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 / Discussions / formation penalties? Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< 2 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
|
E Logic
|
posted: 2012-12-01 10:03:42 (ID: 70730) Report Abuse |
|
im curious as to weather certain formations have a penalty when running the ball and if not, I think in the current engine they should do to compensate.
As most experienced managers know, TE and FB dont block when running the ball so every formation in theory has same amount of blockers and thats 5 OL so in the current engine all formations should be equal when running ball. But I do not agree that 4 WR shot gun should be as successful as say I-formation. And in fact if all formations are equal when running the ball, it would most likely be advantageous to run from the 4 WR shotgun as the defence will most likely play a softer run defence and I do not believe this should be the case. Also does Goal-line offence have a penalty against when playing a certain distance away from the goal-line? so to summerise... do certain formations have penaltys when running the ball? If they do not do you agree for the reasons given above that they should have penalties? And to finish. i am aware to fix this whole issue would be to allow FB and TE to block for the run but as for now I think a penalty on blocking for certain formations would go someway to compensating the more run based formations. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Buffalo
|
posted: 2012-12-01 10:36:44 (ID: 70736) Report Abuse |
|
I think in theory the I-formation is a stronger run formation than the 4WR shotgun. A 4WR SG would be very weak against run defenses like 5-3-3 or 4-4-3. The I-formation would be a strong run offense against a passing defense like the DIME formation.
BUT the problem is: Managers preferre against the I-formation a run defense and against the Shotgun a pass defense. This lead to the assumption that the SG might be the better run formation. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
E Logic
|
posted: 2012-12-01 11:29:53 (ID: 70737) Report Abuse |
|
i agree with you to a point. but in the current engine, no matter what formation you have you only ever get 5 blockers so to compensate i think pass based formations should get a penalty when running to compensate until FB and TE are able to block for the run.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
sneaky_minotaur
|
posted: 2012-12-01 19:51:24 (ID: 70782) Report Abuse |
|
I'm not sure what the point is here.
Should Big-I have a penalty for passing since it's one of the best run formations? Edit: Reading your post again, if you think the Shotgun 2WR and 4WR are unbalanced at this point and too good for running I would have to strongly disagree with you. Last edited on 2012-12-01 20:02:45 by sneaky_minotaur |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
E Logic
|
posted: 2012-12-01 23:13:01 (ID: 70799) Report Abuse |
|
sneaky_minotaur wrote:
clearly you dont fully understand what im saying or cannot get that altho run based formations in theory should be better but in the current engine they only have 5 blockers which is the same for pass based formations.
I'm not sure what the point is here.
Should Big-I have a penalty for passing since it's one of the best run formations? Edit: Reading your post again, if you think the Shotgun 2WR and 4WR are unbalanced at this point and too good for running I would have to strongly disagree with you. And no big-I should not have a penalty for passing seeing as a TE is a TE and a WR is a WR and they do not need any other players help to do there job. But in the running game for it to be successful you need blockers and every formation as it stands only has 5 blockers. I never said the shotgun 2WR and 4WR are to strong running so please read things proparly before posting. I will REPEAT myself so you get the point and that is that there should be a small penalty on these formations to compensate for the inability of TE and FB to block in the current engine if there isnt already a small penalty in place. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
sneaky_minotaur
|
posted: 2012-12-01 23:17:31 (ID: 70800) Report Abuse |
|
Ok, but I still don't get what your point is, as this aspect of the engine seems balanced now.
No change is necessary. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
alexshans84
|
posted: 2012-12-02 09:28:00 (ID: 70821) Report Abuse |
|
E Logic wrote:
As most experienced managers know, TE and FB dont block when running the ball so every formation in theory has same amount of blockers and thats 5 OL ... It's wrong. TEs block defenders breaking through LOS. It can be very useful, especially on end runs  |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
ombi
|
posted: 2012-12-02 21:46:39 (ID: 70869) Report Abuse |
|
alexshans84 wrote:
E Logic wrote:
As most experienced managers know, TE and FB dont block when running the ball so every formation in theory has same amount of blockers and thats 5 OL ... It's wrong. TEs block defenders breaking through LOS. It can be very useful, especially on end runs Correct. TE's can block on runs, FB's can block only on passes. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
andrew2scott2
|
posted: 2012-12-04 01:48:15 (ID: 70944) Report Abuse |
|
Form a guy who plays football in now in semi pro. The shot gun can be just as effect as the I formation if the Defense plays the wrong formation.
But What I dislike about this game is the fact of that I play football. I know any team that plays a 5-2 or 5-3-3 against a 4 wr set. Is in real trouble. Against the pass. I have nothing against upping the penalty against they run as long as they up the passing penlites for the 5-2 and 5-3-3 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
dark_wing
|
posted: 2012-12-04 06:47:58 (ID: 70948) Report Abuse |
|
Buffalo wrote:
I think in theory the I-formation is a stronger run formation than the 4WR shotgun. A 4WR SG would be very weak against run defenses like 5-3-3 or 4-4-3. The I-formation would be a strong run offense against a passing defense like the DIME formation. BUT the problem is: Managers preferre against the I-formation a run defense and against the Shotgun a pass defense. This lead to the assumption that the SG might be the better run formation. To make surprises for opposition defence is the main part of the OC-s job. And look the NFL games, you can see many passes from I-form and many rushes from shotgun/sinleback. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< 2 > >| | |
| Main / Discussions / formation penalties? | |
