Warrior General Games

Instead of having anything to do with man or zone, the main coverage SA's should be tied to Coverage Technique which would allow for a lot more flexibility in how you want to build and use DB's. Also, remove all the extra stuff from Eyes on the Prize. DB's who think they can get an interception shouldn't have to have had a zone coverage that puts someone over the top for them just to go for an interception. They should go for it because their agent build them to be a risk taker rather than a shutdown guy.

With those changes, if you wanted to build a ball hawk CB who plays in a man system, you could. If you want to build a shutdown corner who plays in a zone system (rofl....zone...) you could. If you were in a man system on one team that benefited from On an Island, you wouldn't lose effectiveness just because you get stuck in zones on a new team (Free safety comes to mind...).

DB's already have so many things working against them. Couldn't the devs throw them this little crumb...

On an Island doesn't really make sense in zone coverage so I don't see why it is a problem as a man coverage SA.

Eye on the Prize however I can understand being more of a cover tech thing. Though I still like the designation of a person being over the top as that is far more realistic in use than setting up in 100% blitz, solo man cover and letting loose the sacks or INT's.

Zone Coverage could use an entirely different SA imo that helps guys in zone play the ball faster. Maybe something kinda like Chase Down where the defense collapses a bit faster in zone while the ball is in the air? That could also work for safeties and LB's in the man coverage end as well.

As far as zones go I think it would first be interesting to see how guys look in zone coverage with 100 in each skill. If they largely look great then an SA that I mentioned might be a really interesting shot at making regular zone coverage feasible for the average vet zone player. If it still looks bad well then it just obviously needs work from Corndog.

Originally posted by bhall43
On an Island doesn't really make sense in zone coverage so I don't see why it is a problem as a man coverage SA.

Eye on the Prize however I can understand being more of a cover tech thing. Though I still like the designation of a person being over the top as that is far more realistic in use than setting up in 100% blitz, solo man cover and letting loose the sacks or INT's.

Zone Coverage could use an entirely different SA imo that helps guys in zone play the ball faster. Maybe something kinda like Chase Down where the defense collapses a bit faster in zone while the ball is in the air? That could also work for safeties and LB's in the man coverage end as well.

I like at EotP as a risk/reward SA. If you're willing to build a high risk DB, you should be allowed. On top of that, the over the top help requirement just cuts out way too many of actual game situations to make the SA of much value.

OaI situations come up all the time in the zone, and I suspect actually end up being the standard since guys in coverage in zone don't wander over to help even if their zone is empty and another is getting flooded. If you're playing zone, you really need all the help you can get

There is no coverage aggressiveness tactic so lets put the high risk/high reward debate to bed right there. Its all reward. And that total bullshit that the requirement cuts the value.

As far as OaI goes, they aren't playing the man themselves when they are in zone coverage. They are playing the QB. It would make much more sense that there is an SA like Chase Down or like GLB1 Ball Hawk VA that gives a boost to players who see the ball leave the hands of the QB. Trust me I know it needs help, but at least it should be things that still make sense.

Originally posted by bhall43
There is no coverage aggressiveness tactic so lets put the high risk/high reward debate to bed right there. Its all reward. And that total bullshit that the requirement cuts the value.

As far as OaI goes, they aren't playing the man themselves when they are in zone coverage. They are playing the QB. It would make much more sense that there is an SA like Chase Down or like GLB1 Ball Hawk VA that gives a boost to players who see the ball leave the hands of the QB. Trust me I know it needs help, but at least it should be things that still make sense.

Uh...going for an interception, missing, and letting a WR run for a TD is pretty high risk. It's already happening now that DB's are more likely to jump at passes even without any vertical skill or much of a chance of deflecting or intercepting the ball. Why not let us have an SA that at least makes that behavior a little bit more meaningful.

How does 1 guy by himself in zone coverage end up being any different than 1 guy by himself in man coverage? And what possible rationale can you have that says he should do a better job in man coverage than in zone coverage for no other reason that he was assigned man coverage?

The guy in zone is playing the ball. The guy in man is playing the man. Do you get that?

Originally posted by bhall43
The guy in zone is playing the ball. The guy in man is playing the man. Do you get that?

