User Pass
Home Sign Up Contact Log In
Forum > Test Server Discussion > Test Server Discussions > Current Sim Issue- Improving the Pass Game/ Coverage Issues
Page:
 
Triple_A
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Staz
I'm not understanding the suggestion.


Man to man has to be changed somehow. How about changing the cushion to a max of 1 or 1.5 yard in player tactics instead of the zero or not allowing triple coverage in man to man. Or just allowing one man to man with the second coverage being zone so he gets the double coverage once he (Wr) enters that zone.
Edited by Triple_A on Mar 18, 2010 23:00:36
Edited by Triple_A on Mar 18, 2010 22:59:49
 
Kirghiz
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Triple_A
Man to man has to be changed somehow. How about changing the cushion to a max of 1 or 1.5 yard in player tactics instead of the zero or not allowing triple coverage in man to man. Or just allowing one man to man with the second coverage being zone so he gets the double coverage once he (Wr) enters that zone.


I agree that distances and such could possibly be tweaked. Double man coverage however should be just that, double coverage. If an offense has a WR on pace for 100 receptions, the DC should be able to stick four guys on him in man coverage if he wants to. The Randy Moss' and Larry Fitzgerald's of the world get double teamed most plays. I don't think that should be any different here.
 
tragula
title
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Kirghiz
I agree that distances and such could possibly be tweaked. Double man coverage however should be just that, double coverage. If an offense has a WR on pace for 100 receptions, the DC should be able to stick four guys on him in man coverage if he wants to. The Randy Moss' and Larry Fitzgerald's of the world get double teamed most plays. I don't think that should be any different here.


You really need to "teach" DB how to double team a receiver. Use a over/under, long/short or in/out methods. The DBs should know about the help and use it for the double team success.
 
ryanshaw
offline
Link
 
A few thoughts on the passing game:

1. In GLB there are very few instances where the WR catches the ball on the sideline and goes out of bounds. This is not just an aesthetic point. The reason QBs throw to the sidelines a lot in real life is that you cannot have any defenders out of bounds - it reduces the areas where defenders can actually cover and means you can be pretty sure that the DB is either trailing the play (if the WR is cutting out of bounds) or behind the WR (if it is a comeback play).
2. The big issue with sideline passes is that they are timing plays and GLB doesn't really work with timing patterns. One suggestion here is spot on - breaks should be sharp. There are very few real comeback patterns in GLB and most of the breaks are really, really slow. However, sideline patterns should be introduced as they are a big part of a passing game.
3. Maybe the best easy option is to change the plays so that certain WRs are in timing routes and some are not. The QB should be coded that if the primary WR is on a timing route he will throw it on time if the guy is open - if not, he just goes for the next best open man. If a 3 WR play had a couple of guys on timing routes OCs would have a couple of choices of primary for the timing pattern and then the TE/HB and last WR potentially available if the timing does not work, or they can select a non-timing primary. It will add a lot more options without changing the number of plays.
4. Hate to say it, but look back 10 seasons. When I watch replays of my team in S 5 the passing sim looks a lot better, but mainly because it is a lot slower. At least then it was clear that guys are getting open and the QB is trying to hit them. The problem is that as you get into higher levels the game is much faster and the defenders have dosed up on VA's since then and they are unrealistically fast. It might we worth revisiting some old games and having a look. Generically, WRs of equal agility/speed as CBs should always have the advantage since they know where they are going and so does the QB. If WRs were given the advantage 'back' but they actually had to get open to have a good chance of a catch it might make the sim look a lot better quite quickly.
 
Triple_A
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Kirghiz
I agree that distances and such could possibly be tweaked. Double man coverage however should be just that, double coverage. If an offense has a WR on pace for 100 receptions, the DC should be able to stick four guys on him in man coverage if he wants to. The Randy Moss' and Larry Fitzgerald's of the world get double teamed most plays. I don't think that should be any different here.


I agree that players are doubled teamed in the NFL, but it is mostly 1 man to man and another helps once the receiver enters the zone he is covering to make it double team. In glb, 2 secondaries , are instantly doing man to man coverage, and to see 3 is also common. Add the 4th when he enters the zone. How will the passing game improve when 3 secondaries are instantly doing man to man.
From watching some of the better teams in GLB (WL/Pro). They tend to use one player for man to man and zone the rest. Which results in a high passing game with more completions.
Nerfing or boosting certain VA's/SB's is more decremental to the game balance which has previously been suggested.
 
Mike1709
offline
Link
 
I don't know whether this is feasible with the dots being round rather than having a front and a back but it would be more realistic if defenders in zone who were having to backpedal (ie the receiver is running a post/streak route straight through their zone) couldn't move quite as fast as if they were running forward, maybe have the emphasis slightly more on agility than speed when backpedaling. To balance this, the vision check for zone defenders who are facing the QB should be predominently less than for defenders in man who have to turn and locate the ball in the air (much more difficult). This ties in with Triple A's thoughts on having more INT's in zone coverage near the bottom of the last page. Tragula is also on the right track with the over/under coverage on double teams especially if one is in man and the other in zone.

