playbooks

[Mobarak]

When putting together a playbook/gameplan, do you need to run plays in every formation, or can you say never run a 2/3/0 and still have success? Can you focus entirely on 3 or 4 formations only and still have success?

[Mobarak]

Another question would be, when you go into playbook and generate 100 plays.. half of the plays generated are in the 1/1/3 formation. Is this the main formation used for offense in FoF or can you base your offense out of the 1/2/2 or 2/1/2 ??

[Julio Riddols]

I'd say do what works for your personnel. If you're building the book yourself, play to your guys strengths and use them in the way that you think best fits their style.. You still want other plays in there so the defense doesn't have as easy of a time figuring out how you're doing things, and you want a reasonable amount of balance.. But if you have a specific personnel grouping you want to emphasize I don't see it being a detriment as long as that is what your team does best.

I'd say to focus 75-80% of the playbook on plays that really work with the group of players you have, then use the other 20% for gimmick plays, unique formations and personnel, etc. This way you can vary your game plans week to week without getting too predictable.

[Ben E Lou]

I don't believe that the Help File explicitly says that you should run a high percentage of your plays from 113, but it does mention somewhere that it is by the most frequently used one in real life. I wouldn't be shocked if part of the familiar mechanism is realistic-formation-usage based. I mean, with five eligible receivers, 14 routes, 3 QB depths, 2 pass types, 2 run types, 4 different back alignments, and 8 running holes, it's certainly *possible* to put together a varied playbook using nothing but, say, 131 personnel. But I doubt that's a good idea.

[Mobarak]

Ok so say you have 2 extremely good pass catching TE's. You want them both on the field as much as possible right, so can you run say 70-80% formations using 2 TE's and mix in other stuff to get the balance?

[Mobarak]

my first attempt at a playbook was awful and full of familiars.

[PikeStance]

Unless I am mistaken, the year the L.A Raiders won the SB they ran almost exclusively a two back two receiver set formation. I watched them run that formation on a 3 and 7 (I think). I haven't made a playbook, but i will definitely take the approach suggested here. I will build around my strength regardless of "preference" the game plays to a certain alignment. For example, I have an awesome fullback. He can do everything. I would want him on the field 80% of the time.

Anecdote. Back when Super Techmo Bowl first game out, you can choose 4 running plays and four passing plays. There were plays that complimented each other. My brother, not the most technically intelligent person when it came to football, designed a playbook. He dumbfounded that everyone "knew" what he was running on every play.

[Julio Riddols]

Unless I am mistaken, the year the L.A Raiders won the SB they ran almost exclusively a two back two receiver set formation. I watched them run that formation on a 3 and 7 (I think). I haven't made a playbook, but i will definitely take the approach suggested here. I will build around my strength regardless of "preference" the game plays to a certain alignment. For example, I have an awesome fullback. He can do everything. I would want him on the field 80% of the time.

Anecdote. Back when Super Techmo Bowl first game out, you can choose 4 running plays and four passing plays. There were plays that complimented each other. My brother, not the most technically intelligent person when it came to football, designed a playbook. He dumbfounded that everyone "knew" what he was running on every play.

Re: Tecmo - The Denver default playbook was super predictable. One of my favorite teams to play when I wanted to dominate defensively. I did take note of the formation similarities though, and tried to avoid putting in any one play that stood out as different from the rest based on formation or motion.


As for FOF, Variety and balance have always been a big part of keeping the defense on their toes. Going against expectations has also always been useful. Letting the CPU create your playbook is the easiest and most painless way of getting a competent offense to build game plans from - But if you want to get in depth, then figure out exactly what percentage of the time you want to get the ball to certain players in general. Use that to determine how many plays to create when making your book. One thing to keep in mind is that it doesn't really matter who is on the field on a given play, as long as the pieces you want to use on that play are there.

For instance, if you have a stud WR and the rest of your team is a bunch of scrubs, you might want to get him the ball about 35-40% of the time. So in a playbook with 100 pass play, ideally 35-40 would have him as the primary target. Scale up or down as needed but I wouldn't go much over 40% for any particular player. You want to make sure route depth and formation and personnel differ between these plays as well. Doing a focused build where you install plays for one player at a time seems to be the best way I have found to get a good playbook together. As for run plays, I feel like having variety is good here too, but you want to play to the strengths of your line and your lead back slightly. So if you have a strong interior OL and a good powerful back, focus a little more on inside runs.. Maybe 65/35 or so. If you have a balanced line and back, do a little bit of everything. If you have a killer FB, make sure he is blocking for that back, etc.

