Warrior General Games

I have been posed this question and I know it has been answered, but I can't remember 100% what the answer was. What say you GLB2 experts?

Is this a 2 WR formation or is this a 2 TE formation. Obviously its more important for the defense keying to identify as those are both viable options and both viable solutions based of play design.

Which is it?

2TE

Originally posted by TxSteve
2TE

That was my theory, but you know as well as I. For exploring and providing information to the community we all must have the 'why' attached to the 'is'.

Why is it flagged as 2TE rather than 2WR? Is it based of exclusivity or based on personal findings? How can a new user decide this on their own as you look at the drop down tree 2WR shows up first so they might think that it should be 2WR.

2 TE...without a doubt.

I don't know "why" Bort made it 2 TE, but he did. I personally think they should split up Big I and 2 TE.

Originally posted by Galactic Empire
I don't know "why" Bort made it 2 TE, but he did. I personally think they should split up Big I and 2 TE.

As do I, as they are completely different formations to plan for.

doobas™

2 TE.

Its a well accepted fact that anytime a second TE is on the field its 2 TE no matter the amount of WRs. Whoever it was that decided to first do it likely decided that

Now as to big I i think that would be a heavy or big package that is 2 TE based. So it is what it is.

Thank you everyone! I wanted to have a thread out there so that new users can easily find and digest not only the answer, but also the mentality behind why the users of the game 'know' its 2TE.