Let's Discuss Preplay Adjustments

[Big FN Deal]

Quote: Originally Posted by 4thQtrStre5S

I would like to see game plan stuff from NCAA Football added over to Madden, in addition to what we have; though in Madden they rely more on the individual traits of players to determine a lot of what NCAA did in the game plan options; so to work in Madden it would seem that the players who had good traits for certain things in a game plan would do better and vice-versa, which would add in how the user builds their team. I am not sure how NCAA determined who would make a bad play or good play under certain game plan choices, ie. If a player was not a big hitter, but the game plan was set for the defense to try for big hits, would that player be forced to try to hit big because he was playing under that game plan, thus increasing the chance of missed tackles for that player, or was the chance of hit or miss, equal across the board?

That's an interesting point about traits and I would prefer to see that be expanded and play a bigger role to determine how players perform on the field vs the micromanagement. For me it all comes back to the same point though, that the way preplay adjustments are currently setup allows too much micromanagement at the LOS.

[ggsimmonds]

Quote: Originally Posted by Big FN Deal

@ggsimmonds, you basically repeating you like what preplay adjustments allow you to do, is besides the point of how realistic it is or better articulated, how well it replicates football in a video game. We all realize this is a video game so of course there is a difference in replicating what goes on in real football vs actual being able to do it, in a video game. You seem to be saying it's easier for you or more convenient to use preplay adjustments to press one corner at the LOS vs game planning it off the field, a fact I'm not disputing but I fail to see what that has to do with which one is a better representation of real football in a video game. If you feel that the current way is more realistic or a better representation of what happens in real football than what I'm suggesting, that's cool, we just disagree on that, for reasons we have both stated.

So lets actually discuss ways to make it a better representation of real football.

I can think of 3 alternatives to hot routes at the LOS. Moving it to the play call screen, adding a rules feature, and going a step further from formation audibles to play audibles. Conversely hot routes could not be changed and instead the developers continue the path of making gameplay more realistic so that the exploits aren't as effective.

First, moving it to the playcall screen like we are forced to do with formation subs. This is the weakest option and if the center point of your argument is realism then this is DOA. It is not realistic to make adjustments in the huddle before knowing anything about the offense's alignment. This is how you end up playing an outside technique against a WR in a plus split and the coach looks at you like you are stupid.

Implementing a rules based feature. Along with a total overhaul of the way plays are called, this is the most realistic. It would also be ridiculously time consuming and difficult. Basically there would be a team management/strategy screen where you set adjustments for each scenario you want to. This is where I would set to press/shade inside the backside WR in a 3x1 set. The problem with this isn't that hard to see -- there are a lot of scenarios. It is doable, but this is where I go back to saying the current LOS adjustments accomplish the same task easier so why needlessly complicate things.

Play audibles. Hell it may actually be the next logical step. We went from setting audibles, to setting different audibles for each formation, so maybe next we designate 3-5 audibles per each playcall. I don't like this option for two reasons, it is time consuming and I don't think it captures the finer points of NFL defenses. Madden plays on defense are not realistic on their own (previously, it is better but not there yet). I think this would be a waste of time.

If you have any other ideas for how to implement what you are suggesting let me know. Or ifyou disagree with my thoughts on any of the above alternatives we'll talk about it. Otherwise I think this conversation has run its course.

[DeuceDouglas]

Quote: Originally Posted by ggsimmonds

No, it is not. Individual adjustments happen all the time in the NFL.

Quote: Originally Posted by Big FN Deal

For me it all comes back to the same point though, that the way preplay adjustments are currently setup allows too much micromanagement at the LOS.

To your example gg, I don't think that's the problem as it is more so to how far it can be taken and I think that's kind of Big's point. Pressing one corner or moving one corner to off pre-snap is a lot different than pressing one corner, changing the other corner to a flat zone, changing your defensive line to deep zones, and setting your entire LB group to play hook zones. And why is a deep zone even an option for a DL hot route?!

