Finesse Rush vs Power Rush [video]

[baller7345]

Quote: Originally Posted by Big FN Deal

Baller linked to this video from NY Kia, whom you also mentioned in this post. Please help me to understand what is so football fundamental about what is in this video versus what seems to me to be exploiting/manipulating the program, in unintended ways, to get a desired result. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o--u5...vqzZ0v&index=2 All the predetermined reblitzing and audibling at the LOS, that's real football strategy and the way the game is intentionally programmed for Users to replicate football?

I unfortunately can't watch the video since I'm currently stuck with a dial up connection but I will try and make this answer broad enough that it answers any of your questions.

Audibling at the line of scrimmage is a part of football there is no way for me to ever think that is ever going to be something that takes the game away from replicating football. Most teams always come to the line with a pass and a run and many come with 3 plays (2 passes 1 run or the reverse). The reason you here Tony Romo yell "KILL, KILL, KILL" nearly every other snap is because he is checking into a new play. QBs like Rodgers and Brady use hand signals as well as the check system to change plays on the fly (How the Erhardt Perkins System Maintain Tom Brady's Dominance - Grantland)

As for reblitzing there are several reasons why this is done. Since NYkia is running a Tampa 2 I would be pretty safe in assuming that he is reblitzing his linemen in order to either give his cpu players a better outside rush angle or to make sure his 1 and 3 tech DTs fly into their gap assignment. If he is running a tampa 2 he is running a 1 gap defense in all likelihood and a 1 gap defense gains its advantage in the pass rushing and run defense categories due to the fact that the line is able to fly into their gap assignments. There is no need to read where the play is going, you can knife into your gap assignment and if everyone else does their job you have a shot at stopping the play. If for instance he picks a Cover 2 defense that crashes one of his linemen in or he has a DT leaving the gap he wants him to attack you fix that. You account for the gaps and you have a sound defense, you ignore gap responsibility and you get gashed.

If it is him blitzing (which is risky out of a 2 deep shell) then its to get around the stop gaps EA puts in the game to stop nano blitzes. This in return causes many real life blitzing concepts to cease to function properly due to the line adjusting to pressure schemes regardless of whether or not the offensive player changes his protection scheme at the line. EA has taken the responsibility out of the users hand because of complaints about nanos.

Overload Stunts



Weak Side Overloads





and Cross Fire Zone Blitzes



are all real life blitz concepts that get neutered by these stop gaps that EA has put in place. If you want realistic results from these concepts you have to change them slightly (depending on the formation) or you will never get them to work as they are designed (Cross Fire Zone vs Pass). I never said EA was perfect, and due the stigma surrounding blitzes in general and their own inability to give us proper blitz concepts (that Cross Fire 3 Seam is dropping the wrong OLB out when you look at the order the ILBs are blitzing) they have neutered their blitzing concepts and in order to fix that they need to be adjusted so that the center blocks air. If anyone else is blocking air including the tackle on the other side of the formation they'll slide across and pick up any overload blitz (assuming it isn't actually a nano).

This is a major complaint of mine, I want them to remove the psychic line play, I want them to free the blitz concepts and let these concepts work. However there is a large portion of the fan base that thinks any blitz that gets a free rusher (even when their protection scheme is wrong) is a nano and because of such you are forced to adjust the in game concepts to get them to work under the rules put in place by EA.

[Big FN Deal]

Quote: Originally Posted by baller7345

Audibling at the line of scrimmage is a part of football there is no way for me to ever think that is ever going to be something that takes the game away from replicating football.

I appreciate you taking the time to respond and like I said I will not derail your thread any longer after this. Just wanted to comment on this statement. Granted, you could not see the video but I am pretty sure you know the tactic I was referring to for using audibles to basically create new plays at the LOS. That's not how they use audibles in the NFL, that's using the system in the game in an unrealistic way.

Again, thanks for the discussion though.

[baller7345]

Quote: Originally Posted by Big FN Deal

I appreciate you taking the time to respond and like I said I will not derail your thread any longer after this. Just wanted to comment on this statement. Granted, you could not see the video but I am pretty sure you know the tactic I was referring to for using audibles to basically create new plays at the LOS. That's not how they use audibles in the NFL, that's using the system in the game in an unrealistic way. Again, thanks for the discussion though.

I honestly don't mind the discussion, I quite enjoy having an intelligent debate as long as it doesn't fall into chaos.

Also creating new plays at the line isn't too far off some offense in the NFL. Most of the time NYkia is simply creating a new concept (or at least I would imagine that is what he is dong). A lot of teams work in concepts in today's NFL, this helps make your play calling and terminology much simpler which allows more flexibility in what you can and can't do at the line of scrimmage. That Grantland article I posted in my last post goes over what all this turns into.

It is not outrageous to think a QB could come to the line in one set of concepts and see a better set of concepts that could take advantage of that coverage and then either throw out their code words for each concept or use hand signs (this is popular in college Air Raid offense). Its one thing to use hot routes to exploit the game by creating something that breaks the game, its another to use hot routes to create real life concepts and then use these. If you read blitz there is nothing wrong with going into Omaha (flankers run speed outs), or Slant Flat (easily made from curl flats), or slot outs/back outs. Just because you don't have a specific audible in Madden to make this adjustment doesn't mean real offenses don't have methods in place to make these kind of adjustments.

