An easy way to level the playing field (Offense vs Defense)

[Sven Draconian]

Quote: Originally Posted by Trojan Man

Well, no intent to rant here, burnwood; you bring up a valid and recurring point. It might just be that I'm happy with my team, but I have generics bringing down all tiers of backs, and my d-line typically disallows guys like Earl to get rolling. I might give up one run a game to those kinds of backs, but my corners are good tacklers, I've got an inkling of what kinds of plays to call once I get a sense of where my opponents like to run, and even though I agree that Earl breaks tackles of a sort and with a frequency that can only be described as ridiculous, I don't think there's a team out there that's de facto un-beatable. I definitely defer to those more knowledgable than myself on some of these points, and I second all those who call for a second iteration of the game that has some things toned down and others toned up, but I'm still more or less happy with the game as I feel that any team is beatable and that any player is stoppable. I'm also the type that likes to look for productive solutions rather than wallowing in the misery occasioned by the game's imperfections (and it does have them), but that's just my philosophy.

Im not wallowing in Misery, and outside of an outlier game I havn't been burned by a runningback recently either. That doesn't mean I think the game has magically been fixed.

I can win with defense still by slowing the game down and doing a few new tricks I've been working on. Thats not the problem. Its still the same balance issue.

You guys are quick to point out that its "strategy" for the offense to see these mismatch's. Alright, I can understand that line of thinking....except we are back to the same old discussion of the defense not having those.

You can say that its simply about looking at attributes and noting that a speed burner should beat a non speed-burner. Alright, but there arn't enough speed burners on defense to counter all the speed burners on offense. Thus, we are back to the same discussion.

This is further magnified by the underpowered...or missing...defensive attributes. For example, closing speed...which no defenders have. Or "Big Hit" which makes no noteable impact in terms of gameplay. Or "Pass Rush" and "Sack Master" which seem to the same skill IMHO and is thus a waste for a player to have one of them.

On to the point of the post, which was simply a way of improving the balance of the game. I'll go back to one of my favorite examples which is Night Train Lane. He simply does not make the same impact as other gold players. As such, IMHO, he plays more like a silver player. Thus, changing him to Silver would increase his value and help the games balance.

On the other side, Cunningham who's "Rocket Arm" and "Scrambling" are such a formidable combo he is just as good as most gold level QB, but as a silver tier he is a much better choice than a gold QB (letting you pick somebody else as a gold).

In this short sample, having Lane is like having 4 silver players while having Cunningham is like having 3 golds. This is from my experience.

Now, lets look at say Metzellars who I frequently use and see on a lot of teams. Having Metz is again, like having an extra silver player with his ability to dominate the middle of the field. He makes a huge impact in a lot of games, a much bigger impact than say, Chris Spielman. Having them on the same tier seems to be an imbalance to me.

[DA_Kenny]

Quote: Originally Posted by dunelly

There's a similar problem with zone in the passing game. Say you call a cover 3. If there's a WR running a deep post and 1 running a short slant. The Safety will never drop to the deepest WR, but instead cheat up leaving the WR wide open.

That is what a Cover 3 is tho, the Safety cheats up, and is not focus on the deep pass, hes focus on the short passes underneath.

Cover3 isnt design to protect the deep pass,

if you want a deep pass D call cover 4, then the safety will move up.

[Sven Draconian]

Quote: Originally Posted by DA_Kenny

That is what a Cover 3 is tho, the Safety cheats up, and is not focus on the deep pass, hes focus on the short passes underneath. Cover3 isnt design to protect the deep pass, if you want a deep pass D call cover 4, then the safety will move up.

You are incorrect. The cover 3 is designed to contain a pro-style offense which presents three immediate vertical threats (2 WR, TE).

Its a safe zone, and what most teams are in late in a game when up by 14 or more. It provides coverage of any immediate deep route (Streak/Post/Flat) and gives 4 underneath to protect against screens and draws. Its even useful against a spread team as the speed of DBs makes having 4 vertical threats a waste as all 4 can typically be covered by just 3 men (giving the defense a numbers advantage). Its weakness (and why it died) is the WCO.

cover 4 is a prevent defense and is seldom run as its not really practicle at even the BCS-conference level college football. If a team was to run a Cover 4 (No safety support in the run) a screen pass, short slant or draw would eat them alive. Outside of the last 2 or 3 minutes of a TD game when the other team doesn't have timeouts you won't see much Cover 4 outside of high school/low level college.

[Disasterpiece]

Yeah, there is something jacked up with the zones. I played saftey, you never let somebody behind you, it's a cardinal sin.

[RogueHominid]

