Warrior General Games

This guy had 0 INTs and 2 FFs last season...

http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/player/244775

That should p much sum the problem up...

That is pretty awesome! Even if he was getting smoked due to lower conditioning/sprint and even coverage tech, one would think that 98 points invested in INT would have allowed him to snag a few. He couldn't have been destroyed on every route ran against him for the season. Morale was also likely another issue but still... If you invest heavily in INT you cannot afford anything else lol.

I'm all aboard the buff INT train. The cost of the skill is pretty high and it doesn't currently pay off.

Probably has more to do with the way that coverage is broken. DBs rarely break on a ball or play the INT. WRs adjust to errant throws, dive and slide for extra yardage and do so pretty frequently. Maybe Cov Tech or man awareness should add to the likelihood that a DB will dive on a pass or jump routes more. I dunno. It just seems like DB play the route that the WR is supposed to run while WRs get to make adjustments to the ball. DBs are dumb.

Originally posted by Detroit Leos
Probably has more to do with the way that coverage is broken. DBs rarely break on a ball or play the INT. WRs adjust to errant throws, dive and slide for extra yardage and do so pretty frequently. Maybe Cov Tech or man awareness should add to the likelihood that a DB will dive on a pass or jump routes more. I dunno. It just seems like DB play the route that the WR is supposed to run while WRs get to make adjustments to the ball. DBs are dumb.

I think this is it along with the broken Int trait.

I think what should happen is the really long passes should have a slight buff to intercepts?

I mean, obviously we dont want to go absolute mental on the turnovers, but a buff is definitely needed

I also think ints should happen much more when the WR is double covered.

Originally posted by Galactic Empire
I also think ints should happen much more when the WR is double covered.

Thats a good shout too... only small buffs though that defenses can have more variety in terms of investing in intercept, and the game planning element on defense means you cant be totally predictable v a top pass defense

I would stress small buffs though, for sure

Should happen even more when the receiver is nowhere near the ball, bad passes on defenders hands.

Originally posted by Detroit Leos
Probably has more to do with the way that coverage is broken. DBs rarely break on a ball or play the INT. WRs adjust to errant throws, dive and slide for extra yardage and do so pretty frequently. Maybe Cov Tech or man awareness should add to the likelihood that a DB will dive on a pass or jump routes more. I dunno. It just seems like DB play the route that the WR is supposed to run while WRs get to make adjustments to the ball. DBs are dumb.

Originally posted by Galactic Empire
I also think ints should happen much more when the WR is double covered.

Double coverage should automatically lead to a buff to CBs Interceptions.

What I'd like to know is what is the Counter to WRs Catch in Traffic. Is it Deflection? Seems to be since high Deflection helps CBs.

The code change should be to use the higher of Deflection or Interception in a roll against WR CiT. This would make sense since Ball Hawk / Long Reach are opposite of each other. Deflection should of course be cheaper than INT, but that's because INT is so much more valuable.

Originally posted by jakedood
I think what should happen is the really long passes should have a slight buff to intercepts?

I mean, obviously we dont want to go absolute mental on the turnovers, but a buff is definitely needed

Yes we should go mental on Long Passes. That's football. GLB2 Passing is just spam 15 yard routes. Those 15+ yard passes outside the hash marks are INT bait in real football and should be in GLB2 too. It's what should make Passing Power valuable instead of the negative it is.

Short passes need a WR completion buff and Long passes need a CB INT buff. I've been saying this for almost 20 seasons now.

How about making the Int skill a little cheaper while we're at it?

I am all for buffing the skill but not cheapening it if that is the case. If it is just going to be what it is right now may as well cheapen it.

Originally posted by bhall43
I am all for buffing the skill but not cheapening it if that is the case. If it is just going to be what it is right now may as well cheapen it.

From the looks of it I would say it needs both, but making it much more effective at 60 would go a long way. I just crippled my CB trying to max it for 0 benefits.

Originally posted by DeeVee8
From the looks of it I would say it needs both, but making it much more effective at 60 would go a long way. I just crippled my CB trying to max it for 0 benefits.

Cheapening the skill while increasing the effectiveness is just an easy way for power tackling builders to become much more effective at pass defending.