How to play Defense [Archive] - Front Office Football Central

Yoda

04-01-2009, 06:07 PM

From: • Login (http://primetime-football-league.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6296)

Am I a guru at this game. No. I think am a pretty good player that has been able to put a few things together that work. I still have alot of learn (In someways I feel I know more about defense than offense).

One of the better things you can do is read through the help file ingame and the 2007 player guide found here:
http://www.solecismic.com/support/FOF20 ... rGuide.pdf (http://www.solecismic.com/support/FOF2007PlayerGuide.pdf)

Required Reading:
I find that one of the more misunderstood applications of defense is what 'agressive' means. From the player guide:
An "aggressive" expectation means that your linebackers and safeties
are either moving forward to stop the run or moving into pass coverage
as the ball is being snapped. There are both greater risks and rewards
for guessing right or wrong.

• Run - Aggressive - The defense is expecting the run, and the
linebackers and secondary are going to be moving toward the line
at the snap.
• Run - Normal - The defense is expecting the run, but won’t take
any serious risks in preparation.
• Pass - Normal - The defense is expecting the pass, but won’t take
any serious risks in preparation.
• Pass - Aggressive - The defense is expecting the pass, and the
linebackers and secondary are going to be moving into pass
coverage at the snap.

And now these:
The following pass coverages are available (when blitzing multiple
players, some choices for double teams are not available):
• 1-Deep, Loose Man - This is a basic man-to-man coverage with
only the free safety in a deep zone. This is generally called when a
run is expected, as it is very vulnerable to any kind of passing
attack, particularly to short passes.
• 1-Deep, Bump and Run - This is the traditional "46" defense, and
like the 1-Deep, Loose Man, gets eight men in the box, possibly
nine when playing the run aggressively. It is a man-to-man
coverage with only the free safety in a deep zone. Pass defenders
play much closer to the receivers, trying to keep them from
breaking free. This is also vulnerable to a passing attack,
particularly to deep passes.
• 2-Deep, Loose Man - This is one of the most basic coverages.
Both safeties drop into deep zones, and the other defenders play a
man-to-man defense. It has no major strengths or weaknesses.
• 2-Deep, Bump and Run - This is the "Cover-2" defense that so
many teams use today. Both safeties drop into deep zones, and
the other pass defenders play much closer to the receivers, often
bumping them within the legal five-yard limit. This defense has no
major weaknesses, and is a little stronger against a short passing
attack.
• Strong-Side Man Cover - This is a combination zone/man-to-man
defense with the safeties in two deep zones. On the strong side of
the field, defenders are in a man-to-man coverage scheme. On the
weak side, the cornerback plays in a short zone along with
linebackers, if necessary. This coverage gives you a little variety
and is slightly worse against teams with a good receiving tight end.
• Weak-Side Man Cover - This is a combination zone/man-to-man
defense with the safeties in two deep zones. On the weak side of
the field, defenders are in a man-to-man coverage scheme. On the
strong side, the cornerback plays in a short zone along with
linebackers, if necessary. This coverage gives you a little variety
and is slightly better against teams with a good receiving tight end.
• 3-Deep Zone - This coverage places both safeties and a
cornerback (often the nickel) in deep zones. It gives you a more
effective pass defense, but leaves you vulnerable to the run.
• 4-Deep Zone - This coverage places both safeties and two extra
defensive backs in deep zones. This is a prevent defense and
should never be used when expecting a run. Even short passes
are more likely completed against this defense, but it is very
effective against deep passes.

You may double-cover either the split end or the flanker in most cases.
Double-coverage means that a second defender (usually the free safety
or a nickel back) is assigned a responsibility to join the cornerback as
soon as the play begins. This doesn’t mean that double coverage is
impossible without this selection, as the defensive backs manning the
deep zones will join in when a receiver enters their zone.

Yoda

04-01-2009, 06:10 PM

Defense: The Basics
Hopefully you have read that and picked up on some of the key terms in there.
In general, for me, agressive defense is bad. Well, I won't say bad, but on 1st and 10, you don't find me in any kind of agressive defense. And I think that's one of the issues of defense in MP today.
In learning how to play defense, one of the first things I did was to do this:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v680/Nusair/defense1.jpg
From there, I ran about 10 single player seasons. Then I went in and adjusted the %.
On what downs did I want my LB's and S's creaping up to stop the run?
On what downs did I want them dropping back early into coverage?
So, I think that toning down the agressive nature of defense and knowing when to implement it (3rd and 10) is key to defensive success.

Yoda

04-01-2009, 06:10 PM

Coverages: When
The next part of defensive success comes from knowing what coverages to call.
In the GEFL I have a STUD CB, Jarvis Williams. Here he is:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v680/Nusair/JarvisWilliams.jpg
Now, he sucks at zone coverage... but is a stud every where else. So, how do I protect and exploit him?
One of the more under-used defenses:
Weak-Side Man Cover - This is a combination zone/man-to-man
defense with the safeties in two deep zones. On the weak side of
the field, defenders are in a man-to-man coverage scheme. On the
strong side, the cornerback plays in a short zone along with
linebackers, if necessary. This coverage gives you a little variety
and is slightly better against teams with a good receiving tight end.
In a email to support from the game, I learned that:
To answer your question, in the strong-side man and weak-side man pass coverages, only the corner on that side is in true man coverage.
Tailor your defenses to match your players.
If you are only in a Run Agressive defense in rare specific situations, then going 50% / 50% in each of the 1-deep coverages isn't going to kill you. Same goes for Pass Agressive defense. If you are only in Pass Agressive for 5-6 plays a game, it's not going to kill your team to be 50% 3deep / 50% 4deep.

Yoda

04-01-2009, 06:10 PM

Hopefully some of you will ready this, and learn something, or get on the track to learning how to play defense to match your teams talent.
One last tidbit.
Players without big red bars need to be a little more agressive in some situations to be successful. Players with big red bars will make plays anyway.
If you know a player is almost always going to be in zone coverage, why care about his m2m or bnr skills?

Yoda

04-01-2009, 06:12 PM

As a reminder, you will find the first part here:
http://primetime-football-league.com...t=6296&start=0 (http://primetime-football-league.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=6296&start=0)

In a effort to spread the love around, I have decided to post the 2nd of my defensive writings here, and then link it to other sites. Also, at some point, I'll be putting them together. But anyway....

Defense: Theory
First of all, I want to discuss theory.

The first item mentioned in Defense 101 (refered to hereafter as D101) was what agressive play is described as in FoF. To refresh basically what agressive play refers to is if the linebacks and safties move up to the line or drop back during a play.

Now, if it's 3rd and 5, why would you want to be in an agressive pass defense?

You wouldn't. That's like giving up a free 1st down.

This is why I believe that anything aggressive on 1st and 10 is a BAD THING. Sure, some people like to take chances. And if you have the right players with high Play Diag and Run Defense, then I can see making the case for having some Aggressive Pass defense on 1st and 10, but even then.... it's not something I would do.

Also, why would you be in Agressive Pass Defense on 3rd and 5?

You shouldn't.

Agressive Pass means that your LB's and S's are dropping BACK into pass coverage. If LB's are normally 5-8 yards off the line of scrimmage, and it's 3rd and 5...and they are dropping further back. Sure, you'll prevent them from getting more YAC, but you are essentially giving up the 1st.

See, agressive isn't so much of a STYLE of playing rather is positioning of players before/during the snap.

Next part coming as soon as I type it up....

Yoda

04-01-2009, 06:13 PM

More on Defensive Play Selection

In D101, I mentioned using SP to set up your DPS 50/50 for all run and pass to test with.

Another thing to do, is hit the recommend, and then change it so that you add the run side together and the pass side together. Example:

After hitting recommend, on 1st and 10, you get:
21 / 32 / 26 / 21 - change that too
0 / 53 / 47 / 0

Then decide on what downs and yardlines you want to a aggressive on. Example, on 1st down and 1 you want to be agressive 30% of the time, so take 30 from what you have in the run column and place it there. So, if you had
0 / 70 / 30 / 0 - you'd now have - 30 / 40 / 30 / 0

Another note. And something I see people missing when they ask me for help and I ask them to send me what they have (because, in general, I like to tweek what people are already doing, instead of just giving them a defense, the idea is to get them to learn how to do it as well) is this:

In what occasions are you going to be shorter than 10 yards to go on 1st down? There are 2. One is when there is a 5 yard penalty, and it's 1st and 5. The second is when it's 1st and goal to go. So, do you want to be playing the same defense as you would on 1st and 10 when it's 1st and 3?

Also, think about what you do on offense. Or look at Ben's offensive playbook. Look at how the run / pass is divided up in there. Those are good examples on how to handle the play calling on the defensive side of the ball.

More....

Yoda

04-01-2009, 06:13 PM

Double Coverage: What, When, Why, How?

Things to remember- the TOP WR isn't the highest rated WR. The TOP WR is considered the WR with the highest Route Running skill. This is why I tend to use Orient CB by side of the Formation. Unless my opponents top WR (or the one I want to shutdown) has the highest RR.