If you plan it out and know what you want to do and how you're going to do it, then making a playbook is as easy as doing the math and then making sure everything adds up in the end.

[Mobarak]

Great answer thanks!

[Sharkn20]

Re: Tecmo - The Denver default playbook was super predictable. One of my favorite teams to play when I wanted to dominate defensively. I did take note of the formation similarities though, and tried to avoid putting in any one play that stood out as different from the rest based on formation or motion.


As for FOF, Variety and balance have always been a big part of keeping the defense on their toes. Going against expectations has also always been useful. Letting the CPU create your playbook is the easiest and most painless way of getting a competent offense to build game plans from - But if you want to get in depth, then figure out exactly what percentage of the time you want to get the ball to certain players in general. Use that to determine how many plays to create when making your book. One thing to keep in mind is that it doesn't really matter who is on the field on a given play, as long as the pieces you want to use on that play are there.

For instance, if you have a stud WR and the rest of your team is a bunch of scrubs, you might want to get him the ball about 35-40% of the time. So in a playbook with 100 pass play, ideally 35-40 would have him as the primary target. Scale up or down as needed but I wouldn't go much over 40% for any particular player. You want to make sure route depth and formation and personnel differ between these plays as well. Doing a focused build where you install plays for one player at a time seems to be the best way I have found to get a good playbook together. As for run plays, I feel like having variety is good here too, but you want to play to the strengths of your line and your lead back slightly. So if you have a strong interior OL and a good powerful back, focus a little more on inside runs.. Maybe 65/35 or so. If you have a balanced line and back, do a little bit of everything. If you have a killer FB, make sure he is blocking for that back, etc.

If you plan it out and know what you want to do and how you're going to do it, then making a playbook is as easy as doing the math and then making sure everything adds up in the end.

Great tips as usual

[Pyser]

the giants this year ran something like 90% of their (terrible) offense from a 113. defenses across the board said they were easy to prepare for, and the team didnt crack 30 points all season, and maybe didnt crack 20 for their last 7 games or something insane.

so real life says dont do it.

[Mobarak]

