Defensive Settings

[Ajaxab]

I'm wondering if anyone has more detail about the 'run aggressive'/'pass aggressive' settings on the defensive game plan screen. The help file states,

"The Defensive Settings section determines specific behavior on defense, in comparison to the average coach in the league. Aggressive run or pass defense indicates that the defense is set to react to the run or pass as soon as the ball is snapped. If the defense is right, it will be much more effective. If it is wrong, a long gain could result."

I'm puzzled about how this works in the context of play diagnosis. If a defense has relatively good play diagnosis skills, does that mean you don't need to be as concerned about upping the aggressive run or pass defense settings because your defense's reaction skills are already good? Would the opposite be true in upping the aggressiveness settings in anticipation of what your opponent will do to compensate for your defense's relative stupidity?

Or does it work as if an aggressive run defense moves 8 into the box or an aggressive pass defense shifts into a nickel as soon as the ball is snapped? It seems like this makes more sense, but at the same time makes me wonder why the setting exists when it appears that the run anticipation percentages by down and distance are doing something relatively similar.

[Icy]

Never able to figure that myself, apart from coverage, defense startegies are a mistery to me in fof. I can have my team do what i want on the offensive side, but not in defense.

[Celeval]

I compare it to the manual playcalling - where you can select (something like) Aggressive Run, Run, Pass, or Aggressive Pass on every call. The percentages choose Run or Pass, then the Aggressive settings determine whether AR/R or AP/P.

[Kozure]

In my tests, which I no longer have the results of, aggressive run/pass will give you no better results. I have found that you are just as likely to give up a big pass play, regardless of whether you have aggressive pass set at 100 or 00. Same with aggressive run.

Defense in FOF is largely personnel based (Players and coaches). Tweaking gameplans on defense doesn't do you as much good as you would think.

If someone knows more info on how exactly defensive gameplanning works, I would love to know. I just don't see any major differences regardless of what kind of defense you have employed.

I ran test where I set all variables on all defensive gameplanning screens to 00 and my defense performs about the same as it does when you set all variables to 100.

Man-to-man defense, when tested over the course of 20 seasons (all the same season), ends up around the same as a bump and run defense tested over 20 season (all the same season). Same goes with 2-deep zone, 3-deep and 4-deep.

Defensive gameplanning is overrated.

I know this answer is more than what you were looking for, but I just thought this might help you. Get urself personnel to do well. Don't worry about gameplanning much.

[Ajaxab]

Hmmm. Interesting info. Anyone care to disagree with Kozure?

[Kozure]

I wanted to add, I find that switch defensive fronts 3-4, 4-3, improves sack production if you have the correct personnel.

In 3-4, blitz a lot and rush the SLB alot, 35 inside, 35 outside, and he will get you around 8-15 sacks. Even got 18 sacks in one test. WLB will get around 4-8 sacks too. And defensive line will get it's typical amount of production. And thus sacks will improve.

In 4-3, linebackers getting sacks are few and far between.

[Icy]

In my tests i must agree with Kozure, my best results are when i choose at least 90% for one coverage and the other 10% for the other ones. It doesn't matter which coverage is set at 90% as long as your personal is suited for it. About agressivenes, never found how it really affects the defensive perfomance. I could be wrong of course as it's so hard to make a real test as there are a lot of variables that could affect it. I would love to know more how real life strategies can be applied to fof, that doesn't mean i would like to know the exact values that make the game engine to get a sack or int etc as that would kill the inmersion factor, but at leats to know what affects each setting and how can be translated that to real life.

[Kozure]

In real life, Man-to-man (loose) coverage helps eliminate long pass plays but is vulnerable to short slants and WR screens.

Bump and run helps eliminate short pass plays as well as timing patterns, since the bumping disrupts timing, but long pass plays can result if the receiver beats the coverage at the line of scrimmage.
Bump and run coverage is also used to cause quarterbacks to stall, or take more time to throw the ball than they normally would. This helps pass rush and blitzing teams.