Also, from various postings there is some disagrement on how DC works. This is my feelings. If you set the DC top WR to 50% and the DC 2nd WR to 50%, it means this:
You DC the top WR on 50% of the plays.
You DC the 2nd WR on 50% of the plays that you are not DC'ing the top WR.
Meaning, if you run 100 plays, the top WR would be DC'ed 50 times, and the 2nd WR would be DC'ed 25 times.

There are 2 kinds of double coverage.

The most common people are familiar with is when you set it in the Pass Coverage screens.

The second one is the one that will happen when you have players in zone coverage. If the receiver is in the 'ZONE' of a defender, then he will be considered double covered, if the player covering him to begin with was in m2m coverage.

Also, while you might not believe it works (and I used to be one of those people)- it has been shown that double coverage does significantly affect the completion %.

Don't be afraid to DC, but remember, usually it's the Free Safety or Nickleback joining in the coverage, so you want to make sure that player has good m2m skills.

More....

Yoda

04-01-2009, 06:13 PM

My most recent discovery
I thought about including this and not including this, for various reasons, but here it is:
In my musings of defense and playcalling, I asked myself the question:
How can you be in BnR coverage the whole play? Once the receiver goes past the 5 yard limit, it's just m2m. As was pointed out in the other post:

it strongly hints that MTM/Zone/BnR all effect each individule play to some extent

And that's true....
If you are playing BnR defense, after the initial bump at the line of scrimmage, you are in m2m coverage.
If you are in a zone coverage, once a player enters your zone you are in m2m coverage with that player.
So, as you can see, m2m is very important, not to downplay the importance of the others.
Anyway, hopefully some have found this somewhat helpful. Comments, questions, rebukes or adding to this are welcome...
If I do another update, it will be something like drafting team, and developing a defense for that team.

gstelmack

04-01-2009, 06:15 PM

Great read, thanks.

bighouserulez

04-01-2009, 06:43 PM

wow Yoda very informmative

Bako

04-01-2009, 06:51 PM

One of the more under-used defenses:
Weak-Side Man Cover - This is a combination zone/man-to-man
defense with the safeties in two deep zones. On the weak side of
the field, defenders are in a man-to-man coverage scheme. On the
strong side, the cornerback plays in a short zone along with
linebackers, if necessary. This coverage gives you a little variety
and is slightly better against teams with a good receiving tight end.
In a email to support from the game, I learned that:
To answer your question, in the strong-side man and weak-side man pass coverages, only the corner on that side is in true man coverage.

How do you know which CB is on the weak or strong side?

Great read Yoda. Very helpful.

Autumn

04-01-2009, 07:38 PM

If you are playing BnR defense, after the initial bump at the line of scrimmage, you are in m2m coverage.
If you are in a zone coverage, once a player enters your zone you are in m2m coverage with that player.
So, as you can see, m2m is very important, not to downplay the importance of the others.

A nice writeup, thanks. It would be good to know how you came to some of these conclusions though. For example, the above--do you have some evidence that showed you this or is it just your interpretation? It seems we've all been burned by applying common parlance or football sense to the game terms before. My impression from previous threads was that it was not as simple as this to determine which ratings were being used in each play.

Yoda

04-01-2009, 10:26 PM

How do you know which CB is on the weak or strong side?

Great read Yoda. Very helpful.

Almost always I use the orient CB by formation.

Going by that, I use something like this:
http://www.geocities.com/epark/raiders/images/3-4-defense.png

Which would mean that the LCB is on the Strong Side of the formation.

Yoda

04-01-2009, 10:28 PM

A nice writeup, thanks. It would be good to know how you came to some of these conclusions though. For example, the above--do you have some evidence that showed you this or is it just your interpretation? It seems we've all been burned by applying common parlance or football sense to the game terms before. My impression from previous threads was that it was not as simple as this to determine which ratings were being used in each play.

Honestly, it came to me while I was trying to figure out what coverage bars were best for LB's. Like... why would a LB ever need BnR? In what circumstance? ect... and it just flowed from there, to a couple of email to sole support. And....

Here's where I got that tid-bit from:
-------------------------------------------------------
Yes, that's the concept behind having different ratings apply during the
same play.

--------------------------------
Ethan Potter
Customer Service
Solecismic Software

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jimmy Repine" <[email protected]>
To: "Ethan Potter" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 4:37 PM
Subject: RE: Defense Question

Ok, so... let me ask this:

If you are in BnR coverage. Realistically, you cannot be in BnR the whole
play, so it would be for stuffing the guy at the line, and then m2m would
take over.

Zone is the ability to play your zone and notice when someone enters your
zone, once they enter, m2m skills take over.

Antmeister

04-01-2009, 11:45 PM

Okay, you are more than a Jedi Master. Thanks a lot for this Yoda.

QuikSand

04-02-2009, 09:19 AM

In a email to support from the game, I learned that:

To answer your question, in the strong-side man and weak-side man pass coverages, only the corner on that side is in true man coverage.

Tailor your defenses to match your players.

How do you know which CB is on the weak or strong side?

Okay, you answered this question with a picture above, but I'm less interested in the picture than I am in playing FOF.

So, let's say I want to "Tailor my defenses to match my players."

So, in FOF, is there a way that you can see that I can make sure that my mostly-man corner is lined up on the weak side, and my mostly-zone corner is lined up on the strong side, so I can use the appropriate split coverage scheme to make best use of each guy's strengths?

In game, I seem to have two choices with my corners...orient by side, and orient by top/second receiver. I don't see a choice that pivots based on strong/weak.

Subby

04-02-2009, 09:22 AM

Big fan of the LOLbacker...

Ben E Lou

04-02-2009, 09:26 AM

Hammer

04-02-2009, 10:37 AM

Excellent job Yoda, this really should be saved for reference. Don't think I'm pulling this apart as I agree with most of what you say, but naturally there is no point in discussing those bits.

3rd and 5. You said yourself (I think) that aggressive pass defense greatly reduces YAC. Your going to see mainly short passes on 3rd and 5. Granted most will be 5-8, if the GM knows what he is doing, but still there is value in playing aggressive on this down and distance. I tend to agree with Ben's post, I think aggressive is simply a bit better against the pass than normal pass defense.

M2M. In summary I play this hardly ever, in any league. My players are often low, very often 0 in M2M. Still my defenses have always been pretty much always top 10. I have had a number of 1 ranked pass defenses with this system. Its certainly not down to the personnel. My teams are typically packed on offense, not defense.

Maybe if I used M2M as a system rather than BnR, it would work even better? But having a bias one way or the other allows me to invest star quality elsewhere, thats a given.

One thing that I'm not sure was widely picked up on, is that BnR is better against the run than M2M. That is based on the wide body of information published on here. A detailed in depth study of offense and defense statistics. I'm sorry I forget who put the information together.

In real life BnR is not just about the first 5 yards. It can throw off ANY pattern. It disrupts the timing if a receiver is held up at the line. Perhaps we should push that to one side, this isn't real football.

However from personal experience of how I have neglected M2M, and considering it is weaker against the run than BnR, I am able to say with confidence you don't have to call it to any extent, or have players that can play that type of coverage.

Yoda

04-02-2009, 11:52 AM

Okay, you answered this question with a picture above, but I'm less interested in the picture than I am in playing FOF.

So, let's say I want to "Tailor my defenses to match my players."

So, in FOF, is there a way that you can see that I can make sure that my mostly-man corner is lined up on the weak side, and my mostly-zone corner is lined up on the strong side, so I can use the appropriate split coverage scheme to make best use of each guy's strengths?

In game, I seem to have two choices with my corners...orient by side, and orient by top/second receiver. I don't see a choice that pivots based on strong/weak.

In the situation you would describe, I would use orient by formation, make your man corner the RCB, and use the Weak-Side Man/Strong Side Zone scheme. When using that formation, only the CB on the Weak-Side is considered in m2m, everyone else is considered to be in zone coverage.

Yoda

04-02-2009, 11:54 AM

My #1 concern here is the 3rd and 5 thinking. If FOF were a 2D engine where little Xs and Os moved around, I'd say Yoda is correct. However, I strongly suspect that those are just explanations to correlate a probability-based engine to real football. My suspicion is that what those things mean are something along the lines of...

Run Aggressive = 15% higher chance of completed pass
Run = 5% higher chance of completed pass
Pass = 5% lower chance of completed pass
Pass Aggressive = 15% lower chance of completed pass

...and as a result, you're better off in pass aggressive any time they pass.

That's why I listed it as a theory. Unlike others (and what others may believe) I don't have the skills to set up a parcer to go through and check each time it was 3rd and 5, what was the coverage, what type of play was called, and what was the success rate.

If I could do something like that, it would make stuff like this ALOT easier.

Yoda

04-02-2009, 12:12 PM

Excellent job Yoda, this really should be saved for reference. Don't think I'm pulling this apart as I agree with most of what you say, but naturally there is no point in discussing those bits.

I wanted to start conversation on this, so I figured the best way was to post something and get people to disagree with me. ;)

3rd and 5. You said yourself (I think) that aggressive pass defense greatly reduces YAC. Your going to see mainly short passes on 3rd and 5. Granted most will be 5-8, if the GM knows what he is doing, but still there is value in playing aggressive on this down and distance. I tend to agree with Ben's post, I think aggressive is simply a bit better against the pass than normal pass defense.