(1Q: 15:00) Jason Myers kicked off 72 yards from the JAX35. Touchback.
1-10-SDO25 (1Q: 15:00) Play-Action. Philip Rivers pass completed to WR Travis Benjamin for 37 yards. Tackled by CB Prince Amukamara. The receiver ran his route right over the middle of the field. Benjamin gained 13 yards after the catch. The quarterback threw away from the double coverage.
1-10-JAX38 (1Q: 14:20) Philip Rivers pass completed to RB Danny Woodhead for 36 yards. Tackled by S Tashaun Gipson. Woodhead gained 29 yards after the catch.
1-2-JAX02 (1Q: 13:46) Melvin Gordon ran around the left tackle for 0 yards. Tackled by OLB Telvin Smith, assisted by ILB Grayson Prior. PENALTY: T Chris Hairston of San Diego was called for Offensive Holding.
1-12-JAX12 (1Q: 13:39) Philip Rivers pass completed to WR Dexter McCluster for 2 yards. Tackled by CB Prince Amukamara, assisted by CB Jalen Ramsey.
2-10-JAX10 (1Q: 13:01) Danny Woodhead ran around the left tackle for 6 yards. Tackled by ILB Paul Posluszny, assisted by DE Yannick Ngakoue.
3-4-JAX04 (1Q: 12:20) Philip Rivers pass fell incomplete, intended for TE Hunter Henry. DE Jared Odrick simply tossed Orlando Franklin aside to reach the quarterback and hurry the throw.
4-4-JAX04 (1Q: 12:16) Josh Lambo attempted a 21 yard field goal and succeeded. San Diego 3, Jacksonville 0
(1Q: 12:11) Josh Lambo kicked off 70 yards from the SDO35. Touchback. PENALTY: WR Tyrell Williams of San Diego was called for Offsides on the Kickoff.
(1Q: 12:11) Josh Lambo kicked off 69 yards from the SDO30. Chris Ivory returned the ball 41 yards to the JAX42. Tackled by Kenneth Farrow.
1-10-JAX42 (1Q: 11:36) E.J. Manuel pass fell incomplete, intended for RB T.J. Yeldon. ILB Manti Te'o defended the pass.
2-10-JAX42 (1Q: 11:29) T.J. Yeldon ran inside the left guard for 3 yards. Tackled by ILB Jatavis Brown.
3-7-JAX45 (1Q: 10:54) E.J. Manuel scrambled for 8 yards. Tackled by DE Corey Liuget.
1-10-SDO47 (1Q: 10:25) PENALTY: G Jeremiah Poutasi of Jacksonville was called for a False Start.
1-15-JAX48 (1Q: 10:19) T.J. Yeldon ran outside the right tackle for 2 yards. Tackled by ILB Manti Te'o.
2-13-SDO50 (1Q: 09:51) T.J. Yeldon ran around the left tackle for 3 yards. Tackled by OLB Jeremiah Attaochu, assisted by OLB Melvin Ingram.
3-10-SDO47 (1Q: 09:23) E.J. Manuel pass completed to WR Rashad Greene for 12 yards. Tackled by CB Pierre Desir. PENALTY: CB Casey Hayward of San Diego was called for Defensive Holding. The penalty was declined.
1-10-SDO35 (1Q: 09:15) E.J. Manuel sacked by OLB Kyle Emanuel for a loss of 8 yards. Sack allowed by Jeremiah Poutasi.
2-18-SDO43 (1Q: 08:31) E.J. Manuel pass fell incomplete, intended for TE Julius Thomas. ILB Jatavis Brown defended the pass.
3-18-SDO43 (1Q: 08:23) E.J. Manuel pass completed to WR Marqise Lee for 8 yards. Tackled by CB Steve Williams, assisted by CB Casey Hayward.
4-10-SDO35 (1Q: 07:39) Brad Nortman punted 35 yards. Touchback.
1-10-SDO20 (1Q: 07:34) PENALTY: WR Dexter McCluster of San Diego was called for a False Start.
1-15-SDO15 (1Q: 07:24) Play-Action. Philip Rivers pass completed to TE Sean McGrath for 12 yards. Tackled by OLB Dan Skuta, assisted by OLB Telvin Smith.
2-3-SDO27 (1Q: 06:54) Philip Rivers pass was dropped by WR Travis Benjamin.
3-3-SDO27 (1Q: 06:48) Philip Rivers pass completed to RB Melvin Gordon for 1 yard. The receiver went out of bounds. Tackled by OLB Telvin Smith.
4-2-SDO28 (1Q: 06:10) Drew Kaser punted 46 yards. Rashad Greene returned the kick 13 yards to the JAX39. PENALTY: S Peyton Thompson of Jacksonville was called for Holding on the Punt Return.
1-10-JAX17 (1Q: 06:02) E.J. Manuel pass completed to TE Julius Thomas for -2 yards. Tackled by OLB Jeremiah Attaochu.
2-12-JAX15 (1Q: 05:39) T.J. Yeldon ran inside the right guard for 4 yards. Tackled by ILB Jatavis Brown.
3-8-JAX19 (1Q: 05:11) E.J. Manuel pass completed to WR Rashad Greene for 5 yards. Tackled by CB Casey Hayward, assisted by OLB Melvin Ingram. The receiver ran his route right over the middle of the field.
4-3-JAX24 (1Q: 04:29) Brad Nortman punted 57 yards. Tyrell Williams returned the kick 16 yards to the SDO35. PENALTY: DT Brandon Mebane of San Diego was called for Holding on the Punt Return.
1-10-SDO23 (1Q: 04:20) Danny Woodhead ran around right end for 13 yards. Tackled by DE Dante Fowler, assisted by CB Jalen Ramsey. Key block delivered by Orlando Franklin.
1-10-SDO36 (1Q: 03:48) Danny Woodhead ran inside the left guard for -3 yards. Tackled by CB Jalen Ramsey.
2-13-SDO33 (1Q: 03:05) Philip Rivers pass completed to WR Dexter McCluster for 11 yards. Tackled by S Johnathan Cyprien. McCluster gained 13 yards after the catch.
3-2-SDO44 (1Q: 02:25) Philip Rivers pass completed to WR Tyrell Williams for 9 yards. Tackled by ILB Paul Posluszny.
1-10-JAX47 (1Q: 02:02) Philip Rivers pass completed to WR Travis Benjamin for -1 yards. Tackled by DE Dante Fowler, assisted by CB Davon House. The receiver ran his route right over the middle of the field.
2-11-JAX48 (1Q: 01:41) Danny Woodhead ran inside the left guard for 0 yards. Tackled by CB Jalen Ramsey, assisted by DT Malik Jackson.
3-11-JAX48 (1Q: 00:59) Philip Rivers sacked by DT Sen'Derrick Marks for a loss of 3 yards. Sack allowed by Joe Barksdale.
4-14-SDO49 (1Q: 00:13) Drew Kaser punted 30 yards. Rashad Greene called for a fair catch at the JAX21.
1-10-JAX21 (1Q: 00:03) T.J. Yeldon ran around the left tackle for 2 yards. Tackled by ILB Manti Te'o, assisted by OLB Jeremiah Attaochu.
Start of second quarter.
2-8-JAX23 (2Q: 15:00) E.J. Manuel scrambled for 6 yards. Tackled by CB Steve Williams.
3-2-JAX29 (2Q: 14:32) Dez Lewis ran inside the right guard for 1 yard. Tackled by ILB Manti Te'o. The defense looked very familiar with that play.