Same thing goes for offense. Changing a route based on the defense is realistic. Setting a HB to block is realistic. But is coming out in one formation just to audible to another formation and then create a play entirely different from everything in the playbook by hot routing every receiver as soon as the huddle is broken even remotely realistic?

I get that not everyone uses these tools to exploit the game or to produce unrealistic results but I don't think there's any denying the fact that the current system enables and even encourages you to do just that. There has to be an even medium somewhere that allows users to use hot routes while also maintaining a somewhat realistic representation of them. Basically what we have now is a use at your own discretion, anything goes system available pre-snap.

[ggsimmonds]

Quote: Originally Posted by 4thQtrStre5S

I would like to see game plan stuff from NCAA Football added over to Madden, in addition to what we have; though in Madden they rely more on the individual traits of players to determine a lot of what NCAA did in the game plan options; so to work in Madden it would seem that the players who had good traits for certain things in a game plan would do better and vice-versa, which would add in how the user builds their team. I am not sure how NCAA determined who would make a bad play or good play under certain game plan choices, ie. If a player was not a big hitter, but the game plan was set for the defense to try for big hits, would that player be forced to try to hit big because he was playing under that game plan, thus increasing the chance of missed tackles for that player, or was the chance of hit or miss, equal across the board?

Unless I am mistaken the game plan settings from NCAA were universal, e.g. setting it to big hits made everyone aim for the big hit. So the risk of making bad plays and who made them came naturally.

[ggsimmonds]

Quote: Originally Posted by DeuceDouglas

To your example gg, I don't think that's the problem as it is more so to how far it can be taken and I think that's kind of Big's point. Pressing one corner or moving one corner to off pre-snap is a lot different than pressing one corner, changing the other corner to a flat zone, changing your defensive line to deep zones, and setting your entire LB group to play hook zones. And why is a deep zone even an option for a DL hot route?! Same thing goes for offense. Changing a route based on the defense is realistic. Setting a HB to block is realistic. But is coming out in one formation just to audible to another formation and then create a play entirely different from everything in the playbook by hot routing every receiver as soon as the huddle is broken even remotely realistic? I get that not everyone uses these tools to exploit the game or to produce unrealistic results but I don't think there's any denying the fact that the current system enables and even encourages you to do just that. There has to be an even medium somewhere that allows users to use hot routes while also maintaining a somewhat realistic representation of them. Basically what we have now is a use at your own discretion, anything goes system available pre-snap.

You are right and I agree, that is why I made the comment about cutting off the hand because a finger is cut.
Earlier in the thread I pointed to things that could alleviate the cheesalicious adjustments some people do, while saving the system itself.

[4thQtrStre5S]

A lot of people in the Sim community would like to see realistic penalties called, and many penalties are not called, apparently because the tourney users don't like random stuff to happen, such as penalties because they cannot trace it back to something they had control over, is that a fair summary?

If so, I would think that the more hot routes and adjustments made, especially, on offense, should increase penalty chances..We would in turn get penalties in the game, and they would have a user influence that could be traced back to excessive hot routes which may pacify tourney player complaints on penalties.

[ggsimmonds]

Quote: Originally Posted by 4thQtrStre5S

A lot of people in the Sim community would like to see realistic penalties called, and many penalties are not called, apparently because the tourney users don't like random stuff to happen, such as penalties because they cannot trace it back to something they had control over, is that a fair summary? If so, I would think that the more hot routes and adjustments made, especially, on offense, should increase penalty chances..We would in turn get penalties in the game, and they would have a user influence that could be traced back to excessive hot routes which may pacify tourney player complaints on penalties.

Illegal formation should be in the game without question, and doing multiple preplay adjustments should increase the likelihood of it being called.

It should be a no brainer, so it is a bit disheartening that EA chooses not to do so.

[Big FN Deal]

@ggsimmonds, you already know I disagree with your "thoughts" by the way you described "moving it to the play call screen" in your third paragraph but we both agree, that conversation has run its' course between us.