Yes, I've run several dozen seasons using what someone mentioned here, the 'dime' defense. And I did seasons where it was all 'normal' pass, and other with all 'agressive' pass. The YAC allowed was significantly less in seasons where the 'all-dime/all-aggressive' defense was used.

Well, if they don't know now (about short passes on 3rd and 5, lol), they do!

Yes, that's just a theory of mine, and it's something I wish I could test. I have plenty of logs, just no way to parce them. If someone would write/give me one, I'd be happy to post the results. :popcorn:

M2M. In summary I play this hardly ever, in any league. My players are often low, very often 0 in M2M. Still my defenses have always been pretty much always top 10. I have had a number of 1 ranked pass defenses with this system. Its certainly not down to the personnel. My teams are typically packed on offense, not defense.

Ok, let me ask this.... in leagues where you don't have one of the top offenses, where do your defenses rank? In the TFL for instance, last season I was one of the worst ranked offenses, but at the sametime, I was one of the top ranked defenses. Could have been an aboration, but I'd like to think I am a LITTLE better than that. lol.

Maybe if I used M2M as a system rather than BnR, it would work even better? But having a bias one way or the other allows me to invest star quality elsewhere, thats a given.

One thing that I'm not sure was widely picked up on, is that BnR is better against the run than M2M. That is based on the wide body of information published on here. A detailed in depth study of offense and defense statistics. I'm sorry I forget who put the information together.

In real life BnR is not just about the first 5 yards. It can throw off ANY pattern. It disrupts the timing if a receiver is held up at the line. Perhaps we should push that to one side, this isn't real football.

However from personal experience of how I have neglected M2M, and considering it is weaker against the run than BnR, I am able to say with confidence you don't have to call it to any extent, or have players that can play that type of coverage.

I didn't know that about BnR (against the run), but it makes sense.

Yes, and if the player 'beats' the BnR then they are usually wide open until someone playing zone gets over to help.

Again, I wish I could parse this stuff, but I lack the skills to program such.

QuikSand

04-02-2009, 12:45 PM

In the situation you would describe, I would use orient by formation, make your man corner the RCB, and use the Weak-Side Man/Strong Side Zone scheme. When using that formation, only the CB on the Weak-Side is considered in m2m, everyone else is considered to be in zone coverage.

http://www.jessicaswell.com/images/failure-to-communicate.jpg

So, your view is that the right side is always the weak side? Have anything to back that up other than one arbitrary picture? Are we talking past one another here?

Subby

04-02-2009, 12:57 PM

I CAN EAT 50 EGGS!

Ben E Lou

04-02-2009, 01:03 PM

That picture is beyond awesome.

gstelmack

04-02-2009, 01:05 PM

So, your view is that the right side is always the weak side? Have anything to back that up other than one arbitrary picture? Are we talking past one another here?

There are no guarantees here, we know that with FOF. However, given that LCB covers top WR in orient by receiver, and given that the double-coverage settings say "Double cover strong-side" and "Double cover weak-side" when you switch to orient by side of formation, it's a pretty good guess based on the one clue FOF gives us. If it's not true, I'd claim it was a bug (much like the goal-line defense switched gameplanning columns that took us forever to figure out). Of course, as I started this, there are no guarantees with FOF, and we can't figure out from the game who is covering who when, so who the heck knows which way it is supposed to be, or which way it actually is? Aside from Jim of course. And maybe jkat.

There, how's that for covering both sides of the conversation in one paragraph?

Yoda

04-02-2009, 01:25 PM

So, your view is that the right side is always the weak side? Have anything to back that up other than one arbitrary picture? Are we talking past one another here?

No, I don't think we are. This is the best I can come up with and why I think this way.

If you go into the Personnel- X Formations screens, you will see that the TE is always listed as being next to the Flanker. Therefore the Flanker 'side' is always the 'strong' side.

I see nothing in anywhere to suggest it's otherwise. In the NFL, yes, the TE can line up on either side. I just haven't seen anything in any logs or documemtation on the game to say otherwise.

Celeval

04-02-2009, 02:39 PM

If you go into the Personnel- X Formations screens, you will see that the TE is always listed as being next to the Flanker. Therefore the Flanker 'side' is always the 'strong' side.

I see nothing in anywhere to suggest it's otherwise. In the NFL, yes, the TE can line up on either side. I just haven't seen anything in any logs or documemtation on the game to say otherwise.

Actually, the Flanker side is by definition the strong side... Flanker is the receiver who stands back from the line, i.e. the tackle on that side is covered (by the Tight End). A Split End is a receiver set on the line, covering the tackle (i.e. no Tight End).

FOF can go strong right / strong left from an offensive perspective. From a defensive perspective, we assume that RCB and LCB stay left/right, and in essence switch assignments between the FL and the SE.

QuikSand

04-02-2009, 03:40 PM

No, I don't think we are. This is the best I can come up with and why I think this way.

If you go into the Personnel- X Formations screens, you will see that the TE is always listed as being next to the Flanker. Therefore the Flanker 'side' is always the 'strong' side.

I see nothing in anywhere to suggest it's otherwise. In the NFL, yes, the TE can line up on either side. I just haven't seen anything in any logs or documentation on the game to say otherwise.

I'll try again, as plainly as I can.

#1. I understand that in football generally, in a standard 2RB/2WR/1TE formation, with a TE and FL on one side, that side is the strong side. We're good there.

#2. You are saying to put my man-CB at RCB, and use a split formation calling for weak-side man coverage, to make better use of his skills.

#3. In your picture, that works out great. That offense is lining up their TE and FL on the left side of our screen (the offense's right side), making that side the strong side, and leaving the right side of our screen (where we put the RCB) the weak side. That looks great in that picture.

#4. My observation is that there's nothing magic about that left/right orientation in your picture. In football, and I believe in FOF, the offense can choose to make the strong side either on its left or right. Meaning that picture could jsut as easily have a mirror-image offensive lineup, with the TE and FL both lined up on our right hand side... meaning our man-coverage guy has just been placed into the zone side of the split coverage, precisely what we *don't* want.

#5. Thus, my question from before:

So, in FOF, is there a way that you can see that I can make sure that my mostly-man corner is lined up on the weak side, and my mostly-zone corner is lined up on the strong side, so I can use the appropriate split coverage scheme to make best use of each guy's strengths?

In game, I seem to have two choices with my corners...orient by side, and orient by top/second receiver. I don't see a choice that pivots based on strong/weak.

Yoda

04-02-2009, 10:36 PM

According to the FoF help file, the TE usually is covered by the SLB. Now, in order for that to happen, if the TE lines up on the other side, then the SLB would need to follow suit. Now, would just the LB's flip? Or would the whole defense? Or would the defense stay put, and the WLB would now cover the TE?

Admittedly, I don't know the answer to this question (maybe I'll email support about it). And I made a judgement call as to the way I THINK it works. No, I cannot give you a definative answer. I have an idea of how to test it that might show it, but then again, I cannot parse log files, so I cannot test my theory.

What I do find interesting, as greg mentioned, is that the Cornerback coverage is listed as 'Orient CB by Side of the Formation' which suggest to me that the LCB is always going to be on the strong side of the formation if that option is selected. And if that is true, then what I said works.

If not, I look like a dumbass. ;)

QuikSand

04-03-2009, 09:04 AM

There are no guarantees here, we know that with FOF. However, given that LCB covers top WR in orient by receiver, and given that the double-coverage settings say "Double cover strong-side" and "Double cover weak-side" when you switch to orient by side of formation, it's a pretty good guess based on the one clue FOF gives us.

I will readily admit that I was unaware (or perhaps forgot) that the double coverage language flips to strong/weak when you orient your CBs by side. And I agree that is some evidence that LCB=strong, RCB=weak.

But seriously, don't you agree that the terms "LEFT" and "RIGHT" being placed right into the title of the position is itself a fairly strong clue, too? If the LCB is assigned to the left or right purely based on which side is the STRONG side, then why the hell call him the LEFT side cornerback? He's the STRONG side cornerback, right?

I agree that you have offered some evidence suggesting it may be right, and I totally agree that insisting on logic is not necessarily the way to go when trying to figure out FOF. Maybe there's some real-football convention that I am simply not understanding, but to me... left means left. If left really just means "left as long as that's the strong side, otherwise right" then I guess I stand corrected. *shurg*

gstelmack

04-03-2009, 09:45 AM

But seriously, don't you agree that the terms "LEFT" and "RIGHT" being placed right into the title of the position is itself a fairly strong clue, too? If the LCB is assigned to the left or right purely based on which side is the STRONG side, then why the hell call him the LEFT side cornerback? He's the STRONG side cornerback, right?

To be fair, the depth chart says "Left/Top" and "Right/2nd", so all we've figured out is that FOF gives confusing and mixed signals. Which I understand is the point you were trying to make.

To answer this question directly, it would not surprise me if it was an oversight and simply just the way it's always been. There have been enough of those as this game has progressed. It's hard to figure out what is a clue to what is really happening, and what is just a bug / oversight. Like a crossword puzzle where 5% of the answers are misspelled. We have no clue if this is a misspelling, or exactly what was intended.