If I agreed with those premises I would.

A guy in man still needs to play the ball or all he's doing is running close enough the WR to see the catch and make the tackle afterwards.

The guy in zone still needs to play the man since they are generally covering an area that leaves the possibility of them being too far away from a WR which means they have a good chance of doing nothing but watching a football fly well away from them into the waiting hands of a WR.

The guy in zone only holds the responsibility of the receiver while that receiver is in his zone. Do you believe that OaI should work for FS's and SS's for the man coverage too (while they are in their C2-3 zones? There is a completely distinct difference between the two. Once you figure these things out we can move on.

Originally posted by bhall43
The guy in zone only holds the responsibility of the receiver while that receiver is in his zone. Do you believe that OaI should work for FS's and SS's for the man coverage too (while they are in their C2-3 zones? There is a completely distinct difference between the two. Once you figure these things out we can move on.

I think OaI should work any time a guy is left by himself without any cares to whether he was assigned zone or man coverage to begin with. If he ends up on an island, he should get to use On an Island. That was my point to begin with. The trigger condition shouldn't care what the defender was assigned.

It should work like HB and other offense SA's do. It doesn't matter if a HB caught a pass or took a handoff, if they have Mr. Reliable and are near the first down, it'll fire. It doesn't matter if a WR is running a slant, hook, go, or screen, if they have YAC Attack and catch a pass, it can fire.

Originally posted by bhall43
On an Island doesn't really make sense in zone coverage so I don't see why it is a problem as a man coverage SA.

Eye on the Prize however I can understand being more of a cover tech thing. Though I still like the designation of a person being over the top as that is far more realistic in use than setting up in 100% blitz, solo man cover and letting loose the sacks or INT's.

Zone Coverage could use an entirely different SA imo that helps guys in zone play the ball faster. Maybe something kinda like Chase Down where the defense collapses a bit faster in zone while the ball is in the air? That could also work for safeties and LB's in the man coverage end as well.

There also need to be more man cover plays that use a combination of man/zone to allow for this underneath cover.

Originally posted by Time Trial
There also need to be more man cover plays that use a combination of man/zone to allow for this underneath cover.

There are a lot of Cover1/2 plays to make use of. Even a cover 3 play. Though I don't argue there could be a lot more interesting man/zone situations that utilize parts of the field.

Originally posted by bhall43
There are a lot of Cover1/2 plays to make use of. Even a cover 3 play. Though I don't argue there could be a lot more interesting man/zone situations that utilize parts of the field.

Ya, it's not a lack of plays with over the top help by itself that's so limiting for Eyes on the Prize, it's the additional requirement of being in zone coverage as well.

My suggestion was based on the fact I don't think a DB should care if they have over the top help to try and amp up and jump a pass. If they want to take the chance they'll miss the interception and let a WR have a clear shot at the end zone behind them, so be it. (and if you don't want such players on your team, also so be it)

bhall and I are just disagree opinion v opinion on the subject.

my worry is that if there is no requirement of over the top help the SA will largely be used and end up really good or really bad for teams.

Really Good: Guys start blitzing heavily causing quick throws into interceptions frequently despite 1v1 coverage.

Really bad: Lots of whiffing on 1v1 coverage and no help and these CB's are largely not sought after on the market and find it hard to find homes.

Originally posted by bhall43
my worry is that if there is no requirement of over the top help the SA will largely be used and end up really good or really bad for teams.

Really Good: Guys start blitzing heavily causing quick throws into interceptions frequently despite 1v1 coverage.

Really bad: Lots of whiffing on 1v1 coverage and no help and these CB's are largely not sought after on the market and find it hard to find homes.

I don't disagree that if the SA ends up too strong or too bad, it'll create problems for players finding teams on either side, can't have or must have. But I do think it's possible to find some balance there, and maybe work a build in such a way that if you whiffed, it wasn't the end of the world. For example, a really fast CB with excellent footwork and quickness that you only play at a CB slot that you believe won't get a lot of go routes.

And even with balance, I still think DC's are going to have their say in the matter. On Yorick, I'd prolly go with people picking it up because that whole team is high risk high reward. On Lost Lounge, I'd want On an Island because that team is far more 'safe' in nature.