What I had is when I have 4-deep zone prevent coverage and repeatedly have 50-yard bombs completed on me. If I have 4-deep zone coverage, I would think that passes completed 40+ yards down field are few and far between. BUT IT ISN'T. It's a regular part of the game.

Also, defenses in real life use combinations of all of these coverages on some plays. They may have both corners in bump-n-run coverage with both safeties playing a 2-deep zone to eliminate a long gain if the corners are beat. There is also short zone coverage and man-to-man used on the same play, something the Steelers do a lot to confuse quarterbacks.

What sucks is that you cannot set up your gameplan to run bump and run coverage on third down and short and loose coverage on 1st and 10, or a long 3rd down. These combinations, I believe, are the essence of defensive gameplanning, but it is void in FOF.

Hopefully, it will be addressed in the next version of the game, as well as other gameplanning issues. I don't believe a team should prepare 100 for the run, with 100 in goal line defense on every play in every setting, and then be effective against the pass, which is what happens in the current game.

[Warhammer]

Hopefully, it will be addressed in the next version of the game, as well as other gameplanning issues. I don't believe a team should prepare 100 for the run, with 100 in goal line defense on every play in every setting, and then be effective against the pass, which is what happens in the current game.

If you read about this particular setting, that is not what the 100 represents. That does not mean that you are in a goalline D for every play, but you are very likely to be in a goalline d on applicable plays (i.e. third and short, on the goalline, etc.).

Run defense is mostly ratings, but all the settings on the screen work together. And I have noticed that the aggressiveness settings do make a HUGE difference to how your players perform, based upon what the offense does. If you are playing a very aggressive run d, you will be eaten up by a finesse running team (traps and counters, etc.). I think the method for testing may not be very revealing, as the overall average may not change much, but the peaks and standard dev. for the runs would be very revealing in such a test.

Pass D is more than setting your defensive plan around what coverage your players are best at. That is a big part, but it is not the only aspect of game planning against the pass.

[jbmagic]

I
Pass D is more than setting your defensive plan around what coverage your players are best at. That is a big part, but it is not the only aspect of game planning against the pass.



what is?

thanks

[Kozure]

No matter how you gameplan against the pass or run, it will have minimal affect on how a team performs against you, if it has any affect.

That's the point I was trying to make.

[Dutch]

I ran test where I set all variables on all defensive gameplanning screens to 00 and my defense performs about the same as it does when you set all variables to 100.

Horribly...I presume?

It's kind of like a race car driver testing to see if not pushing the throttle at all or pushing it all the way to the floor for the entire race has any difference.

Test #1 - No Throttle - I finished in last place because I went nowhere.
Test #2 - Full Throttle - I finished in last place because my engine blew up on the 2nd lap.

[Kozure]

Horribly...I presume?

It's kind of like a race car driver testing to see if not pushing the throttle at all or pushing it all the way to the floor for the entire race has any difference.

Test #1 - No Throttle - I finished in last place because I went nowhere.
Test #2 - Full Throttle - I finished in last place because my engine blew up on the 2nd lap.

Nope, both setting finished the same as the default settings, or just around where the default settings where.

[Dutch]

Nope, both setting finished the same as the default settings, or just around where the default settings where.

Oh...

{long pause}


Well then, perhaps you have a point.

:)

[MrBigglesworth]

Nope, both setting finished the same as the default settings, or just around where the default settings where.
What was the p-value of your test? What controls did you have in place to minimize confounding variables, such as the computer gameplanning for your defense?

[Kozure]

I have no idea what p-value is, but to ensure that things were the same throughout all tests:

I had gameplanning set to manual, so the CPU would not change it before every game.

I ran the same season with same roster and starting lineup 20 times with default lineup, then wrote down ending defensive results, such as yards givin up in both passing and rushing, sacks, INTs and so on.