QuikSand

04-03-2009, 09:48 AM

To answer this question directly, it would not surprise me if it was an oversight and simply just the way it's always been.

I agree with this. Some time ago, I know a number of people were trying to dig out stats from pass-rushing defensive linemen in a 3-4 defense, and kept finding some suggestions that LDE and RDE didn't necessarily mean "the guy on the left" and "the guy on the right." Suffice it to say that this may well be some more supporting evidence for the theory that FOF's references to left and right on defense may just be code for strong and weak, respectively.

I guess that's kinda good to know, if true, but seriously... why?

Jughead Spock

04-03-2009, 12:41 PM

I think the number-crunchers would probably say there are no 'sides'. LCB matches against #1 WR, RCB against #2, etc. LT matches against #1 pass-rusher, RT against #2.

Which is probably true, I've no real idea either way. I tend to play more figuring sides and formations. But as has been pointed out numerous times, this is a simulation based on football, not a football simulation.

Yoda

04-03-2009, 12:43 PM

Here is the response I just received from Solecismic support:
Left is always left and strong is always attached to the strong side of the
offensive team's formation. This is set up in this manner because typically
NFL teams have a strong-side linebacker who often covers the tight end (or
the strong safety does), but cornerbacks are either aligned by left/right or
are assigned to a particular receiver.

To make sense of it, imagine how a defense reacts to pre-snap motion. If the
tight end switches sides, changing the strength of the formation, you will
see linebackers moving, but generally corners do not unless they are in man
coverage on a specific receiver.

--------------------------------
Ethan Potter
Customer Service
Solecismic Software

QuikSand

04-03-2009, 12:53 PM

Thanks, Yoda. That makes more sense to me, but alas, it clearly unravels your theory about how to use man-only and zone-only corners in a split coverage scheme.

Yoda

04-03-2009, 02:26 PM

Thanks, Yoda. That makes more sense to me, but alas, it clearly unravels your theory about how to use man-only and zone-only corners in a split coverage scheme.

Yeah, it does, doesn't it? :(

Well, one of the reasons I posted this stuff was to get people talking. And it has worked.

At this point, other than not calling any zone defense coverages, I don't know of a way to set it up to hide players like that... but it 'feels' like you should be able to.

I may still do it and just take my chances, lol.

QuikSand

04-03-2009, 04:43 PM

At this point, other than not calling any zone defense coverages, I don't know of a way to set it up to hide players like that... but it 'feels' like you should be able to.

That's where I have been on this for some time, sadly. I do appreciate you digging a bit on this.

Poli

04-03-2009, 05:17 PM

Yoda

04-04-2009, 08:47 AM

That's where I have been on this for some time, sadly. I do appreciate you digging a bit on this.

Thanks =)

In the end, what I hope to have is something that will give people a little better understanding (as well as myself) on how to build/design a defense and how to game plan one.

I don't just want to hand out a bunch of numbers and say, here use this. I'd like for people to learn how to specifically tweek and implement it for themselves.

Celeval

04-04-2009, 09:35 PM

Thanks, Yoda. That makes more sense to me, but alas, it clearly unravels your theory about how to use man-only and zone-only corners in a split coverage scheme.

Although it does leave room for man-only and zone-only linebackers. Given the recent proliferation of short-passing gameplans, that may be useful.

QuikSand

04-05-2009, 07:01 AM

Although it does leave room for man-only and zone-only linebackers. Given the recent proliferation of short-passing gameplans, that may be useful.

Not so sure about that. You comfy based on what you have read that the WLB in a strongzone/weakman split coverage is exclusively in man? I'm not.

Yoda

04-05-2009, 09:29 AM

Not so sure about that. You comfy based on what you have read that the WLB in a strongzone/weakman split coverage is exclusively in man? I'm not.

In the split coverage, everyone except the CB in man coverage is in Zone coverage.

Granted, even then their m2m skills will have some effect.

Here's the response I got confirming that:
> From: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Bug with Dime Coverages
> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 01:15:08 -0400
>
> To answer your question, in the strong-side man and weak-side man pass
> coverages, only the corner on that side is in true man coverage.
>
> --------------------------------
> Ethan Potter
> Customer Service
> Solecismic Software

And we know from this:
Probably all three skills are used in some manner on every play.

As to how much each skill is used on each play, can't really get into code
algorithms.

--------------------------------
Ethan Potter
Customer Service
Solecismic Software

----------------------------------------------
That even when in zone, that m2m (and possibly bnr) are used on each play.

I'd still prefer a 'high' Zone bar as opposed to balanced lower bars (like 70+ zone as opposed to even 30's across the board).

Yoda

04-07-2009, 04:18 PM

With the responses I've received, I am going to be re-writing parts of this, and would like to offer anyone that would like to add suggestions and what not to post here, pm me or send me an email [email protected]

merry

04-07-2009, 05:54 PM

Hi,
(1) Have we actually verified that when an offence switches from strong-side left to strong-side right the flanker moves from his left side to his right side in FOF?
Thanks,
Merry the Hobbit:confused:

QuikSand

04-07-2009, 06:00 PM

cmdrsam

08-01-2009, 11:31 PM

Sorry all for bumping a old post but I found this thread as a new player very usefull for basic understanding of defensive game planing. Thank you Yoda and the rest for your discusion of this subject.

Dandelion

08-02-2009, 05:56 AM

Well, the football definition of "strong side" gets a little complicated in a few situations, but by and large, the strong side is the side with the tight end. And pretty much by definition of the position, the flanker is the WR who lines up off the line of scrimmage, because that keeps the TE on that side eligible.

So, in anything approaching a "base" offense, that's the definition of being the flanker -- you're the WR on the strong side, lined up outside the TE and off the line a couple of steps (technically in the backfield). So, basically, I think there's every reason to believe that we have confirmed that's how it works in FOF as well -- to switch the strong side, you essentially swap the receivers as well as the TE.

One look at my last playlog brought me these:
a) Pittsburgh: Pro formation with two tight ends, strength is right. The defense is in a 43 with nickel personnel and 3-deep zone coverage, keying aggressively on the pass.
and
b) Pittsburgh: Five-Receiver Spread formation, strength is left. The defense is in a 43 with nickel personnel and 2-deep bump-and-run coverage, keying aggressively on the pass
and
c) Pittsburgh: Strong formation with three wideouts, strength is left. The defense is in a 43 with dime personnel and 2-deep man-to-man coverage, keying aggressively on the pass.

As in a) there are 2 TE lining up at the LOS and the FL being a step behind on either the left or right side, it seems the side with the FL must be the strong side.

In b) there's no TE in the game. Or at least, there has to be none, though you can use a TE as WR5 for example.. So two WR step up to the LOS. And from the "Personnel - miscellaneous formations" screen it looks as if those two are the FL1 and SE1. So the line is evenly balanced left and right. So which side is the "strong side" here? The one with more WRs on it?

Then there is c) - two WR lining up on either side of the LOS - FL1 and SE1 - and FL2 in the slot. RB either left or right of the FB. Where's the strong side here?

Well.. if you start calling the plays yourself, you can see there's always the option to "view" a play before you call it. And the option to switch the strong side to the left or to the right. And what happens is, that the formations - at least the receiver and backs - are "mirrored".

So version a) shows up as: TE1 on the right side of the line at the LOS, TE2 on the left. FL1 on the right side, a step off the LOS. Once you switch strength to the left, both TE exchange places and the FL1 moves to the left side also. Even the RB and FB exchange places, with the FB taking up position on the strong side. So strong side: Side with TE1/FL1/FB on it.. ?

In version b) with strong left side, its SE1 on the LOS, wide outside right. And SE2 on the LOS, wide outside right. FL1 is left of the line, a step back from the LOS. Right beside him is WR5. And FL2 stands way out right from the line, a step off the LOS. Once you switch strength to the right, all FL/SE exchange places. So strong side: Side with FL1 on it.. ?

Then c) again.. with strength = left the SE1 lines up outside of the line on the LOS to the right. Way outside Left of the line on the LOS is FL2 on the LOS. And FL1 is on the left, a step off the LOS. FB also left of the QB. Change to strength right and all go ring around the rosie again.. So strong side: Side with FL/FB on it.. ?

To check if it's 100% right I'd have to look through all formations, but it seems secure to say: Strong side is the one with FL1 on it.. (except for Goalline formation, where it's the one with TE3 and the FB.. *grin*)

So, unless someone uses the formation personnel screens to move the players around, there should be the possibility to orient your defense around the FL1, who usually should be the "best WR" - at least in SG.. right?

Yoda

08-02-2009, 05:58 AM

You're welcome.

Actually, I am planning an update to them soon. But recently life has gotten a little bit busy and I haven't had time to sit down and do it.

Dandelion

08-02-2009, 12:47 PM

I'm not so sure what to make of your theory.. I think, there are at least some aspects of FOF2k7 that might get in the way.. for example:

- in a test game (more about that later..) my backup ILB was on the field on the second defensive play. The second TOTAL defensive play. He actually backups the WILB an SILB in my team, but both have not that bad Endurance (89 resp. 48) and both were neither injured nor tired. And both were at 100% starters playing time.. formation was a "strong man, cover 7" from the basic 3-4 I play. So what did that guy do to get on the field?
And as he did, what if it happens with other players too?

