When will we get and who desires a more realistic depth chat

[guineapig71]

I've always been one of those people who would like the option to designate players as the Will/Sam, Strong Side/Weak side end, Nickle corner(not just corner #3), Slot receiver(Not just WR #3) and ect.

Also to coincide with this actually have the defenses line up to strong side and weak side like if your running a 4-3 over have the strong side players line up against the Tight End.

[The JareBear]

Re: When will we get and who desires a more realistic depth chat

It's unacceptable, imo, that we can't set our special teams units. The depth chart, in general, as it currently is just does doesn't come close to being enough.

[KingV2k3]

Re: When will we get and who desires a more realistic depth chat

Worse still, is the "logic" that the CPU controlled teams use in CFM...

In no particular order:

1) Wrong player at 3rd down back, more often than not

2) MLB's as back DTs

3) Speed Backs often turn up as backup FBs

4) OLBs as DEs and DEs as OLBs in the wrong schemes

5) Starters at Long Snapper

6) Often "Starting" FA level players on the OL, when better options remain on the bench

7) Etc.

[NEOPARADIGM]

Re: When will we get and who desires a more realistic depth chat

... and we haven't even mentioned yet the egregious nonsense of how ROLB/LOLB and RE/LE, etc. are still official position designations. Real teams haven't been using those for like 20 years. Real rosters list players as DB, OL, DL, LB, etc. It's like the game is always trying to force the issue with players playing "out of position" when that really isn't how it works. Plenty of guys can play plenty of positions. Stop pigeonholing them, EA.

[RogueHominid]

Re: When will we get and who desires a more realistic depth chat

... and we haven't even mentioned yet the egregious nonsense of how ROLB/LOLB and RE/LE, etc. are still official position designations. Real teams haven't been using those for like 20 years. Real rosters list players as DB, OL, DL, LB, etc. It's like the game is always trying to force the issue with players playing "out of position" when that really isn't how it works. Plenty of guys can play plenty of positions. Stop pigeonholing them, EA.

I really wish they would go with those broader designations.

Let me decide where a particular DB plays in my scheme on the basis of my scheme and his skill set.

And let me decide to use an offensive player on defense or a defensive player on offense if I feel talent, scheme, and strategy suggest it wise to do so.

I think much of this is hampered by the simple fact of online play.

Since they do differentiate between online and offline modes, please give offline players maximum flexibility. You can put all the rules you want for online players so they don't cheese your game, but for the offline player who wants to create his or her own experience as he or she sees fit, please enable that!

[ggsimmonds]

Re: When will we get and who desires a more realistic depth chat

I really hope we get more realistic depth charts, but I don't think we will any time soon.

Aside from the most cited LB positions like Sam and Will, they should do away with WR 1, 2, etc. Give us x,y,z
The plays follow this naming convention.

Then somewhere (scheme settings, playcall screen, presnap) there should be a control hat toggles the mirroring of offenses. Ideally it should be under the scheme screen and it should have options for each position group.

LB mirror: Whether or not the Sam LB always lines up strongside
DT mirror: If you use a 3 tech you can set him to always play a certain side
DE mirror: toggle to keep best pass rusher on weakside
CB mirror: This is defensive assignment basically. Toggle to determine if #1 corner always follows #1 WR

I think Madden could revolutionize the way defense is handled by making changes like this.

[mestevo]

Re: When will we get and who desires a more realistic depth chat

I don't think they'll arbitrarily change the terminology, and ditch WR1, WR2, etc but could see them supplementing the depth chart slots with some of that data. Isn't x, y, z playbook related anyways? What NFL team's depth chart lists their 1-3 x, y and z receivers? Special teams probably would be addressed in that way too, at the playbook level rather than supplemental depth chart positions that might not even exist today, or do they? We have what we have now in part because here is what NFL rosters look like: http://www.dallascowboys.com/team/depth-chart

Honestly, I think some of this stuff will be addressed in the next year or two, with how this team is tackling things. The next real deep dive into franchise has to hit on rosters and contracts for sure.

[ggsimmonds]

Re: When will we get and who desires a more realistic depth chat

I don't think they'll arbitrarily change the terminology, and ditch WR1, WR2, etc but could see them supplementing the depth chart slots with some of that data. Isn't x, y, z playbook related anyways? What NFL team's depth chart lists their 1-3 x, y and z receivers? Special teams probably would be addressed in that way too, at the playbook level rather than supplemental depth chart positions that might not even exist today, or do they? We have what we have now in part because here is what NFL rosters look like: http://www.dallascowboys.com/team/depth-chart

Honestly, I think some of this stuff will be addressed in the next year or two, with how this team is tackling things. The next real deep dive into franchise has to hit on rosters and contracts for sure.

