no content
AdBlocker active?
It seems you are using software to block advertisements. You could help us if you could switch it off when visiting redzoneaction.org.
The reason is very simple: Advertisements help us running the site, to offer you the game in a good quality for free. So if you like the game, please support us by purchasing a Supporter Account or disabling the AdBlocker on this site.
Thank you very much!
| Main / Suggestions / Formations to add - read the very first post before you post anything Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 17 18 19 > >| | |
| Rating: | |
| Poster | Message |
|
Captain Jack
|
posted: 2014-01-17 21:48:42 (ID: 100021023) Report Abuse |
|
pete wrote:
There cannot be such an formation at the moment, it would collide in the database. For the moment you have to deal with the information, that the engine uses the right formations for such special plays Thank you for a prompt response! |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
kharton99
|
posted: 2014-01-18 14:11:11 (ID: 100021060) Report Abuse |
|
not really a NEW formations, but would it be possible to have 2 different versions of the IFORM and PROSET formations where the TE lines up on the left hand side instead of the right.
So eg. IFORM Left = TEL instead of TER, giving more protection to the left in passing, maybe double teaming a nasty RDE and being able to run to the left, adding to the blocking on that side. NEW FORMATIONS = IFORM LEFT - otl otr ogl oc wrl wrr TEL hbc fbc qb PROSET LEFT - otl otr ogl oc wrl wrr TEL hbl hbr qb |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
E Logic
|
posted: 2014-01-23 09:04:35 (ID: 100021686) Report Abuse |
|
WR/L OT/L OG/L OC OG/R OT/R WR/R
QB FB/L FB/R HB/C WR/L OT/L OG/L OC OG/R OT/R TE/R WR/R QB FB/L FB/R |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
andrew2scott2
|
posted: 2014-01-23 09:10:42 (ID: 100021690) Report Abuse |
|
you first one i already suggested it callled full house formation the other i never seen but why not
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2014-04-26 13:56:30 (ID: 100030563) Report Abuse | |
|
Anyone mentioned the below formations as yet?: -
Offence OTL/OGL/C/OGR/OTR/TEL/WRL/WRR1/WRR2/HB/QB = Singleback3 
OTL/OGL/C/OGR/OTR/TEL/WRL/WRR1/WRR2/FB/QB = ShotGun3
Both would give more protection/help to Offence line but still potentially explosive offence attack Defence DER/DTR/DTL/DEL/MLBR/MLBL/CBR/CBL/SS/FSR/FSL = 4-2-5
Would give more protection against the run when theres 4WR's to cover 
 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
andrew2scott2
|
posted: 2014-04-26 22:00:42 (ID: 100030586) Report Abuse |
|
dell_g wrote:
Anyone mentioned the below formations as yet?: - Offence OTL/OGL/C/OGR/OTR/TEL/WRL/WRR1/WRR2/HB/QB = Singleback3
OTL/OGL/C/OGR/OTR/TEL/WRL/WRR1/WRR2/FB/QB = ShotGun3
Both would give more protection/help to Offence line but still potentially explosive offence attack Defence DER/DTR/DTL/DEL/MLBR/MLBL/CBR/CBL/SS/FSR/FSL = 4-2-5
Would give more protection against the run when theres 4WR's to cover
Right now the we can't use 3 WR in a formation. The engine form what i can under stand can not handle it. As for the 4-2-5 D yes it has been. I would like to see it added as well. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2014-04-27 10:00:42 (ID: 100030609) Report Abuse | |
|
Just to make it more clear...the engine could not not handle "exploits" on one side very well. This is why we refused to handle one-sided attack formations...But with the improved AI in place, maybe I can start another test on this...let's see
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2014-04-27 10:42:20 (ID: 100030613) Report Abuse | |
|
Good good, WR TE on one side and WR WR on the other, defo not lob sided so hope it will pass the test
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
PanthersRowell
|
posted: 2014-10-10 21:41:39 (ID: 100044510) Report Abuse |
|
I'd like to see the singleback formation including check down passes to the RB. If we could also use passes in the flat in a split back set that would be real exciting!
It would also be fun to have QB sneak incorporated into our gameplans in certain situations wouldn't you agree? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Gambler75
|
posted: 2014-10-28 05:34:22 (ID: 100045196) Report Abuse |
|
Weak I:
WRL OTL OGL OC OGR OTR TER WRR ......................QB ...........FBL.....HBC Strong I (also sometimes called Broken I): WRL OTL OGL OC OGR OTR TER WRR ......................QB .....................HBC....FBR Similar to the Far/Near formation posted by andrew2scott2 a page back, but the FB is offset rather than the HB. These formations are still very common, outside of the NFL - where FBs are a dying breed. Any of those 4 formations (the weak/strong I, or the far/near) being added would be nice for teams that want to stick to a more "traditional" personnel grouping. Currently there is only ONE formation that uses 2 WR, 1 TE, 1 HB, 1 FB ... the I Form. *edit - apparently I didn't read far enough back, this was already suggested by Lucea Cardinals in 2012  *Last edited on 2014-10-28 05:39:01 by Gambler75 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 17 18 19 > >| | |
| Main / Suggestions / Formations to add - read the very first post before you post anything | |