- I LOVE blitzes.. so I've set a blitz rate of 100% on all plays outside the redzone. But as it seems to me, that the game doesn't handle multiple blitzers too well, there's only one player ordered to blitz.
In 90% of the plays it's the SLB (.. and as in all 3-4 the WLB) who goes for the QBs head. In the other 10% it's either the WILB or the SILB who blitzes.
BUT.. from the Nickel or Dime formation there's a differance.. In the Nickel the WILB goes off the field to be replaced by a CB/S - okay.. so - logically - he also replaces the WILB in the blitzing sheme.. which means one less defender in the backfield, negating the backfield advantage of the Nickel defense.. I think the same holds true for the Dime..

- Blitzes again.. how comes, that although I put in 0% as the chance to blitz for the SS/FS the FS from the Dime formation - who is in there as the FS, not as an replacement for a LB - does blitz? Ok.. not often.. just as often as the 5% for WILB/SILB in my playbook allow.. but he shouldn't blitz at all.. so.. what does FOF2k7 do internally to mix that up?

- oh.. and before I forget it.. the game puts You into Nickel formation on automatic sometimes.. usually when the opponent comes up with a 4+ WR formation (and/or in the last minutes of the first and second half..) For me that messes a bit with my usual playbook.. I usually only want my guys in Nickel or Dime Formation when the go aggressively after the pass.. so it's 50/50 at agg. pass and lotsa 0 in agg. run, run and pass.. nonetheless there are the occasions when the log says: "Nickel B&R" at a 3rd and 2.. *cough*

Nonetheless I played one (!!) test match to get some data.. had to type all the stuff from the htm output into a spreadsheet.. *sigh*

here's the result for a mediocre Pittsburgh Def - 3-4, lotsa blitzes, DL, LB and Backfield all mediocre in most cases.. some Rookies in there, too.. - against an at least as bad Baltimore Ravens offense..

Off. vs. Def.
Pass vs. Agg. Pass
7/21 Completions, 83 Yard (15 YAC), 5 1st Downs, 6 Blocked/Deflected, 4 Inc, 1 Int, 2 Sack -8 Yard, 2 Penalty + 20 Yard - looks good to me...

Pass vs. Pass
6/13 Comp., 76 yard (5 YAC), 4 1st Downs, 1 TD, 1 Blocked/Deflected, 3 Inc, 1 Int, 2 Sack -17 Yard - bit high on the yards, but not too bad..

Pass vs. Run
7/12 Comp., 86 yard (13 YAC), 5 1st Downs, 1 blocked/Deflected, 1 Inc, 1 Int, 1 Sack -6 Yard, 1 Penalty -10 Yard - again, a bit high on yards, but my def sucks..

Pass vs. Agg. Run
None - I only allow Agg. Run def at 4th an 1 or 2.. ordinary run def all the rest of the way..

Run vs. Agg. Pass
4 Runs, 24 Yard, 1 1st Down - mostly from 1st and 10.. the 1st down resulted from a 2nd 10 run..

Run vs. Pass
7 Run, 30 Yard, 2 1st Down - a 2nd and 10 and a 2nd and 3 were made.. the rest came from first downs

Run vs. Run
7 Run, 25 Yard, 1 1st Down, 1 Penalty -10 Yard - again the conversion came from a 2nd and 10.. the rest were again mostly 1st and 10s..

Diverse
2 Scramble vs. Agg. Pass for 17 Yard gain, 1 1st Down - from a 3rd and 10 and a 1st and 10.. the first succeeded, the second didn't..

I have not yet gone through all the formations and the effects they might have, but it seems, the 3 Deep is the most dangerous to either run or pass. Most of the long yardage gains were against a 3 Deep.

I do NOT use any double coverage.. I tried it a couple of games and my Backs seemed to go dozy and the completion ratings didn't get lower, but higher.. and when I take a look at the messages in the log, how often my QBs stick the ball into double coverage without getting deflected or intercepted, I am not too sure that double coverage is as powerfull as it should be.. especially with the many passes going to the 2nd ord 3rd WR, TE or RB/FB ;)

So.. my "impressions" with little - nearly no - data.. any numbercruncher out there to get us more insight?

sidthelid

08-02-2009, 04:23 PM

Welcome to FOF, lots of things don't work you will get used to it. :lol:

Which ever side of the field has the most recievers/ tight ends at the LOS is the strong side.

The reason your ILB got on the field on the second play of the game was due to a dice roll, if anything fishy happens in FOF it gets blamed on a bad dice roll, it's a good way of covering things up. ;)

Blitzing, if you send more than one guy, just about any guy can be the second guy who blitzes.

Double coverage, does work the higher your Read defence is the less chance he'll put the ball into double coverage or maybe the better his judgement is. Just because the defence has a receiver double teamed does n't mean they are doing it well!

gstelmack

08-02-2009, 06:18 PM

First off, the percentage of playtime you put into the play time screen is the percentage the guy will play on any given down. The backup ILB being in for the second play just means the dice check failed for the starter so the ILB went in.

On multiple blitzers, in the 3-4 the WLB is always rushing the passer. Not sure if he's counted as a blitzer or not, but I would suspect so.

Dandelion

08-02-2009, 07:15 PM

Welcome to FOF, lots of things don't work you will get used to it. :lol:

Yeah, noticed that already ;)

Which ever side of the field has the most recievers/ tight ends at the LOS is the strong side.

Uhm.. don't think so.. as explained further above, just check with the play formations You can call Yourself and use the "view" option.

The reason your ILB got on the field on the second play of the game was due to a dice roll, if anything fishy happens in FOF it gets blamed on a bad dice roll, it's a good way of covering things up. ;)

must have been a pretty bad dice roll.. there isn't much % left if the starter should stay on the field 100% of the time ;) But I guess that in this case 100% means "all the time, unless the dice comes up with 100 on it.." - which would rather make it 99% then, but what the &%$§ do I know about maths..

Blitzing, if you send more than one guy, just about any guy can be the second guy who blitzes.

well... one lives and learns to set % to 0 then.. although I set the value in the Def. Personnel Choices for multiple blitzers to 0 already..
So what makes me wonder about the blitzing FS is that there have been "replacements" for the WILB and SILB in the formation, who didn't blitz.. but instead the none-replacement FS makes the attempt.. if the Nickelback or the Dime Corner/Safety would have blitzed, I wouldn't find reason to wonder..
Well.. bad dice roll again, I suppose.. :devil:

Double coverage, does work the higher your Read defence is the less chance he'll put the ball into double coverage or maybe the better his judgement is. Just because the defence has a receiver double teamed doesn't mean they are doing it well!

Could it be that the Accuracy value plays a role in that too? Like a QB with high ACC sticking the ball in between the two defenders where only his WR can get it? Cause that might be an explanation.. *looks at his QBs ACC of 100*

On multiple blitzers, in the 3-4 the WLB is always rushing the passer. Not sure if he's counted as a blitzer or not, but I would suspect so.

As I read the description in Game (and the Help file..) the WLB always rushes the QB in the 3-4, even with blitzing set to 0
And as in the 3-4 Nickel or Dime the WLB stays on the field and isn't replaced, he should do so from those two formations also..

The maximum of blitzers seems to be 3 - SLB, WILB and SILB.
And as one can only setup blitzes by the SLB (inside and outside %), the WILB and the SILB and only those guys show up in the log as "xxx blitzes.." I've never seen the name of my WLB coming up there..

Tasan

08-02-2009, 08:16 PM

must have been a pretty bad dice roll.. there isn't much % left if the starter should stay on the field 100% of the time ;) But I guess that in this case 100% means "all the time, unless the dice comes up with 100 on it.." - which would rather make it 99% then, but what the &%$§ do I know about maths..

My guess is that it's 100% of your endurance as a percent. So a 98 endurance set to 100% would put your guy on the field 98% of the time. Or maybe something else. Math makes my head hurt.

NiteMaestro

08-02-2009, 09:12 PM

One look at my last playlog brought me these:
a) Pittsburgh: Pro formation with two tight ends, strength is right. The defense is in a 43 with nickel personnel and 3-deep zone coverage, keying aggressively on the pass.
and
b) Pittsburgh: Five-Receiver Spread formation, strength is left. The defense is in a 43 with nickel personnel and 2-deep bump-and-run coverage, keying aggressively on the pass
and
c) Pittsburgh: Strong formation with three wideouts, strength is left. The defense is in a 43 with dime personnel and 2-deep man-to-man coverage, keying aggressively on the pass.

As in a) there are 2 TE lining up at the LOS and the FL being a step behind on either the left or right side, it seems the side with the FL must be the strong side.

In b) there's no TE in the game. Or at least, there has to be none, though you can use a TE as WR5 for example.. So two WR step up to the LOS. And from the "Personnel - miscellaneous formations" screen it looks as if those two are the FL1 and SE1. So the line is evenly balanced left and right. So which side is the "strong side" here? The one with more WRs on it?