Then I ran the same season as above 20 times with a defensive setting of 100 against the run in most categories, 00 in both nickle and dime defense and 100 in goalline to ensure that my team is prepared as it can get to playing the run, and I wrote down the stats after each of the 20 seasons.

Then I ran the same season 20 time with defensive settings against the run set at 00 (or what would be considered 100 against the pass), and set goalline defnese to 00, and set nickle and dime defense to 100 each.

The results of all three tests (20 seasons each) ended with teams giving up around the same yardage, points, sacks and so on. I was very dissapointed in this, and has since made me very skeptical on how important gameplanning is to not just defense, but to offense as well.

I no longer have the results. I've moved since I ran the results and felt it wasn't important to keep them.

I did the test originally to see how to best gameplan to a team's strenghts, and i ended up getting into this whole project.

Maybe I'll run the tests again and see what happens. Given, I ran the test before Solecismic released a bunch of its patches, I still haven't seen any difference in defensive gameplanning.

not sure if this answers your question, Mr. Bigglesworth, but it should be in the right direction.

[st.cronin]

Did you not record W-L percentages?

[Celeval]

Brand New League, random player file created by the game, drafted by my scout. Injuries off, computer has control of roster. Head Coach is 'Excellent' at Defensive Playcalling.

A: Scout has control of gameplan:
B: Recommend on every defensive screen of first game, left that way:
C: Expecting Run 0% across the board (Other settings, same as B):
D: Expecting Run 100% across the board (Other settings, same as B):

A1: Rush YPG allowed: 97.4 (3rd), Pass YPG allowed: 201.5 (8th), Points PG allowed: 14.3 (1st)
A2: Rush: 94.1 (3rd) Pass: 209.6 (13th) Points:14.5 (2nd)
A3: Rush: 103.5 (3rd) Pass: 202.6 (10th) Points:15.7 (4th)
Aavg: Rush: 98.3 ypg Pass: 204.6 ypg Points:14.8 ppg

Apparently I've "drafted" a pretty good defense.

B1: Rush: 109.1 (7th) Pass: 184.3 (1st) Points:14.3 (2nd)
B2: Rush: 119.8 (16th) Pass: 200.7 (6th) Points: 16.1 (3rd)
B3: Rush: 117.5 (12th) Pass: 212.8 (15th) Points: 16.5 (7th)
Bavg: Rush: 115.5 ypg Pass: 199.3 ypg Points:15.6 ppg

Looks like whatever that initial recommend was was more solid against the pass then the coaches game-by-game selection. Still very solid statistics.

C1: Rush: 150.5 (29th) Pass: 219.8 (23rd) Points:16.8 (9th)
C2: Rush: 149.1 (31st) Pass: 205.2 (7th) Points: 18.8 (9th)
C3: Rush: 122.1 (17th) Pass: 184.3 (3rd) Points:15.9 (5th)
Cavg: Rush: 140.6 ypg Pass: 203.1 ypg Points: 17.2 ppg

Ronnie Kemp would love this defense.

D1: Rush: 92.5 (1st) Pass: 235.3 (29th) Points: 18.3 (10th)
D2: Rush: 94.4 (2nd) Pass:209.4 (17th) Points: 17.4 (10th)
D3: Rush: 99.6 (3rd) Pass: 221.5 (19th) Points: 14.3 (1st)
Davg: Rush: 95.5 ypg Pass: 222.1 ypg Points: 16.7 ppg

Again not too terribly bad, but worse than the first two.

This is with a top-notch defense and a great head coach for defense. I'll try again with less than ideal conditions.

Kevin

[Kozure]

Did you not record W-L percentages?

Good question,

I did, i just forgot to mention that above. W-L and points given up/scored were about the same.

I used a pretty good team for the test, and it won the championship at least once in all tests, if i remember correctly. I simmed until the end of each season and playoffs. I did not keep playoff stats. I only wanted to know if the team could win a championship.

