Disguising Cover Shells. Do's & Don'ts...

[jello1717]

Quote: Originally Posted by BlyGilmore

Serious question - do we think shells work against the computer?

After playing tons of games, I’m 95% certain they do. My pass coverage (and coverage sacks against confused QBs) is much, much better with disguised shells. As an example default cover 4 on 3rd and long is often shredded. But cover 4 disguised as cover 3 is usually very, very effective.

[Mackrel829]

What impact does this have on the CPU, if any? Is the CPU QB actually tricked or hindered at all? Or is this mostly for use against human opponents?

[Collegefbfan]

Quote: Originally Posted by Mackrel829

What impact does this have on the CPU, if any? Is the CPU QB actually tricked or hindered at all? Or is this mostly for use against human opponents?

If the CPU knows what we just called on defense in a total manner, say we called cover 3 but disguised it with cover 4 or whatever, they the human player is at a disadvantage. Some believe this happens especially on Heisman. I am not sure how the coding and logic is programmed in as far as that approach goes. Now, in reality, if the CPU sees the human defense come out in cover 2, and the CPU believes it is cover 2, then there are areas that are open in the zones in regular cover. However, if the human disguised using cover 3 or 4, then these areas can/will change.

I was looking at a play in practice mode while ago. I was in 425 and called a certain play that had a blitzing player. I think I set him in a vertical hook. Then I used both DE's and dropped them in nearby zones. Nothing was open, but I was only rushing two DT's. Then, had to cut it off for breakfast. But I feel like this is the only way to call zone coverage. Dumb I know, but my defense isn't getting to the QB much anyway.

[xCoachDx]

I don’t think the CPU truly makes “reads” based on your coverage. I think it’s more that the CPU makes throws based off of openness and doesn’t really take into account the direction that defenders are moving. And using disguises usually has your defender moving much quicker to get to his spot. So often, they are already making a full break towards the ball when it is thrown.

It’s still something that works really well. I just wish we had a touch more time in the huddle to try and set some of this stuff up. I also wish it wouldn’t default back to the previously used shell every time we select that formation again.

[ggsimmonds]

Quote: Originally Posted by xCoachDx

I don’t think the CPU truly makes “reads” based on your coverage. I think it’s more that the CPU makes throws based off of openness and doesn’t really take into account the direction that defenders are moving. And using disguises usually has your defender moving much quicker to get to his spot. So often, they are already making a full break towards the ball when it is thrown. It’s still something that works really well. I just wish we had a touch more time in the huddle to try and set some of this stuff up. I also wish it wouldn’t default back to the previously used shell every time we select that formation again.

We have to remember that everything that happens in game is dictated by concrete, operationalized code.

Everything is the result of a mathematical expression or logical argument.

The AI doesn't get "confused" by disguised coverage, but using a disguised coverage probably introduces a numeric modifier into the expression to tilt things in your favor.

An overly simple and entirely incorrect example could be

qbFindOpen = Awr/100;
disguiseModifier = .10;

findOpenPercent = qbFindOpen - disguiseModifier;
findOpenThreshold = .7

if findOpenPercent > findOpenThreshold,
Return True

In everyday language disguising coverage would be akin to lowering the QBs awareness by 10. I want to stress that this is just a highly simplified sample I just pulled out of my rectum so don't go saying "well ggsimmonds said disguising your coverage against the AI lowers their QB awareness"

But it does help to understand how disguising coverage could impact the AI

[Mackrel829]

Quote: Originally Posted by ggsimmonds

We have to remember that everything that happens in game is dictated by concrete, operationalized code. Everything is the result of a mathematical expression or logical argument. The AI doesn't get "confused" by disguised coverage, but using a disguised coverage probably introduces a numeric modifier into the expression to tilt things in your favor. An overly simple and entirely incorrect example could be qbFindOpen = Awr/100; disguiseModifier = .10; findOpenPercent = qbFindOpen - disguiseModifier; findOpenThreshold = .7 if findOpenPercent > findOpenThreshold, Return True In everyday language disguising coverage would be akin to lowering the QBs awareness by 10. I want to stress that this is just a highly simplified sample I just pulled out of my rectum so don't go saying "well ggsimmonds said disguising your coverage against the AI lowers their QB awareness" But it does help to understand how disguising coverage could impact the AI

This is useful. Thanks!

It's obvious that the CPU knows what play we've called, so I just want to know whether a disguised coverage has any actual impact on the CPU's actions or ability, or whether it's mostly cosmetic.

This is a good illustration of how disguised coverages might have a more tangible impact on the play.

[DonkeyJote]

So far I've mostly run the 3-4 Base playbook. I might experiment with something else soon. With the 3-4, I pretty much always came out 2 high. My default was Cover 6, but I'd switch to Cover 2 (if I'm more worried about the pass) or Cover 4 (if I'm more worried about the run) situationally. I'd mix in Cover 0 once in a while. I also like to show blitz (but I don't always actually blitz when I'm showing blitz). I always check the playart when I'm coming to the line, and if zones are messed up, or there is a big man coverage mismatch (like a pass rushing OLB on a WR), I'll audible quickly to get into something cleaner.


Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

[zpq12]

Quote: Originally Posted by DonkeyJote

So far I've mostly run the 3-4 Base playbook. I might experiment with something else soon. With the 3-4, I pretty much always came out 2 high. My default was Cover 6, but I'd switch to Cover 2 (if I'm more worried about the pass) or Cover 4 (if I'm more worried about the run) situationally. I'd mix in Cover 0 once in a while. I also like to show blitz (but I don't always actually blitz when I'm showing blitz). I always check the playart when I'm coming to the line, and if zones are messed up, or there is a big man coverage mismatch (like a pass rushing OLB on a WR), I'll audible quickly to get into something cleaner. Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk

How do you show blitz?