Then there is c) - two WR lining up on either side of the LOS - FL1 and SE1 - and FL2 in the slot. RB either left or right of the FB. Where's the strong side here?

Well.. if you start calling the plays yourself, you can see there's always the option to "view" a play before you call it. And the option to switch the strong side to the left or to the right. And what happens is, that the formations - at least the receiver and backs - are "mirrored".

So version a) shows up as: TE1 on the right side of the line at the LOS, TE2 on the left. FL1 on the right side, a step off the LOS. Once you switch strength to the left, both TE exchange places and the FL1 moves to the left side also. Even the RB and FB exchange places, with the FB taking up position on the strong side. So strong side: Side with TE1/FL1/FB on it.. ?

In version b) with strong left side, its SE1 on the LOS, wide outside right. And SE2 on the LOS, wide outside right. FL1 is left of the line, a step back from the LOS. Right beside him is WR5. And FL2 stands way out right from the line, a step off the LOS. Once you switch strength to the right, all FL/SE exchange places. So strong side: Side with FL1 on it.. ?

Then c) again.. with strength = left the SE1 lines up outside of the line on the LOS to the right. Way outside Left of the line on the LOS is FL2 on the LOS. And FL1 is on the left, a step off the LOS. FB also left of the QB. Change to strength right and all go ring around the rosie again.. So strong side: Side with FL/FB on it.. ?

To check if it's 100% right I'd have to look through all formations, but it seems secure to say: Strong side is the one with FL1 on it.. (except for Goalline formation, where it's the one with TE3 and the FB.. *grin*)

So, unless someone uses the formation personnel screens to move the players around, there should be the possibility to orient your defense around the FL1, who usually should be the "best WR" - at least in SG.. right?

Wait a minute... so in example 3, FL1 is in the slot...??

Subby

08-02-2009, 09:27 PM

Reposting this for any one who is interested. It's the defense I use for most of my MP leagues. Works best when paired with explosive offenses.

Dandelion

08-03-2009, 04:39 AM

Wait a minute... so in example 3, FL1 is in the slot...??

See pic below.. #87 = FL1

http://operationsports.com/fofc/attachment.php?attachmentid=844&stc=1&d=1249292064

jdavidbakr

08-03-2009, 10:33 AM

My guess is that it's 100% of your endurance as a percent. So a 98 endurance set to 100% would put your guy on the field 98% of the time. Or maybe something else. Math makes my head hurt.

I believe that's pretty accurate. If your starter has 98 endurance and is set to play 100% of the time, each and every play there's a 2% chance that he'll be off the field. If he's got 60 endurance, each and every play there's a 40% chance that he'll be off the field. Remember, there used to be a bug in this calculation that you could take advantage of by putting your best RB in the #2 slot and, even with no endurance, he would get most of the plays because the algorithm only calculated the chance of the starter playing based on his endurance and playing time.

I know Jim plugged that loophole, so it _might_ be something like:

Starter: 100% * 80 endurance = 80% chance
Backup: 85 endurance = 85% chance

Then there's probably some sort of a weight to determine what percentage is applied to each player, which in the above case I would imagine that the starter's chance will get pulled down below 80%.

The flaw in logic is the assumption that the endurance is kept track of through the game where a player gets worn down, like Madden. This is NOT how it works. I'm pretty sure there's a Q&A with Jim that talks about this.

Dandelion

08-03-2009, 07:55 PM

The flaw in logic is the assumption that the endurance is kept track of through the game where a player gets worn down, like Madden. This is NOT how it works. I'm pretty sure there's a Q&A with Jim that talks about this.

I guess You mean "The way FOF plays non-quarterbacks is to determine, internally, a percentage for player usage based on endurance and the starter playing-time settings. That's then independently applied to the depth chart on each play. This is kind of an unnatural solution, but it's fair to each team."

Makes me wonder, though, why the game - if You call plays yourself - shows players as "exhausted" in the play personnel options (... the list on the left, if one uses the "view" option for a play to see which personnel/routes it contains).

Be it as it may, if Your assumption is right, then getting the right personnel on the field would be just pure luck, right? Which would - IMHO - devalue several of the assumptions made in the first posts of the thread.

jdavidbakr

08-04-2009, 07:42 AM

Be it as it may, if Your assumption is right, then getting the right personnel on the field would be just pure luck, right? Which would - IMHO - devalue several of the assumptions made in the first posts of the thread.

The key here is that the game is stats driven, which means the box score will look great, but going through the game log you start to see some of the flaws of the game engine. If you plan your game with that in mind you will do better than micro-analyzing each play and trying to figure out why your team did what it did. So it doesn't invalidate the above strategies, it just means that you need larger sample sizes to make everything play out ok. I've said this before and I'm pretty sure I'm correct in my assumption that who you have on the field for each given play isn't as important as it would be if the game was simmed at the 2-d level, as not every player appears to have an effect on the outcome of each play. Look at the stats on a macro level and you'll appreciate it better, looking at it on the micro level (and thinking you can have a greater effect at that level) can lead to frustration.

Yoda

08-04-2009, 08:26 AM

In nickle and dime defenses 99.99% of the time there are no substitutions.

I have never seen a sub done (but that doesn't mean it can't happen). But I did a test a while ago in which I set the defense to 100% nickle and the only plays where someone not on the depth chart played was when the game forced the defense into Dime coverage.

So, if you have crap for back ups and absolutely need your base defense on the field 100% of the time, run all nickle/dime.

Dandelion

08-04-2009, 05:14 PM

The key here is that the game is stats driven, which means the box score will look great, but going through the game log you start to see some of the flaws of the game engine.

And with that You mean that regardless of what I would call in the games' "Play Simulation" part - You know the one in SP mode, where one decides NOT to let the coach call the plays ;), the one nearly nobody ever uses as it seems.. -well that regardless of what kind of calls I make there, the game has been decided ahead by.. statistics?
If so, why's that part in the game? Should have taken some time to build it in, I guess..

Or did You mean with "stats driven" that the players stats - skills, ablilities, whatever to call them.. - are put up against each other and then the decision is made with a - more or less lucky - roll of the dice? If so, then it doesn't matter, if FOF is a 0d or 3d Sim - even Madden10 is decided by those player stats (not the player on the Joystick.. at least not for 100%..) and some dice rolls..

The problem would rather be, how deep does the simulation part go. Is it a pure "10% that WR1 Rating 70 is targetted. If so: 10% that LCB1 Rating 67 covers him. If so: x% for deflect/Int/catch. Roll dice. Find result in table $1. Next."

Or does the simulation go deeper, using certains skills of the players? Like the PRT/PRS Skill of the DE being used not only to see IF he pressures the QB, but to which extend. And then modifying the QBs Long Passing Skill to see if the WR gets a chance to use his Adjust to catch the ball etc.. etc.. etc..
Of course it's only dice rolls in the end.. but is it a "Pittsburgh plays Cleveland. 50% Cleveland wins - due to addup of player ratings or whatever ;) - *Sound of dice rolling*.. 34.. Cleveland wins by result in table $1 under 34%... with log files made up to fit the dice roll?
Or does what the gamers - we - do to raise the chances of our teams, up to trying to find the right man on the right spot for the right play have any influence?

If you plan your game with that in mind you will do better than micro-analyzing each play and trying to figure out why your team did what it did. So it doesn't invalidate the above strategies, it just means that you need larger sample sizes to make everything play out ok.

The thing that buggers me about the FS blitzing without being told so and the Backup being on the field without being ordered so is more that those tidbitts seem to me as something that takes control away from me. Different gamers have different styles of play. I would never let Rex put up my Off/Def Gameplans or setup my players unless I'm sure he would do it exactly as I want him to do it. As his plans don't use my personnel as it needs to be used (.. or as I don't have the fitting personnel for Rex's plans..) I have to set up the Gameplans myself. And therefore I try to find out what happens when...
As I'm not a numbercruncher, I don't run 1,000 test games in a sterile surrounding, to get to my results. I've done 13 seasons now, easiest financial mode, started with the Steelers of 2008 and got Big Ben four rings in the first eight years.. then several players retired and now I'm in the process of building up a new team, fitting to my "hit them hard and run them down, then pick their long passes.." style of play. Had three bad years, then made it into Div Final and - tadaa - to another ring in the last season.
And all the time I'm modifying bits of my gameplans or settings.. Not in Macro level mode - but by what you could call Micro management.

I've said this before and I'm pretty sure I'm correct in my assumption that who you have on the field for each given play isn't as important as it would be if the game was simmed at the 2-d level, as not every player appears to have an effect on the outcome of each play. Look at the stats on a macro level and you'll appreciate it better, looking at it on the micro level (and thinking you can have a greater effect at that level) can lead to frustration.

I guess you're right about the ".. not every player.." part. Although from my experience it makes a difference if I set up my 100% of the time blitzing SLB to bugger the lousy rated LT/RTs on the opponents o-line.. even though he doesn't make the sack, the DEs or the WLB will make use of his pressure. And - from what I make of the stats my 13 seasons brought me - it does indeed raise the sack rating of the players around my SLB if he's good in PRT/PRS and set to blitz..
So.. adjusting the blitz directions for him - inside or outside - is what.. micro or macro?