[Kozure]

Brand New League, random player file created by the game, drafted by my scout. Injuries off, computer has control of roster. Head Coach is 'Excellent' at Defensive Playcalling.

A: Scout has control of gameplan:
B: Recommend on every defensive screen of first game, left that way:
C: Expecting Run 0% across the board (Other settings, same as B):
D: Expecting Run 100% across the board (Other settings, same as B):

A1: Rush YPG allowed: 97.4 (3rd), Pass YPG allowed: 201.5 (8th), Points PG allowed: 14.3 (1st)
A2: Rush: 94.1 (3rd) Pass: 209.6 (13th) Points:14.5 (2nd)
A3: Rush: 103.5 (3rd) Pass: 202.6 (10th) Points:15.7 (4th)
Aavg: Rush: 98.3 ypg Pass: 204.6 ypg Points:14.8 ppg

Apparently I've "drafted" a pretty good defense.

B1: Rush: 109.1 (7th) Pass: 184.3 (1st) Points:14.3 (2nd)
B2: Rush: 119.8 (16th) Pass: 200.7 (6th) Points: 16.1 (3rd)
B3: Rush: 117.5 (12th) Pass: 212.8 (15th) Points: 16.5 (7th)
Bavg: Rush: 115.5 ypg Pass: 199.3 ypg Points:15.6 ppg

Looks like whatever that initial recommend was was more solid against the pass then the coaches game-by-game selection. Still very solid statistics.

C1: Rush: 150.5 (29th) Pass: 219.8 (23rd) Points:16.8 (9th)
C2: Rush: 149.1 (31st) Pass: 205.2 (7th) Points: 18.8 (9th)
C3: Rush: 122.1 (17th) Pass: 184.3 (3rd) Points:15.9 (5th)
Cavg: Rush: 140.6 ypg Pass: 203.1 ypg Points: 17.2 ppg

Ronnie Kemp would love this defense.

D1: Rush: 92.5 (1st) Pass: 235.3 (29th) Points: 18.3 (10th)
D2: Rush: 94.4 (2nd) Pass:209.4 (17th) Points: 17.4 (10th)
D3: Rush: 99.6 (3rd) Pass: 221.5 (19th) Points: 14.3 (1st)
Davg: Rush: 95.5 ypg Pass: 222.1 ypg Points: 16.7 ppg

Again not too terribly bad, but worse than the first two.

This is with a top-notch defense and a great head coach for defense. I'll try again with less than ideal conditions.

Kevin


Good test run, but, i would test more than 3-4 season for each test. Try at least 10.

Also, can you also track yards per carry/completion/pass attempt/completion percentage. It gives you a better idea of how affective the gameplan is. A defense might be giving up 150 yards a game against the run, but teams are only averaging 3.7 yard. But when you give up only 95 yards a game, a team might be averaging 4.7 yards per attempt. Weird, but you will run into that.

Regardless, it looks like the game may treat defensive gameplanning, in regard to expectation of run/pass, with more relavance. I like that.

Good test.

[Dutch]

Brand New League, random player file created by the game, drafted by my scout. Injuries off, computer has control of roster. Head Coach is 'Excellent' at Defensive Playcalling.

A: Scout has control of gameplan:
B: Recommend on every defensive screen of first game, left that way:
C: Expecting Run 0% across the board (Other settings, same as B):
D: Expecting Run 100% across the board (Other settings, same as B):

A1: Rush YPG allowed: 97.4 (3rd), Pass YPG allowed: 201.5 (8th), Points PG allowed: 14.3 (1st)
A2: Rush: 94.1 (3rd) Pass: 209.6 (13th) Points:14.5 (2nd)
A3: Rush: 103.5 (3rd) Pass: 202.6 (10th) Points:15.7 (4th)
Aavg: Rush: 98.3 ypg Pass: 204.6 ypg Points:14.8 ppg

Apparently I've "drafted" a pretty good defense.