This is why I really want them to greatly expand on the scheme feature. "Attacking 4-3" is inefficient. I would like for them to drastically change the defense.

Under scheme there could be something like the following for defense:

Base:
Choose the front: 4-3, 3-4, exotic/misc choices (think TCU 3-3-5 and the like).
Coverage: Single high, two deep, etc
Options for alignment: under/over shifts
Type: Options pertaining to man or zone

Philosophy:
Movement: Controls the presnap movement. Options would be none, manual, 5 seconds, 7 seconds, etc. So lets say you call a zero blitz out of a 4-3 look. If movement is set to manual your defense will come out in their base look. You then press the trigger and this causes the defenders to move into position. None would mean they come out of the huddle showing blitz, the time options would tell the defense when during the playclock to move.

Press: on/off. Basically something of a default stance.

Mirroring: All the mirror options from above.

Matching: auto/passing situations, manual, always. Controls behavior when it comes to 3 WR sets and other subs the offense may make. More of an AI/coach suggestions control.

Packages: Think formation subs here.

There should also be options detailing whether LBs in man coverage add to the blitz, spy, or drop into hook.

So for my preferred defense my base defense would be a 4-3 under shift single high man defense (apologies to Pete Carroll). I think this method is more realistic because everything would be derived from a base defense.

Yeah it would be very complex but guys can leave everything set to the team defaults if they wish. But allow guys like me to have total control over what our defense is. One of the options in franchise is to be a coach. Well then actually give us the option to be a coach then.

Then improve custom playbooks and reintroduce create a play so users can truly create their own schemes.

[blockdownkickout]

Re: When will we get and who desires a more realistic depth chat

This is why I really want them to greatly expand on the scheme feature. "Attacking 4-3" is inefficient. I would like for them to drastically change the defense.



Under scheme there could be something like the following for defense:



Base:

Choose the front: 4-3, 3-4, exotic/misc choices (think TCU 3-3-5 and the like).

Coverage: Single high, two deep, etc

Options for alignment: under/over shifts

Type: Options pertaining to man or zone



Philosophy:

Movement: Controls the presnap movement. Options would be none, manual, 5 seconds, 7 seconds, etc. So lets say you call a zero blitz out of a 4-3 look. If movement is set to manual your defense will come out in their base look. You then press the trigger and this causes the defenders to move into position. None would mean they come out of the huddle showing blitz, the time options would tell the defense when during the playclock to move.



Press: on/off. Basically something of a default stance.



Mirroring: All the mirror options from above.



Matching: auto/passing situations, manual, always. Controls behavior when it comes to 3 WR sets and other subs the offense may make. More of an AI/coach suggestions control.



Packages: Think formation subs here.



There should also be options detailing whether LBs in man coverage add to the blitz, spy, or drop into hook.



So for my preferred defense my base defense would be a 4-3 under shift single high man defense (apologies to Pete Carroll). I think this method is more realistic because everything would be derived from a base defense.



Yeah it would be very complex but guys can leave everything set to the team defaults if they wish. But allow guys like me to have total control over what our defense is. One of the options in franchise is to be a coach. Well then actually give us the option to be a coach then.



Then improve custom playbooks and reintroduce create a play so users can truly create their own schemes.

I totally agree. Too much of this game is to keep down the cheesers. It's almost upsetting that EA has to implement sometimes unrealistic things to keep the game fun for online play. When you would think if they actually focused on the game being realistic they couldn't cheese because they would fall on there face. Putting a SS at DE should be possible if you're trying to get maximum pass rush, however if they try to do it all game you could just run the ball all over them.
If EA would focus more on the punishment for playing out of position rather than not letting you do it. It would be a better game. I'm still honestly annoyed that you can blitz four or even 5 and have 4+ seconds to throw the ball. Even though average time to throw is 2.3 seconds. But until EA stops making the game for the "gamers" the actual football people will be annoyed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SolidSquid]

Re: When will we get and who desires a more realistic depth chat

I've been asking for this for so long. Especially in a Tampa 2 scheme where the Will is supposed to be the "free" linebacker while the Sam is the guy who takes on lead blockers in the hole.

I basically lose Lavonte David in the scheme bc he has to do things that the Sam is supposed to be doing.

[ggsimmonds]

Re: When will we get and who desires a more realistic depth chat

I've been asking for this for so long. Especially in a Tampa 2 scheme where the Will is supposed to be the "free" linebacker while the Sam is the guy who takes on lead blockers in the hole.

I basically lose Lavonte David in the scheme bc he has to do things that the Sam is supposed to be doing.

Same here. I run a 4-3 under and the inability to mirror offenses takes so much away from my defense.