And on the 100% playing time thingy.. I ran a meager four test games - two with 100%, two with 50% playing time for the starter - and came up with what I think of as an interesting result..
Under the 100% setup my O-line starters showed a 0 to 15.67% deviation to the 100%.
My starting LG (End 78, rated 70) was on the field 100% of all plays. His backup is a End 35, rating 44 LG.
On the other end of the line is my starting C (End 37, rating 62) who was on the field only on 84.3% of the plays - without getting hurt or suchlike - and was replaced by the End 18 rating 42 Backup C.
Starting LT (End 91, rating 64) was on the field 98.05% (Backup: End 34, rating 52)
From the other deviations, which stand around 2 to 5 % it seems, that neither Endurance nor Rating have a linear influence on the playing time settings.

With a 50% playing time setting for the starters, the deviations stand more equally at about 5%. The above mentioned starting LG was on the field 55.7% of the time, the C 53.57% and the LT made it for also 55.7% of the plays..

So, as each player has less time on the field with the 50% ratings, it seems that endurance does have an influence at playing time (-> higher deviations with 100%, lower with 50%). Though it seems as Endurance isn't the only aspect that has (-> End 91 spent less time on the field than End 78 in 100% mode)..
I would need an html parser to get more data to even have a small chance to find out what aspect that could be.. so up to now it's "Lucky Dice rolls.." all over for me ;)

jdavidbakr

08-04-2009, 08:32 PM

Or did You mean with "stats driven" that the players stats - skills, ablilities, whatever to call them.. - are put up against each other and then the decision is made with a - more or less lucky - roll of the dice? If so, then it doesn't matter, if FOF is a 0d or 3d Sim - even Madden10 is decided by those player stats (not the player on the Joystick.. at least not for 100%..) and some dice rolls..

That's more or less what I mean, the game appears to be designed with the end result of accurate stats being the primary goal rather than simulating what happens on each play. So, you're more or less correct in that it combines all the skills of various key players and comes up with a dice roll result. It differs from madden because madden takes into account the position on the field of the player where FOF doesn't. How far a player runs after making a catch, for example, is a factor of his big play receiving and probably the speed of the covering CB and S, but not where they might have been as the play unfolds. It yields fairly good results, but if you think about how the simulation is actually run it may sway some of the details of how you play it.

And no, I've never done the SP where you call the plays ;)

Dandelion

08-05-2009, 06:12 AM

That's more or less what I mean, the game appears to be designed with the end result of accurate stats being the primary goal rather than simulating what happens on each play. So, you're more or less correct in that it combines all the skills of various key players and comes up with a dice roll result. It differs from madden because madden takes into account the position on the field of the player where FOF doesn't. How far a player runs after making a catch, for example, is a factor of his big play receiving and probably the speed of the covering CB and S, but not where they might have been as the play unfolds.

Easy to test, I guess.. go to SP-DIY mode (Singleplayer, do it yourself.. the playcalling, that is..) and send Your FL1 on lots of short cross routes, then see how often he gets a long yardage catch, who makes the tackle, etc. etc.
The difference between Madden and FOF is - imho - not position of players on the field. It's just that in Madden the player with the joystick is some random factor in the game, which is simulated in FOF by a dice roll ;)
In Madden you see some pixels running across the field, catching some pixels thrown at them.. in FOF you have a "FL1 runs route $1, goes into Zone$12 triggering ZoneDefSkill of FS1 - compare Skills, get result. If result is positive Yardage is xx yard gain"
Of course that looks different on the first glance. But depending on how deep that comparisions are made, there is no need for pixels on a field to get a simulation that is even closer to reality than Madden ;) (I stopped playing Madden with 2005 or so, as it only yielded absolutely unrealistic results from the statistic view.. too many highscoring 300+ yard passing games for my taste..)

It yields fairly good results, but if you think about how the simulation is actually run it may sway some of the details of how you play it.
That's the thing.. DO we KNOW how the simulation in FOF is run? I mean, do we know how deep the simulation is? There's a lot that can be put into such a simulation.. a lot of modifiers, triggered by different things.. Looks to me like You see it as a lot more shallow than I do ;)

Could be that I'm totally wrong, but after 13 seasons with 20-23 games each - preseason, playoffs and bowl included sometimes - I tend to see a "flow" in the messages given for each play. Sometimes a computer controlled team gets hammered all game long, just to get one good drive going in the middle.. all the time before and after they go 3 and out, but that one drive goes over the field with five good plays in a row.. or if there's an interception or fumble in the game.. more than once - a lot more than once.. - there's an interception or fumble shortly after for the other side, giving the ball back into the hands of the previous possessor.. as if the players had been fired up to get the ball back for their side.. could easily be done by some modyfiers in the code of FOF..
So the thing seems to be, that I see more detail in the game than You do.. and I play the game according to my view and of course look for answers according to my view ;)
The numbercrunchers out there could do a lot to prove who of us is more right than the other..

And no, I've never done the SP where you call the plays ;)
hmmm.. maybe You should give it a try.. ;)

jdavidbakr

08-05-2009, 06:48 AM

Of course that looks different on the first glance. But depending on how deep that comparisions are made, there is no need for pixels on a field to get a simulation that is even closer to reality than Madden ;) (I stopped playing Madden with 2005 or so, as it only yielded absolutely unrealistic results from the statistic view.. too many highscoring 300+ yard passing games for my taste..)

First off, let me be clear - I do really like FOF, I switched from Madden though not because of the game play but because of the long-term sustainability of the franchise building aspect. I feel like the game engine works very well, but you can't watch your OG on every play to evaluate how well he's doing because you don't really have any information about what he's doing. I don't doubt that he's being evaluated and having some measure of effect on the end result, and I don't disagree with you that it probably goes very deep with the calculations. This whole discussion started with the question of having your starters get subbed out in an unrealistic manner, which doesn't happen in Madden, and in my opinion sort of breaks the illusion when you start micro analyzing the game logs in FOF.

Dandelion

08-05-2009, 08:19 AM

First off, let me be clear - I do really like FOF...

I'd never have dared to think anything else.. You've been playing FOF a lot longer than me..

I switched from Madden though not because of the game play but because of the long-term sustainability of the franchise building aspect.

Understandible.. Madden is a mediocre game with a whole lot of 3-d gimmicks and a big purse for advertisement.. I loved Sierra's Front Page Sports Football.. too bad they tried to imitate EA Madden too much.. and too bad it was published by Sierra, home of the bugs ;)

This whole discussion started with the question of having your starters get subbed out in an unrealistic manner, which doesn't happen in Madden, and in my opinion sort of breaks the illusion when you start micro analyzing the game logs in FOF.

I see it from two different points of view.. the first is immersion.. if my backup gets on the field on a play where he shouldn't be in, something must have happened.. maybe the starter mislaid his helmet ;) - that even happens to star quality players in the NFL ;)

The second point of view is the game code POV.. Was it just a glitch? A bug in programming? Was it - from the programmer's POV supposed to happen? If not, how can one make sure it doesn't happen again?
I'm still quite new to FOF, so I'm still trying to find out what happens if I change different things - and things like that unexpected backup on the field or the SS blitzing when his blitz rate is set to 0% make me ask for the "why" behind it. Glitch? Bug? Bad Dice Roll? Or done as expected by the programmer?
Might be, that playing WOW for quite a while got me to think there's a whole lot of people around even here, who love to analyse a game - numbercrunchers ;) - as there seem to be millions of them in WOW. As it seems, I've been wrong.. so I'll continue my "live and learn" strategy to find out what happens when I change some detail in the FOF setups ;)

sidthelid

08-05-2009, 02:44 PM

That's more or less what I mean, the game appears to be designed with the end result of accurate stats being the primary goal rather than simulating what happens on each play.
And no, I've never done the SP where you call the plays ;)

Are you saying the game is decided first and then the plays /stats added around it?

Dandelion

08-05-2009, 03:39 PM

Are you saying the game is decided first and then the plays /stats added around it?

I think he means the game is designed to have each gameday end with realistic results - from a statistic point of view.. No horrendous amount of 63:56 wins.. and not too many 0:3 either.

So even with 53 players with 100/100 stats you won't win all games without giving up some TDs.. and even with a team full of 1/1 players sometimes you will score one.. as in real life.. just take a look at the Detroit Lions in the real NFL :devil:

the game is coded to get realistic results - and of course it will "cheat" a bit to get to them. If in a match one team is way too strong, take a look at penalties... maybe even injuries... or that "lucky streak" the losing team has for one drive.. all those things could be coded into the game to the effect of achieving realistic statistics.

QuikSand

08-05-2009, 04:46 PM

Are you saying the game is decided first and then the plays /stats added around it?

I really think what he's saying is (once again) getting back to the idea of starters getting subbed out as the immediate example.

In real football, we understand how this tend to work. The starting RB gets the first couple of series, gets spelled in certain situations, but basically takes all the snaps. Then after a while, he might get a breather for a series, or for a few plays, as the other RB comes in. That is more likely to happen in the middle or later parts of the game. But when you look at the end of the game, you'd see that RB1 got maybe 45 snaps, and RB2 got 15.

