|
Quote: |
|
|
|
|
Originally Posted by Shaolin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In my experience, leadership did not stack up. In fact a few times it seemed the more leadership I had, it neutralized otherwise excellent players. They merely played ordinary. I built one team around Ditka Payton Starr and some linemen that either had leadership or other special abilities. In practice mode they were running the ball like the opposition did not exist; but in an actual game their performance was disappointing and ineffective. There was a thread here recently where someone stated that Leadership seems to work best when it comes to influencing generic players. That seems to be the case in my games. A defensive line of Bethea, Donovan, Youngblood and (whoever) was no more effective than a line anchored by Bethea alone. In fact, my DL with Bethea and generics has been wrecking opponents; Bethea himself might not make the play but his anonymous buddies will. A recent game, a generic lineman had three sacks, another guy had two, and Bethea himself had only one. And now, back to testing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've noticed this as well. The leadership seems to really help generics more than legends. However when I had leaders with an ability to do something else (mostly Run Coverage and Pass Coverage), it helped other legends who have that same ability.
For example I had Nick Buoniconti and Willie Wood on one team. Buoniconti's Leadership in Coverage made all my generics better in coverage and Wood became a monster. More so than he had been. I took Nick off the team and Wood just was not the same guy. I mean he still made plays but just not at that same unstoppable level that he was at when I had Nick on the team.
On another note I have found Sack Masters to be the best "leaders" in making your legend teammates better on the pass rush. The sack masters in the game seldom take over the game at all but when paired with another legend pass rusher, that other legend who is not the sack master has big games.