B1: Rush: 109.1 (7th) Pass: 184.3 (1st) Points:14.3 (2nd)
B2: Rush: 119.8 (16th) Pass: 200.7 (6th) Points: 16.1 (3rd)
B3: Rush: 117.5 (12th) Pass: 212.8 (15th) Points: 16.5 (7th)
Bavg: Rush: 115.5 ypg Pass: 199.3 ypg Points:15.6 ppg

Looks like whatever that initial recommend was was more solid against the pass then the coaches game-by-game selection. Still very solid statistics.

C1: Rush: 150.5 (29th) Pass: 219.8 (23rd) Points:16.8 (9th)
C2: Rush: 149.1 (31st) Pass: 205.2 (7th) Points: 18.8 (9th)
C3: Rush: 122.1 (17th) Pass: 184.3 (3rd) Points:15.9 (5th)
Cavg: Rush: 140.6 ypg Pass: 203.1 ypg Points: 17.2 ppg

Ronnie Kemp would love this defense.

D1: Rush: 92.5 (1st) Pass: 235.3 (29th) Points: 18.3 (10th)
D2: Rush: 94.4 (2nd) Pass:209.4 (17th) Points: 17.4 (10th)
D3: Rush: 99.6 (3rd) Pass: 221.5 (19th) Points: 14.3 (1st)
Davg: Rush: 95.5 ypg Pass: 222.1 ypg Points: 16.7 ppg

Again not too terribly bad, but worse than the first two.

This is with a top-notch defense and a great head coach for defense. I'll try again with less than ideal conditions.

Kevin

If nothing else, it does seem to imply that it's possible that a "sweet spot" for where to set your run % would lie somewhere between 1-99 and probably closer to what the AI would suggest rather than the extremes.

I would venture to guess that if you were to just run a personalized static gameplan against this (where you used human logic for every situation) that you would really get the optimization out of this defense that we want.

[Celeval]

Yeah, well, I didn't have all night to run them. :-D

I would venture to say that personalizing gameplans for each opponent would have the best results. ;)

[Warhammer]

OK, my experience has been this (note this is based upon MP leagues so I cannot go back and re-test):

Season 1: Went with a generic defensive game plan, had a top 10 defense, but was horrible against the run, was good against the pass though. Team with a run of the mill offense was 2nd in the division and lost in first round of the playoffs (out-played that team everywhere but the scoreboard). I think we were around 299 YPG.

Season 2: I charted all of my opponent's plays (often for multiple games) and changed my run/pass settings to correspond to their tendencies. The offense was anemic as our starting RB was out for the year and started a rookie QB (who played above his head due to my offensive game plan). The defense was a top run defense (top 5 in YPC if I remember) and was one of the top pass defense teams (top 3 IIRC) and we wound up allowing roughly 295 YPG. However, this is a little misleading as our first 2-3 games we were absolutely lit up to the tune of 400+ YPG in each contest. This defense was MUCH better over the long haul as we absolutely shut down some opponents that year, we allowed 14 points per game I think. Team was second in the division and advanced to the league championship game where a poisoned buffet line took out half of my starters.

Year 3 - Same team, but tweaked run/pass %s based upon scouting report. The defense was solid, but fell apart at the end of the season. I will need to pull some information regarding how the team played when I get home. One note though, the team did suffer some hits in the quality of players as some of the older guys really tailed off this year.

[Dutch]

Yeah, well, I didn't have all night to run them. :-D

I would venture to say that personalizing gameplans for each opponent would have the best results. ;)

I think the test you did run debunked the theory that run % are meaningless. Which is what I am very glad to see (obviously). :)

[Dutch]

OK, my experience has been this (note this is based upon MP leagues so I cannot go back and re-test):

Season 1: Went with a generic defensive game plan, had a top 10 defense, but was horrible against the run, was good against the pass though. Team with a run of the mill offense was 2nd in the division and lost in first round of the playoffs (out-played that team everywhere but the scoreboard). I think we were around 299 YPG.