In FOF, the end distribution might be the same, but the way the game works you'd see those 15 snaps for RB2 coming basically randomly interspersed throughout the game. He might ne in there for the second play of the game, which seems kinda silly if you look at the game that closely. But in the end, the playing time works out the same way. Pretty much what jdb has been saying here a few times over.

OldSchool

08-05-2009, 05:03 PM

I guess You mean "The way FOF plays non-quarterbacks is to determine, internally, a percentage for player usage based on endurance and the starter playing-time settings. That's then independently applied to the depth chart on each play. This is kind of an unnatural solution, but it's fair to each team."

Makes me wonder, though, why the game - if You call plays yourself - shows players as "exhausted" in the play personnel options (... the list on the left, if one uses the "view" option for a play to see which personnel/routes it contains).

Be it as it may, if Your assumption is right, then getting the right personnel on the field would be just pure luck, right? Which would - IMHO - devalue several of the assumptions made in the first posts of the thread.

How do you get to that play viewing screen?

Dandelion

08-05-2009, 07:44 PM

How do you get to that play viewing screen?

When You simulate a Gameday use the "Show games on Scoreboard - Only Your Team" option.
The scoreboard should pop up with the option to call your own plays - that little hook beside the "call play" button.
If You use the Call Play button on anything but a Kickoff/return, You'll get to the "select offense" (.. or ".. defense") screen.
On the right side all available plays for the chosen formation are listed. And a bit left of the "call" button, with which You call a play, there's the "view" button, which shows You the diagram for the play with the route(s) for the receiver(s) or the slot the RB/FB is going to run through.
Included are the optional players at the skill positions in a drop down menu on the left with remarks about injuries or stamina.

I know of no other way to access these screens.. though they would be quite helpfull for gameplan making IMHO

OldSchool

08-08-2009, 06:59 PM

When You simulate a Gameday use the "Show games on Scoreboard - Only Your Team" option.
The scoreboard should pop up with the option to call your own plays - that little hook beside the "call play" button.
If You use the Call Play button on anything but a Kickoff/return, You'll get to the "select offense" (.. or ".. defense") screen.
On the right side all available plays for the chosen formation are listed. And a bit left of the "call" button, with which You call a play, there's the "view" button, which shows You the diagram for the play with the route(s) for the receiver(s) or the slot the RB/FB is going to run through.
Included are the optional players at the skill positions in a drop down menu on the left with remarks about injuries or stamina.

I know of no other way to access these screens.. though they would be quite helpfull for gameplan making IMHO

Ah ok, I thought they looked dimly familiar, its been a while since I've played single player. (and even longer since I've called my own plays in single player)

Wanderer

02-04-2011, 03:26 AM

Thanks, Yoda. That makes more sense to me, but alas, it clearly unravels your theory about how to use man-only and zone-only corners in a split coverage scheme.I don't think this is too hard to solve, actually.

1) Orient your corners by WR covered.
2) The WR that is the "top" WR is the one with the best RR skills.
3) Determine whether that WR is the SE or the FL
4) There are 4 possibilities, either the SE or the FL are the top guy; and you want to put your stud on the SE or the FL.
a) If the SE is the top RR guy and that's the guy you want to shut down, you want to play Weak Man/Strong Zone, and put your stud at LCB/Top CB. Orient him by WR covered locks him onto the SE, who is on the weak side in most formations (exception being in "slot" formations.)
b) If the FL is the top RR guy and that's your target, put your stud at LCB/Top CB and play Strong Man/Weak Zone. He should lock on to the FL who is on the strong side in most formations.
c) If the SE is the top RR guy and you're targeting the FL, put your stud at RCB/2nd CB, and play Strong Man/Weak Zone. As the "#2" CB he should lock on to the Flanker as the WR with the #2 RR, and the strong side is where the Flanker hangs out.
d) FL top/SE target: Stud @ RCB/2nd CB and play Weak Man/Strong Zone. Should lock you onto the SE, and man him up on the weak side where he plays.

Unless I'm missing something, that should cover you most of the time.

Untested, caveat emptor, YMMV, etc., etc.

QuikSand

02-04-2011, 05:22 PM

I think you're right (an odd bump of a 21 month old post, but I'm game) that this works if:

(1) you are gameplanning one game at a time;

(2) you are correct about the FL/SE being identified as the upcoming opponent's "top" receiver (determined in-game) and the opponent does not make a switch in their roles; and

(3) your assumption that FL=Strong is correct in at least an overwhelming share of situations (reasonable, but not ironclad).

I confess that I'm lost at item #1 above. I have long since lost the patience required to do any gameplanning game by game in any setting, even for title games in MP leagues.

So, what I really wanted way back (at least one or two patches ago, by the way) when we were having this conversation was some way to create a defense that more or less automatically placed my CB1 man specialist on the man-coverage side, and my CB2 zone specialist on the zone-coverage side in a split man/zone formation. And it still appears that there's no real way to do that.

Wanderer

02-04-2011, 06:48 PM

I think you're right (an odd bump of a 21 month old post, but I'm game)Sorry, I found it on a search for defensive gameplanning tips and answered before I looked.

that this works if:

(1) you are gameplanning one game at a time;Yeah, only if you're gameplanning one game at a time, but it's maybe 10 mouseclicks to make the adjustment.
(2) you are correct about the FL/SE being identified as the upcoming opponent's "top" receiver (determined in-game) and the opponent does not make a switch in their roles; andI thought the first part was confirmed from SSoftware, no? That the route running measure was the determining factor? As to the 2nd part, that's true I guess. That sort of gamesmanship could happen.

(3) your assumption that FL=Strong is correct in at least an overwhelming share of situations (reasonable, but not ironclad).This is pretty close to ironclad, actually, and you can see it from the playcalling screens in SP when you shift the strengths from right to left in the various formations. No matter what formation you choose, if you "view" a play and look, your FL1 is always on the side designated as strong. This is true even in balanced sets. In a Single back 4WR, there is no strong side, but FOF actually defines the strong side by where the FL1 goes.

I confess that I'm lost at item #1 above. I have long since lost the patience required to do any gameplanning game by game in any setting, even for title games in MP leagues.

So, what I really wanted way back (at least one or two patches ago, by the way) when we were having this conversation was some way to create a defense that more or less automatically placed my CB1 man specialist on the man-coverage side, and my CB2 zone specialist on the zone-coverage side in a split man/zone formation. And it still appears that there's no real way to do that.I'm afraid that to be able to put an opponent's top WR on Revis Island, it will take somewhere between 0 and 12 mouseclicks before a game where it might be important to you. But if your opponent flips his SE and FL out of nowhere, then yes, it would be undone.

Just thought I'd contribute to give a 90% solution to a problem that looked like it was left unresolved.

DrAFTjunkie

02-09-2011, 01:10 AM

Great read.

Yoda

02-09-2011, 02:42 PM

Thanks, I am planning on updating this soon. I have been getting good information from another owner that I have been asking for.

garion333

06-12-2011, 01:08 PM

Thanks, I am planning on updating this soon. I have been getting good information from another owner that I have been asking for.

Still planning on updating this? Is there another thread I missed? :bowdown:

Yoda

06-12-2011, 01:20 PM

Yes, I am still planning on updating this. I've just gotten busy... my wife is going to Origins and will be gone for a week.... I'll try to find time then.

Mike7273

02-12-2012, 03:50 PM

That was 8 months ago. LOL

Yoda

02-13-2012, 02:15 PM

Yeah, I need to work on this.... *sigh*

NawlinsFan

02-13-2012, 05:28 PM

Please!!!! Because I royally SUCK on both offense and defense and need all the help I can get! Yes, I have studied the threads here but have yet to master this like most here seem to have. I inheretid a suck ass team in a quality league and have found it almost impossible to improve it much when my budget sucks and the only FA's I attracted are everyone elses rejects.

So come on, do this for us losers!

aadam

02-13-2012, 06:50 PM

Hi everyone, I bought the game 2 days ago and I'm not sure I completely understand defense play calling. Let me ask a few noob question, if someone took the time to answer them (ok, some of them), I would be grateful. :) I'm from Europe so please forgive me for any possible language mistakes.

1) How are blitzers determined? (LB, CB, S?)

2) Why is a 1-deep, loose man defense "very vulnerable to any kind of passing attack, particulary to short passes" when a 2-deep, loose man is not? I guess the only difference is one safety not positioning in deep zone which in fact should make it more effective against short passes, not weaker.

3) What is exactly a loose man defense? BnR is slightly better against short passes but what is the advantage of loose man? Run defense? Should I ever call loose man if my LBs and secondary are more effective playing BnR?

4) How to play zone defense? Both loose man and BnR are man-to-man systems with only the safeties playing zone. Strong/weak side man cover feature a CB and 1/2 linebackers playing zone. But in the standard formations, LBs never defend zones?

5) Does that also mean that zone defense skill for LB is mostly irrelevant? And, since they are not usually lined up against wide receivers, they don't bump into them too often. Safeties never do. So how important BnR defense is to them?

6) One last questions. Does it make sense to call a run/pass oriented play and focus on the other option? Like, lining up a nickel/dime formation and expecting run? I guess WRs would be covered by the extra CBs while the LBs and safeties defend against running plays.