[Kaiser Wilhelm]

Quote: Originally Posted by baller7345

This is a major complaint of mine, I want them to remove the psychic line play, I want them to free the blitz concepts and let these concepts work. However there is a large portion of the fan base that thinks any blitz that gets a free rusher (even when their protection scheme is wrong) is a nano and because of such you are forced to adjust the in game concepts to get them to work under the rules put in place by EA.

The line play as a whole was a joke, and EA covering up the nano issue with the current line play was their way fixing it. The initial problem with Nano's was that there was no real reliable in game way to stop them due to a lot of the predetermined movement in each play. As an offline player, I never had nano problems, but online I imagine it was a nightmare so in typical EA fashion, they half *** a solution.

You seem far more well versed in X's and O's but I think we can agree that the Nanos (a true nano) was a game exploit and not an X's and O's exploit.

[baller7345]

Quote: Originally Posted by Kaiser Wilhelm

The line play as a whole was a joke, and EA covering up the nano issue with the current line play was their way fixing it. The initial problem with Nano's was that there was no real reliable in game way to stop them due to a lot of the predetermined movement in each play. As an offline player, I never had nano problems, but online I imagine it was a nightmare so in typical EA fashion, they half *** a solution. You seem far more well versed in X's and O's but I think we can agree that the Nanos (a true nano) was a game exploit and not an X's and O's exploit.

Yes, in fact a big yes. I never want to go back to M08 and beyond where there were 3 man rushes that could get to you before you could finish even a 3 step drop and there was nothing you could do about it.

I should have probably mentioned that while I want them to unchain the defense I also want them to give us a comprehensive protection system. If we are going have a proper zone protection scheme (slide protection) then they need to read this:

Slide Protection Schemes - Gridiron Strategies

EA finally got a full slide protect correctly implemented into the game (though like always people find ways around it) but they shouldn't stop there, we need half slides, we need to be able to designate the Mike and call out our hots. Give the offense more responsibility on their own protection schemes and unchain the defense. I believe there would be less fishing for nanos (what are called nanos in today's Madden) if they managed this but then again it took them 4 years to get a proper full slide correctly implemented.

[GiantBlue76]

Quote: Originally Posted by Kaiser Wilhelm

The line play as a whole was a joke, and EA covering up the nano issue with the current line play was their way fixing it. The initial problem with Nano's was that there was no real reliable in game way to stop them due to a lot of the predetermined movement in each play. As an offline player, I never had nano problems, but online I imagine it was a nightmare so in typical EA fashion, they half *** a solution. You seem far more well versed in X's and O's but I think we can agree that the Nanos (a true nano) was a game exploit and not an X's and O's exploit.

Excellent post. The half-*** part of it is my big issue. We heard so much about the gameplay team doubling. The physics is a decent start, but in now way is it ready for prime time. Line play takes REAL work. This team constantly kicks the real work down the line rather than put your head down and really kick *** and make the most realistic line play ever, we have lineman warping from one side of the field to the other and ridiculous looking player movement and interactions. To see what other football games have done with what is arguably the most fundamental part of football and to compare it to Madden in the year 2013 is flat out embarrassing and due to nothing other than poor development and less talented developers. That's why I tend to agree with Big F that if you asked any developer on Madden what a TE stunt is, they couldn't tell you. I will agree that there are some solid football concepts that can be applied to Madden as Baller said, but there are also a lot of things that COULD be realistic if they were polished and refined to show that some sort of professional development team actually worked on it.

Madden is a worse game now than it was in 1995. If you take into account the technology advances and the progression of sports games from then to now, Madden back then was ahead of the curve. Today, it's so far behind that it's literally embarrassing. What's worse? They constantly give themselves a pat on the back like they actually created something great.

Anyway, I digress.

[D_Fos]

Quote: Originally Posted by JMP

This was super helpful. I went in and played on All Pro, did the movements suggested, and saw all the awesome pass rush moves. Now the problem is that I can't get them to play out on All Madden sets, and I get too many sacks on All Pro. Anyone know of a good middle ground where you don't just get slammed to the ground when you try a move but your LE doesn't get 3 sacks a game?

I agree its harder on All-Madden.
I just have to time my moves better, and I will not win every time, but,
If I when 1 or 2x per gm, that could be just enough to boost my D, get a 3 and out, a sack, etc.





All-Madden Custom
I have
User
Pass R: 45
VS.
Cpu
Pass Blk: 69
(I use Orakpo or Kerrigan, not every play but enough to see me get moves off w/o being pancaked) Now that I know different trigger animations using the stick, this should only help even more!

Thanks Baller7345!

[LBzrule]

Just a comment about the TE stunt. It's still half baked. That is, it's not a true TE stunt. If it were a true TE stunt the outside rusher would have never engaged the tackle and the DT would actually be looking to get to the outside shoulder of the guard and push him into the tackle so that the DE could loop around. The guards responsibility then is to pass the DT to the OT and pick up the looping DE, which doesn't always work for the offense. That's why I can see Big saying it is coincidental rather than EA actually saying let's put TE stunt in the game.