The second problem I see is that a lot of teams against 2 WR sets split the safeties to double each receiver and leave the LB's to pick up the TE/HB/FB which can make passing out of these formations very difficult. Defenses are able to do this because of the zero reaction times of the defense to it being a run - the safeties would still be able to get in and make a play if none of the front 7 get the stop whereas in reality it should be a 20-30 yard gain on inside runs if the ball carrier gets past the Front 7. There is a similar problem on passing downs, say 3rd and 6, where some defenses completely sell out against the pass (quarter D with 7 DB's regadless of offensive formation) and yet can still effectively stop the run due to a zero reaction time.
Edited by Mike1709 on Mar 23, 2010 13:26:55
 
Adderfist
offline
Link
 
On a similar note, in zone coverage instead of covering the player, you need to cover the player and keep your eyes on the QB.

Currently it's THIS IS MY ZONE. instead of "Position myself to see the receiver and QB at the same time"
 
Link
 
While I think this thread is very informative I hope testers/admin don't get fixated on the top 1% of teams in the game and the look more at the actual mechanics of the game and the teams that represent the "average" GLB agent.
 
Staz
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by ImTheScientist
While I think this thread is very informative I hope testers/admin don't get fixated on the top 1% of teams in the game and the look more at the actual mechanics of the game and the teams that represent the "average" GLB agent.


I'm very much concerned about the actual mechanics, and I agree with you. There are a lot of 'extras' that the elite use to their advantage, but the number one problem with just about everything in this sim is HOW players do what they do.
 
Adderfist
offline
Link
 
Another issue with passing. When you throw to a WR the QB automatically knows what the vision penalty is for the WR. (aka, he is in position to catch it every time)

Shouldn't a QB throw to a spot and have to hope the WR adjusts to it? Not have the QB throw to the adjusted WR? o.O
Edited by Adderfist on Mar 26, 2010 01:16:04
 
TrevJo
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by ryanshaw
A few thoughts on the passing game:

1. In GLB there are very few instances where the WR catches the ball on the sideline and goes out of bounds. This is not just an aesthetic point. The reason QBs throw to the sidelines a lot in real life is that you cannot have any defenders out of bounds - it reduces the areas where defenders can actually cover and means you can be pretty sure that the DB is either trailing the play (if the WR is cutting out of bounds) or behind the WR (if it is a comeback play).
2. The big issue with sideline passes is that they are timing plays and GLB doesn't really work with timing patterns. One suggestion here is spot on - breaks should be sharp. There are very few real comeback patterns in GLB and most of the breaks are really, really slow. However, sideline patterns should be introduced as they are a big part of a passing game.
3. Maybe the best easy option is to change the plays so that certain WRs are in timing routes and some are not. The QB should be coded that if the primary WR is on a timing route he will throw it on time if the guy is open - if not, he just goes for the next best open man. If a 3 WR play had a couple of guys on timing routes OCs would have a couple of choices of primary for the timing pattern and then the TE/HB and last WR potentially available if the timing does not work, or they can select a non-timing primary. It will add a lot more options without changing the number of plays.
4. Hate to say it, but look back 10 seasons. When I watch replays of my team in S 5 the passing sim looks a lot better, but mainly because it is a lot slower. At least then it was clear that guys are getting open and the QB is trying to hit them. The problem is that as you get into higher levels the game is much faster and the defenders have dosed up on VA's since then and they are unrealistically fast. It might we worth revisiting some old games and having a look. Generically, WRs of equal agility/speed as CBs should always have the advantage since they know where they are going and so does the QB. If WRs were given the advantage 'back' but they actually had to get open to have a good chance of a catch it might make the sim look a lot better quite quickly.


Excellent point about the sideline routes. Haven't really heard anyone bring it up with respect to GLB. In real football these sideline routes are critical because you can't reasonably throw into heavy coverage often like GLB QBs do. The biggest problem with the passing game remains the inability for receivers to get open, and part of the problem is definitely the limited areas of the field that receivers are using.
On the other hand, real corners for the most part have to decide whether they are playing inside or outside or off or deep... usually conceding the outside a bit because of the sideline; but GLB corners don't really favor covering the inside. If GLB WRs were better at taking advantage of losing a defender with a break inside/outside, corners would have to make more of an effort to take away the inside, and this would open up the opportunity for more sideline routes. Put that way, it seems pretty far away from happening.
 
Adderfist
offline
Link
 
When you throw to a WR the QB automatically knows what the vision penalty is for the WR. (aka, he is in position to catch it every time)
Shouldn't a QB throw to a spot and have to hope the WR adjusts to it? Not have the QB throw to the adjusted WR? o.O

Defenders should play the ball, not the WR. Except inside the 10 yard line.

"Wide open" needs to be defined differently based on the route being run. When you're even with a CB and there's no help over the top on a fly route. You're wide open.
 
Catch22
offline
Link
 
Thread locked by moderator.
 
Page:
 


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