The big problem I have with the generic gameplan is that I figure that's the gameplan I'm absolutely torching in single player. :)

But that's the fascinating part about MP.

If I run a very aggressive offensive strategy against the AI defensive strategy, it seems I do very well.

But if I run a very aggressive offensive strategy against a human opponent that is expecting that, I tend to fall flat.

And if I run a conservative offense against a human opponent that is expecting something at the other end of the spectrum, I tend to be successful.

But in my mind, the run% is only about 25-50% of the gameplanning battle. (There are other options in the gameplan that I think are important like coverage and aggression for instance.)

Anyway, I'm sure you can totally screw it up (guess wrong) and still win. But it's a big bonus if you guess right.

That's my best-guess philosophy of defensive gameplanning.

[Warhammer]

The big problem I have with the generic gameplan is that I figure that's the gameplan I'm absolutely torching in single player. :)

Sorry, I should have been more specific, I used a one plan fits all approach, it was not the recommended settings.

But that's the fascinating part about MP.

If I run a very aggressive offensive strategy against the AI defensive strategy, it seems I do very well.

But if I run a very aggressive offensive strategy against a human opponent that is expecting that, I tend to fall flat.

This is where run aggressiveness comes into play. You see someone playing with a high run aggressiveness, boost your finesse run play %. You'll gash them for big runs.

And if I run a conservative offense against a human opponent that is expecting something at the other end of the spectrum, I tend to be successful.

That has been the problem with both of my offenses in the leagues I am in, we have great defenses, but the offenses lack a vital component.

But in my mind, the run% is only about 25-50% of the gameplanning battle. (There are other options in the gameplan that I think are important like coverage and aggression for instance.)

Anyway, I'm sure you can totally screw it up (guess wrong) and still win. But it's a big bonus if you guess right.

That's my best-guess philosophy of defensive gameplanning.

That is why I am a big fan of leagues where the time frame between games is more in the 4-5 day range. It gives you more time to set up your game plan, but it is still faster than one game a week.

[Celeval]

Season 2: I charted all of my opponent's plays (often for multiple games) and changed my run/pass settings to correspond to their tendencies.
I've had great success against the run doing this.

[Warhammer]

Yeah, I would do it for all my leagues but it just takes too dang long. You can also do it to really screw with your opponent's passing game, but that is a little more involved.

[Briggs]

I'm currently running a test on defensive game planning noting:

Completion % & Average Gain- Overall, Short, Med & Long.
Rush Average - Overall & Middle.
Points Allowed, Wins, Sacks, Ints, Fumbles, Red Zone %, 3rd Down conversions.

I'm currently testing coverages & blitz %'s to see their effect, I will be moving on to aggression next. This is likely going to take me weeks as I can't commit my entire life to it but I'm already noticing significant differences between coverage types.

Quick example: (Everything equal except pass coverages & run 10 times, injuries off etc..)
Bump and Run allowed 20.9% of deep passes to be completed at an average of 6.2 yards per pass play.
2 Deep Zone allowed 32.5% of deep passes to be completed at an average of 9.5 yards per pass play.

But the overall outcome was very similar as 2 Deep Zone was better against both Short and Medium pass plays, so if I had only looked at the overall outcome I would say pass coverages made no difference but they obviously do.

Another thing worth noting in another test is that B & R allowed a rushing average of 4.0 (3.8 up the middle) and 2 Deep Zone allowed 4.2 (4.0 middle) with everything equal. I'm sure I've seen elsewhere that 2 Deep Zone is weaker against the run due to the safties dropping back into deep coverage and that is certainly what I have found here.

I have also found that the more you blitz using Bump and Run the worse your deep pass coverage seem to be, a 10% decrees in blitzing saw a change from 26.4% to 20.9%. With 2 Deep Zone the 10% decrees had little effect on completion % (just under 2% swing) but the Rush D improved from a 4.21 to 3.97 average.

Dan