Warrior General Games

Why has the ROLB been replaced with the LOLB? Is this intended?

By position this leaves the following LBs in the game in specific defensive sets.

MLB 9
LOLB 7
ROLB 4
RILB/LILB 2.

If it is intended, can we get 1 more specific spots for MLB and LOLB as they are in on everything? I would gladly give up my RILB1/LILB1 slots as they are only in 2 formations.

I would suggest the following Yellow Slots

NT1
OLB1
OLB2
MLB1
MLB2
MLB3

In doing so you can use either MLB1, 2 or 3 to have specific MB or ILBs in either D Formations or the DAI.

The 2 OLB settings could be used for either ROLB or LOLB.

Also on the formation page both ROLB and LOLB are listed on the 326 thus making it more confusing.

Anyone ever get an answer on this? I'm still curious.

Originally posted by VenomCoach
Why has the ROLB been replaced with the LOLB? Is this intended?

By position this leaves the following LBs in the game in specific defensive sets.

MLB 9
LOLB 7
ROLB 4
RILB/LILB 2.

If it is intended, can we get 1 more specific spots for MLB and LOLB as they are in on everything? I would gladly give up my RILB1/LILB1 slots as they are only in 2 formations.

I would suggest the following Yellow Slots

NT1
OLB1
OLB2
MLB1
MLB2
MLB3

In doing so you can use either MLB1, 2 or 3 to have specific MB or ILBs in either D Formations or the DAI.

The 2 OLB settings could be used for either ROLB or LOLB.

Also on the formation page both ROLB and LOLB are listed on the 326 thus making it more confusing.



Wow.. that was done last season. I can't recall the replies, but if you are really into finding out feel free to dig through some forum threads.

Was intentional as Bort incorrectly had ROLB in the 3-2-6 in the old DPC and corrected it when he created the new DPC by replacing the ROLB with the LOLB. We won't be adding any more custom slots.

You can file a bug for the formation page issue and we'll get it corrected when Bort has time to get to it.

I don't mind it at all. LOLB should be a better pass protector than ROLB since he regularly covers TE.

I always liked it as a means to get the ROLB more plays.

Originally posted by AngryDragon
I always liked it as a means to get the ROLB more plays.

this,

Now tell me why the 3 man fronts are different based on the # of LB's in the game.

Originally posted by AngryDragon
I always liked it as a means to get the ROLB more plays.

This

Originally posted by AngryDragon
I always liked it as a means to get the ROLB more plays.

same here. If the other team calls plays that brings up a nickel formation in your dpc all game long, then the rolb gets screwed, but using 326 for some of those plays that might otherwise be nickel, lets your rolb get the plays in he needs. Yet another reason I am glad I quit doing DC.

I already changed everything over last season. After going through the trouble, I'd be dead set against changing it back.