Warrior General Games

It would stand to reason that a Scat back would be more comfortable split out wide than a powerback. Also a recieving TE could take snaps out wide better than a blocking TE.

The same could be said for blitz LBs at De or speed DE at OLB. Hard hitting corners at SS or man FS at corner, Zone CB at FS. Speed DT at DE. Cover LB at safety. Pass block guard at OT.

I'm not talking about removal of oop for these spots, just a tweak. For example assuming the baseline oop for HB at WR is 10%, make Scat backs only get 5% while powerbacks get 15% while combos and elusives stay at 10%. Likewise a man CB could be 15% oop at SS while Zone stays at 10% and hard hitter goes to 5%.

Thoughts?

Nobody plays anyone OOP because even the "small" OOP penalties have too pronounced an effect.

Honestly they should either get rid of OOP entirely, or make positions diverse enough where no OOP is needed because the in-position player will always be better suited to the role. (Personally, I think they could get rid of OOP entirely and it wouldn't affect much, but it's one of those silly relics that Bort clings to.)

Originally posted by Maddoc
Nobody plays anyone OOP because even the "small" OOP penalties have too pronounced an effect.

Honestly they should either get rid of OOP entirely, or make positions diverse enough where no OOP is needed because the in-position player will always be better suited to the role. (Personally, I think they could get rid of OOP entirely and it wouldn't affect much, but it's one of those silly relics that Bort clings to.)

False. The OOP penalty is there for a reason. Otherwise you are going to have some teams playing centers in their WR3 position to get super strength for outside blocking or for tackle breaking uber power.

Originally posted by Time Trial
Originally posted by Maddoc

Nobody plays anyone OOP because even the "small" OOP penalties have too pronounced an effect.

Honestly they should either get rid of OOP entirely, or make positions diverse enough where no OOP is needed because the in-position player will always be better suited to the role. (Personally, I think they could get rid of OOP entirely and it wouldn't affect much, but it's one of those silly relics that Bort clings to.)

False. The OOP penalty is there for a reason. Otherwise you are going to have some teams playing centers in their WR3 position to get super strength for outside blocking or for tackle breaking uber power.

Who would have less Speed, Agility, Catching, Carrying, Vision, and no receiving SAs.

So yeah, you would probably have some people building shitty WRs out of Centers I guess, doesn't mean it would work.

the OOP is there because Bort never had a proper understanding of how the game would work at higher levels from the get-go.

Mind you, it's an entirely separate issue that WR SAs suck, but what I'm getting at is that for the most part ALGs and SAs is enough to make playing most stuff OOP terrible even without the penalty.

The main exception to this being LBs, but again, that's because their SAs are turrible.

To me, OOPP is about lining up in a position that you don't practice at. You're used to running the play from another position, or you're not used to running the play at all. Thus you're not as comfortable with what you're doing, assignment-wise. In that sense, a scat back is just as out of position in the slot as a power back. He has better skills for it, but he's still out of position. When real teams use a HB out wide, they make a different formation for it.

Also, thread belongs here: http://goallineblitz.com/game/forum_thread_list.pl?forum_id=2