

I guess I am just taking the builds of those guys and thinking about the reality of the situation. Your corners are playing pretty far off the WR and moving back at the same time. It has to be a super fake to create any separation whatsoever in that case...which happens a couple times in that game for sure for against the aggressive corners. If the corners were playing tight the entire time...it would be more about builds for separation and the WR fake would come much more in effect. Agreed that the Pump fake from the QB would do nothing...but pump fakes shouldn't do really anything to Man to Man defense anyways. At least to the guy in man coverage.

Every fake in regards to the pass game is a super fake. The defenders freeze for seconds at times.

A side issue, one thing I really do not like about man D is that on coverage against backs, they will run up towards them, allowing a HB running a go or bend to burn them every time since the cover guy will be running near full speed at the guy while he runs full speed in the opposite direction. The change to HB/FB coverage that came with the DPC weak/strongside coverage actually made things worse imo.

Oh and JD, RR is a boost to speed/agility, not to the actual route quality. In fact in this game there is no route quality, maybe that should be implemented against man to help cause separations on some cuts.

70% passing in single coverage? I certainly don't see this at all in CPL. These builds can't be too realistic... If I could get these results against a simple cover 1, I'd spam this play all day long

Originally posted by blln4lyf
Every fake in regards to the pass game is a super fake. The defenders freeze for seconds at times.


Of course they do...but defenders don't fall for every pump fake, and man to man defenders should never fall for a pump fake...a simple stop and go shouldnt be a "fake" necessarily...so i dont think the dot should shrink or anything...but he should stop and then have to have enough speed and agility to pick up with the WR again. This is where separation should occur on this sort of play when the defender is in man to man coverage.

However if im in man to man coverage and playing 5 yards off on you...im leaving myself open to that stop route, but its likely that when you start going again...ill have a couple yards on you to make that up...thats what its like in this game...defenders can play off with no sense of caring to get beat like that. In real life...the QB and WR would be like well shit...ill just hit you on that stop route every time. But in GLB...the CB just waits in anticipation or gets horribly faked out. There just isn't separation based on build.

Man to Man coverage just needs to be more dot against dot than it currently is and hopefully when you testers start on the campaign of making secondary attributes more useful, this will be something that gets fixed to a degree.

Originally posted by Octowned
70% passing in single coverage? I certainly don't see this at all in CPL. These builds can't be too realistic... If I could get these results against a simple cover 1, I'd spam this play all day long

Its fairly easy to carve single coverage up all day with good catching builds.

I always assumed that, at least in real life...

Zone = burned by pump fakes by the QB

M 2 M = burned by head fakes/jukes by the WR.

Originally posted by Mstr_October
in real life...

Zone = burned by pump fakes by the QB

M 2 M = burned by head fakes/jukes by the WR.

Yes, this is how it should be.

Originally posted by bhall43
Of course they do...but defenders don't fall for every pump fake, and man to man defenders should never fall for a pump fake...a simple stop and go shouldnt be a "fake" necessarily...so i dont think the dot should shrink or anything...but he should stop and then have to have enough speed and agility to pick up with the WR again. This is where separation should occur on this sort of play when the defender is in man to man coverage.

However if im in man to man coverage and playing 5 yards off on you...im leaving myself open to that stop route, but its likely that when you start going again...ill have a couple yards on you to make that up...thats what its like in this game...defenders can play off with no sense of caring to get beat like that. In real life...the QB and WR would be like well shit...ill just hit you on that stop route every time. But in GLB...the CB just waits in anticipation or gets horribly faked out. There just isn't separation based on build.

There is currently separation based on build in the sense that if you're a slower CB, you can't play tight or you will get beat, and if you play off then you are vulnerable to the stop routes you mentioned, and also in and out routes. (CB will lose his separation, then when the WR cuts to the side, the CB keeps backing up to try to get that vertical separation at first, instead of following in.) So having a better CB build does allow you to play tighter and be less vulnerable to get beat by routes, but everyone is still p much screwed when it comes to pump fakes. If I'm following you though, you're saying that playing off does help you to not get beat by as many yards on pump fakes on vertical routes, so in that sense having a better build and playing tighter comes with the downside of no cushion for pump fakes, which negates the advantage.

Originally posted by TrevJo
There is currently separation based on build in the sense that if you're a slower CB, you can't play tight or you will get beat, and if you play off then you are vulnerable to the stop routes you mentioned, and also in and out routes. (CB will lose his separation, then when the WR cuts to the side, the CB keeps backing up to try to get that vertical separation at first, instead of following in.) So having a better CB build does allow you to play tighter and be less vulnerable to get beat by routes, but everyone is still p much screwed when it comes to pump fakes. If I'm following you though, you're saying that playing off does help you to not get beat by as many yards on pump fakes on vertical routes, so in that sense having a better build and playing tighter comes with the downside of no cushion for pump fakes, which negates the advantage.

Playing further off and playing less aggressive helps prevent falling for pump fakes.

Originally posted by Mstr_October
I always assumed that, at least in real life...

Zone = burned by pump fakes by the QB

M 2 M = burned by head fakes/jukes by the WR.



I think there should be the occasional pump fake on M2M because there are times where the CB is peeking into the backfield. It shouldn't just be a blanket M2M=No Pump Fake. Aggressive settings w/ far coverage should be most susceptible (since the CB is gunning for the pick and they have time to find and track the WR after peeking at the QB).

So you'd have something like this (where the power of the fake scales, and is capped depending on coverage):

(Most susceptible to least susceptible)

Zone (100% effectiveness)
Aggressive/Far (60% effectiveness)
Aggressive/Medium
Aggressive/Close
Semi-Aggressive/Far (40% effectiveness)
Semi-Aggressive/Medium
Semi-Aggressive/Close
Medium/Far (20% effectiveness)
Medium/Medium
Medium/Close (5%-7% effectiveness)

100% effectiveness doesn't mean that it's 100% a fake. It just means that whatever the PF score happens to be, the full value is applied. So if you're on Medium/Far and you get a 120 PF score rolled against you, the end result is 24. There'd have to be a way where that would be enough to have you bite on it a couple times a season, but should save you from getting faked 80% of the time while playing Medium/Far.

imo, anyway.