[Mobarak]

Why would the defense recognize the play when it's only the second time running off the right guard and the first was with the halfback and the the second was the fullback?

[SweenDawg72]

Why would the defense recognize the play when it's only the second time running off the right guard and the first was with the halfback and the the second was the fullback?

Without seeing the formations used it is tough to say. Is it possible all your runs so far have been out of the same formation and the defense has keyed in on it?

[Mobarak]

Not sure i'll have to check. The more I learn about the playbook the more it seems you have very few options. It's pretty difficult to to game plan a playbook without seeing a single one being used effectively =(

[garion333]

Without seeing the formations used it is tough to say. Is it possible all your runs so far have been out of the same formation and the defense has keyed in on it?

That would be my guess.

Also, is the AI able to determine what formations you use frequently in prior games?

[xcom44dan]

Speaking as somebody who only plays sp, and calls every play (offensively at least) in every game (for 4 seasons so far in FOF8)

The only time I have ever received the 'The defense looked very familiar with that play' message is when I have called the exact same play, 3 times in one game.

When calling your own plays, your playbook turns blue after calling a play once, then red after calling it a second time. If I call a 'red' play, it's likely that I'll receive the 'familiar' message.

I haven't seen any evidence that this message is based on formation - it's only affected me when over-calling a specific play. As a disclaimer, my playbook is pretty balanced; I would say the majority of plays are run from the 113 formation.

I very rarely call a play 3 times in a single game now (unless I'm really in a hole and only have a few deep throw calls available). I haven't had the 'familiar' message once in my most recent season (from memory at least)

[Mobarak]

so in the above scenario, why did I get the familiar msg, it was only the second time running off the right guard?

[xcom44dan]

Unfortunately, I've no idea!

My own observations may not even be correct. Just thought I'd share what I've seen in the 80 or so games I've called.

It could be that formations do have an impact on defense familiarity; it's just not something I've seen myself personally (I may be unwittingly always calling balanced games).

[Mobarak]

Re: Tecmo - The Denver default playbook was super predictable. One of my favorite teams to play when I wanted to dominate defensively. I did take note of the formation similarities though, and tried to avoid putting in any one play that stood out as different from the rest based on formation or motion.


As for FOF, Variety and balance have always been a big part of keeping the defense on their toes. Going against expectations has also always been useful. Letting the CPU create your playbook is the easiest and most painless way of getting a competent offense to build game plans from - But if you want to get in depth, then figure out exactly what percentage of the time you want to get the ball to certain players in general. Use that to determine how many plays to create when making your book. One thing to keep in mind is that it doesn't really matter who is on the field on a given play, as long as the pieces you want to use on that play are there.