Quote: Originally Posted by Sven Draconian

Im not wallowing in Misery, and outside of an outlier game I havn't been burned by a runningback recently either. That doesn't mean I think the game has magically been fixed. I can win with defense still by slowing the game down and doing a few new tricks I've been working on. Thats not the problem. Its still the same balance issue. You guys are quick to point out that its "strategy" for the offense to see these mismatch's. Alright, I can understand that line of thinking....except we are back to the same old discussion of the defense not having those. You can say that its simply about looking at attributes and noting that a speed burner should beat a non speed-burner. Alright, but there arn't enough speed burners on defense to counter all the speed burners on offense. Thus, we are back to the same discussion. This is further magnified by the underpowered...or missing...defensive attributes. For example, closing speed...which no defenders have. Or "Big Hit" which makes no noteable impact in terms of gameplay. Or "Pass Rush" and "Sack Master" which seem to the same skill IMHO and is thus a waste for a player to have one of them. On to the point of the post, which was simply a way of improving the balance of the game. I'll go back to one of my favorite examples which is Night Train Lane. He simply does not make the same impact as other gold players. As such, IMHO, he plays more like a silver player. Thus, changing him to Silver would increase his value and help the games balance. On the other side, Cunningham who's "Rocket Arm" and "Scrambling" are such a formidable combo he is just as good as most gold level QB, but as a silver tier he is a much better choice than a gold QB (letting you pick somebody else as a gold). In this short sample, having Lane is like having 4 silver players while having Cunningham is like having 3 golds. This is from my experience. Now, lets look at say Metzellars who I frequently use and see on a lot of teams. Having Metz is again, like having an extra silver player with his ability to dominate the middle of the field. He makes a huge impact in a lot of games, a much bigger impact than say, Chris Spielman. Having them on the same tier seems to be an imbalance to me.

Perhaps this is one of those my experience versus yours situations, Sven, but I disagree with your argument about Lane. First, I would maintain that there is a variability element in the game that keeps players playing slightly better or slightly worse from game to game, as my golds don't always dominate, nor do they always stink. Second, my experience with Lane is that when he's on, he'll blow up running plays to his side, chuck receivers to the ground, and pick off passes--a lot of production from a cornerback, and he's done all of the above to me online. On his off days, he may provide you with one or two of those elements, perhaps a few strong tackles and defensed passes, or one big pick or something. But I've never played a game against Lane where he's been useless to my opponent. He doesn't have the coverage bonus, if memory serves, so he's not airtight in coverage. I'll throw on him some because of this reason. But I also know that I'm taking a chance and that he'll dislodge his share of balls because of his physicality, and he might just snag one because of his ball skills.

Metzelaars, on the other hand, I will concede. That guy is a beast in this game, much moreso than he was in real life.

As for improving the balance of the game, it's tough to decide how to do that because people seem to have different experiences with different player--likely because of individual playing styles, roster setups and playcalling--and also because there's so much under the hood that we can't see just by looking at the player select screen. Example: Mel Renfro. I just put him on a squad to see what a silver corner other than Lem Barney played like. He played fast--not just "quick," as his attributes say, but "fast." There are lots of examples like that where guys do things that you just don't anticipate on the basis of their listed attributes, some of which effect how they play versus the offensive juggernauts that lots of online guys prefer. Nolan Cromwell, for example, can lay wood, and I'd trust him and Albert Lewis, who plays corner for my favorite team at the moment, to hunt Earl down if he gets past my line. Chuck Bednarik only has a couple of abilities, but he's a freaking heat-seeking missile. So who is to adjudicate in these types of situations?

Yes, LB takeoff speed should be improved and there should be fewer plays/players that seem to work no matter what you do, but I think the situation is more complicated than "ramp some guys up and some guys down," partially because we haven't really gotten to know what each player on the game or each play in the playbook does yet, and partly because some people have problems with certain plays/players and others don't. That's not to detract from your experience if it differs from mine, but just to say that I think it's tough to decide on these issues.

[grunt]

Quote: Originally Posted by Disasterpiece

Yeah, there is something jacked up with the zones. I played saftey, you never let somebody behind you, it's a cardinal sin.

Then there are ton of safeties in the nfl that are major sinners.

[grunt]

Here what I notice most players use their gold on a rb, wr, or qb. I use my gold on lb, dl, or a safety. If you want to stop great offensive players you need great defensive players. I haven't seen many gold inside linebackers on line because everyone want their gold players on offense.

[HotShot232]

Most people who have played me before know that I spend MOST my picks on defense. I like to go with Gold D-lineman, maybe Gold cornerback to shut down one side of the field, which then frees me up to play more man on man and bump much more. Willie Brown is one of my favorites. A Silver Linebacker is key to stopping the run. Also a bronze FS and SS are great and stopping the deep ball no matter which side of the field.

I think alot of poeple like stated before just don't play to the abilites of each player. I normally don't choose the standard picks BECAUSE the other ones have a purpose. Many people over look abilities because they THINK they have no use. Strength bonus has alot of help on each side of the ball.

TE with strength bonus will be able to contend with those DE's on run blocking schemes on Linebackers. WR with Strength bonus will be able to have much better run blocking on the edges, or much better chance in those bump battles.

For instance, I use Eric Martin at wideout sometimes. His ONLY ability is bump buster. People that bump alot will find thier Cb on his butt often to because Eric has which I think is a special with Bump busters only where he can push the Cb down and get wide open. So it is a ability that has a purpose. Just like all abilites they won't make a difference play in and play out. But they will make a difference here and there though out a game. Just like signal stealer works only 3 to 4 times a game.

Quick Feet....People spin uch quicker, get though the line much easier, change direction quicker.

Leadership........People complain about the cadence but if you put a D-line with leadership on the line the jumps happen less.

If you dive deeper into the game you can really see where the chess part of it is. I was watching the LSU vs VT game and the on the field play is soooo much like the game. The ONLY thing I wish the game did better was how fast the blitz come.

But as grunt can admit to since we have tested the sliders. With the Pursuit slider up the blitz come much quicker AND take much better angles. So on my end that is fixed now but I know you all won't convert over so we will still continue to hear the same thing over and over. Mainly from the same couple of guys........Dunley, Burnwood, Catcatch