At the bare minimum EA needs to add a "LB swap" presnap adjustment to flip OLBs

[StefJoeHalt]

Re: When will we get and who desires a more realistic depth chat

Same here. I run a 4-3 under and the inability to mirror offenses takes so much away from my defense.



At the bare minimum EA needs to add a "LB swap" presnap adjustment to flip OLBs

Ggsimmonds..problem is that is it isn't enough..needs to include the LB's/DE/Safety's and DT..here is why, I'll skip the LB's as u and other have touched on it..for this example I'll use 43under...DE's need to swap as well as most LEO/Predators/elephant/ weak side ends are too small and weak to play strong side; so 5 tech end needs to be strong side..same defense has 0/1 tech playing on strong side center's shoulder and 3 tech playing weak side guard outside shoulder so they need to swap as well.. So everyone needs to flop/swap..never mind Strong safety too..I have no computer programming so this being "set" or predetermined in the background could be an issue..I'm guessing..but a full swap may be simpler or when u "flip" the play it should work?


Sent from my broken iPhone using my data I can't afford

[Ueauvan]

Re: When will we get and who desires a more realistic depth chat

i am fascinated and excited by these comments as a brit who has never played. apologies if this is a stupid comment but doesnt all of the above rely on the game playing how we expect? for example gap integrity and responsibilities. ive never seen an animation of a proper 3-4 NT taking on a double team and if that isnt in the game doesnt it make everything else more difficult?

i love playing as coach and defence is my favourite thing. i pick what formation i use as base dependent on the best personnel i have available. i want to be able to use a cvr 3 shell in 3-3-5 Nickel and with a button change coverage underneath from man to zone, ie show man when they motion but actually hand off zones properly.

1-2 years ago the 9ers had a lot of good lbs, and i always wondered that the best 11 defensive players were 2 dl 5 lb and 4 dbs so why not play 4-3 as 2-5-4 but not necessarily have the lbers as des have hands on turf. our dline was pants so Justin and one other and 5 lbers. certainly good enough coverage underneath as willis and bowman were at the height of their powers and who knows where the 1-3 other rushers would come from. vs the run there would be challenges i know but passing seems route 1 for everything.

loving this thread its educational

[ggsimmonds]

Re: When will we get and who desires a more realistic depth chat

Ggsimmonds..problem is that is it isn't enough..needs to include the LB's/DE/Safety's and DT..here is why, I'll skip the LB's as u and other have touched on it..for this example I'll use 43under...DE's need to swap as well as most LEO/Predators/elephant/ weak side ends are too small and weak to play strong side; so 5 tech end needs to be strong side..same defense has 0/1 tech playing on strong side center's shoulder and 3 tech playing weak side guard outside shoulder so they need to swap as well.. So everyone needs to flop/swap..never mind Strong safety too..I have no computer programming so this being "set" or predetermined in the background could be an issue..I'm guessing..but a full swap may be simpler or when u "flip" the play it should work?


Sent from my broken iPhone using my data I can't afford

If we are just talking about bare minimums, then each position group can be flipped via the quick adjust presnap commands. And from the main adjustment you can do full.

In real life teams react to the offense in varying ways. When the offense sends the TE in motion to the other side of the line (flipping strong and weak) some defenses respond by swapping multiple positions, some only swap LBs, others may only swap DTs.

I think the simplest solution is doing it via the playcall screen. The offense has a toggle for tempo (no huddle, chew clock). Well on defense that could become the toggle for mirroring. There could be 3 settings -- always, never, presnap. The first two are self explanatory, presnap would tell the D to mirror the initial formation but don't respond to motion.

As far as programming and implementation, from a developer standpoint I think it would be easiest to implement it predetermined in the background. The more options created mean more opportunities for error in the code.

[KingV2k3]

Re: When will we get and who desires a more realistic depth chat

Lots of GREAT ideas here, gents!

I just wonder how many of them are "too complicated" for either the engine, the developers and / or the "target market"...

Thought of a few more "simple" ones:

1) Instead of automatically taking the LLOB off in Nickel or both OLBs in Dime, the AI should calculate "Best Available / Optimized" lineup...

Take HOU for instance...Clowney comes off in Nickel, but perhaps should be be moved to LDE in that package...

2) WR / KR ratings and Depth Chart positions are always "off"...

3) "3rd Down Back" should be a separate rating, so the right guys play for the CPU teams...

Also:

As I (barely) recall, NFL2k had separate options for your line calls and a few other basic, but better / more options and combinations...

Lastly:

NBA2k has a TON of defensive options, that you simply toggle "sometimes / always / never" and the AI runs your gameplan...

A lot of this sort of thing either already existed or exists now in sports video game form...

So, I think you can "Keep it Simple", but still add a LOT...