For instance, if you have a stud WR and the rest of your team is a bunch of scrubs, you might want to get him the ball about 35-40% of the time. So in a playbook with 100 pass play, ideally 35-40 would have him as the primary target. Scale up or down as needed but I wouldn't go much over 40% for any particular player. You want to make sure route depth and formation and personnel differ between these plays as well. Doing a focused build where you install plays for one player at a time seems to be the best way I have found to get a good playbook together. As for run plays, I feel like having variety is good here too, but you want to play to the strengths of your line and your lead back slightly. So if you have a strong interior OL and a good powerful back, focus a little more on inside runs.. Maybe 65/35 or so. If you have a balanced line and back, do a little bit of everything. If you have a killer FB, make sure he is blocking for that back, etc.

If you plan it out and know what you want to do and how you're going to do it, then making a playbook is as easy as doing the math and then making sure everything adds up in the end.

Before I dive back in to make another test playbook, are you changing out the playbook every year based on the players or do you use the same overall playbook and change out the game plans.. 200 plays is a lot of plays and I imagine you can come to a pretty solid playbook for all situations with that number. Maybe keeping a playbook with the same 150 solid plays or so and load it up as you need to each season with the other 50?

[Julio Riddols]

I am putting together several playbooks that cater to different styles of offense. Chances are I would load a playbook rom this set I am creating, then tweak 10-15 plays to alter targets or formations.

[PikeStance]

Does anyone know how to view all 200 plays? The only think I seem to be able to do is change the threshold variable and I can get a different set of plays out of the 200.

The system would be better if they gave you an option of choosing your "100" without playing around with the threshold. Currently, if I do not like a play, I have to change individually; however, I would like the option of choosing an already existing play if he suits my needs.

[Sharkn20]

Does anyone know how to view all 200 plays? The only think I seem to be able to do is change the threshold variable and I can get a different set of plays out of the 200.

The system would be better if they gave you an option of choosing your "100" without playing around with the threshold. Currently, if I do not like a play, I have to change individually; however, I would like the option of choosing an already existing play if he suits my needs.

You can create a base play book with 100 plays, save it and just add 100 more. If you don't like them, re upload the PB and do it again.

[PikeStance]

This is what I had to do. I wanted an easier solution. I want to be able to choose from the 200 rather than be force to choose out of a 100 generated plays. That can become tedious after a while.

[Sef0r]

The most frustrating thing for me is the fact that the playbook generator does not seem to have 200 plays in all 1 style. I'm trying to create a playbook of just 100 Westcoast ONLY "best fit" plays. It throws in Balance, Spread, Smashmouth. I go through the tedious task of deleting those then generate another 10 each time, and each time (regardless of where I have the threshhold set, 1 or 99) it generates 1 Westcoast play and 9 others.

[PikeStance]

I know what you mean. I spent hours trying to figure it out. One team I own has "Air Coryell" OC preference. It generated ONE AC play in like 50 tries. I just gave up after awhile. AC wasn't a spread offense. It was mostly a conventional offense with an innovative approach. I am not sure how that translate with the play selection in game however. If this is supposed to be a GM based simulation why are they so little information about the coaches.

[Dawgfan19]

The help file tells us this. Note the word "slight" bonus. I doubt there is a significant difference between Best Fit and Solid to lose much sleep over. Out of a 200 rexed playbook, you will get enough solid/best fit/good plays to prepare a 65 play GP.

While offensive coordinators can run any play, teams get a slight bonus when running plays that best fit their philosophy. In this day and age, receivers have to be so precise with routes and teams have to memorize these vast playbooks, so the days of one type of play being off the table with a team are long gone.

[Hammer]

I recall it is a struggle to get anything above "good" for Air Coryell when it comes to running plays. So perhaps it is slight x2, that the AC ground game is missing out on.

[Ushikawa]

these are all your solid running plays with air coryell

122 Str Shot - holes 3 4
122 Wk Shot - holes 2 3 4 5
203 Pro Shot - all holes
203 Pro Pist - holes 2 to 6
212 Pro Shot - all holes
221 Pro Shot - all but 3 4

[Hammer]

I imagine running from the gun would flush any edge you get back down the toilet.

[Ushikawa]

yea, i havent tested but doesnt seem like it would work

[rush_27]

The most frustrating thing for me is the fact that the playbook generator does not seem to have 200 plays in all 1 style. I'm trying to create a playbook of just 100 Westcoast ONLY "best fit" plays. It throws in Balance, Spread, Smashmouth. I go through the tedious task of deleting those then generate another 10 each time, and each time (regardless of where I have the threshhold set, 1 or 99) it generates 1 Westcoast play and 9 others.

Generate a playbook with '0' threshold. Should give you all plays under your OC style.

[Sef0r]

It doesn't rush, I've tried. As mentioned though I shouldn't lose sleep if I don't get best fit, should just be happy with solid too :)

[Dawgfan19]

I recall it is a struggle to get anything above "good" for Air Coryell when it comes to running plays. So perhaps it is slight x2, that the AC ground game is missing out on.

And that's exactly my point. My VFL Browns won the title with an Air Coryell offense and roughly half dozen best fit plays.

There is way too much angst over the playbook, IMO.

[Hammer]

Congrats on the win. I am sure you are right, there are so many other factors in the equation. You showed that the passing game is nothing to be concerned about, at least.

I have struggled running the ball with Air Coryell. Although the QB has ran way above expectations. Could be nothing in it, and just sample size. Although I recall your running game didn't do well either. You didn't feel Air Coryell was holding it back?

[Dawgfan19]

Although I recall your running game didn't do well either. You didn't feel Air Coryell was holding it back?

Good question and I agree lots of moving parts, so it's hard to determine why the run game suffered. I was attributing that to a rookie RB and a young o-line. But you could be correct.

I've switched to a balanced style, so I won't be able to tell if a year of seasoning helped the run game. BTW, I made the change to hopefully reduce INTs, not specifically trying to address the run game issues.

[Julio Riddols]

My hope is that a future patch will find a happy medium for playbooks. I'd love a playbook wizard where we can set some parameters and have a playbook created around that.

I do think the "best fit" is being overblown quite a bit though. Not entirely certain it matters as much as it is being made out to.

[wustin]

spent too much time making 100 plays from scratch, but it was worth it

http://i.imgur.com/1pXijC0.png

[Julio Riddols]

Jones was a beast, 11 yards a target.

[Ben E Lou]

Generate a playbook with '0' threshold. Should give you all plays under your OC style.This depends on the particular style, I'm fairly certain. In at least one style (Spread,) I get more like 120ish plays where Spread is the Best Fit, and then 80ish where it's mostly (all?) "Solid." I suspect it's that some styles don't have enough variety to fill an effective game plan with varying pass distances, formations, inside/outside running, QB depth, etc.

But, for example, Smashmouth gives me 100% Smashmouth plays. There are passes and play action and counters and runs and even empty backfield plays that have Smashmouth as a best fit.

[PikeStance]

I created plays straight from Bill Walsh and the game said was solid.

[Ben E Lou]

But, for example, Smashmouth gives me 100% Smashmouth plays. There are passes and play action and counters and runs and even empty backfield plays that have Smashmouth as a best fit.Ha! But it gives me *ZERO* plays out of the 113 or 113t personnel groupings. This isn't a hypothetical; I already did all the weight training and position switching for my FOFL TC export and just noticed the lack of 113 plays. Now I get to decide if I've got the chutzpah to go with a playbook without the most-used formation, or do 150 or so at 0 and 50sih at 15 to give me some 113s.

[wustin]

So for the running routes I always wondered does the game just treat them as a range of numbers assigned to a route?

What happens if I assign 5 receivers in shotgun to all run the dig/drag route toward the center? Does the game interpret that as each receiver advancing 3 yards forward or do they all run into each other.

[Dawgfan19]

This depends on the particular style, I'm fairly certain. In at least one style (Spread,) I get more like 120ish plays where Spread is the Best Fit, and then 80ish where it's mostly (all?) "Solid." I suspect it's that some styles don't have enough variety to fill an effective game plan with varying pass distances, formations, inside/outside running, QB depth, etc.

But, for example, Smashmouth gives me 100% Smashmouth plays. There are passes and play action and counters and runs and even empty backfield plays that have Smashmouth as a best fit.

To add to Ben's comments, it is definitely based on the style. You get mostly "best fit" for Balanced as well. My IFL team had a rexed GP had over 150 best fit. But there is randomness in play as you'll get a slightly different set upon a reset and generation of a new playbook.

Air Coryell and Perkins have the fewest best fit plays.

FYI, I noticed the rex GP for Balanced had no running plays from a 113 set. I choose to add 15 or so 113 run to avoid potential familars. Those plays are best fit for West Coast but still solid for Balanced.