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 / Engine 3.0 Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 4 5 7 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
|
dark_wing
|
posted: 2013-02-02 10:57:01 (ID: 80250) Report Abuse |
|
JonnyP wrote:
The only way I can really get more info now is: - if Pete separates 'passes dropped' from 'passes defended' in the stats, so we can see where the imbalance stems from - or I play a scrimmage with a depth chart that has the worst secondary possible (trainee linemen at CB for example), as that game was starters vs starters... a 60% pass attack vs a 60% pass defense I removed medium passes from the PB. Thank You! |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2013-02-02 12:42:05 (ID: 80284) Report Abuse |
|
dark_wing wrote:
JonnyP wrote:
The only way I can really get more info now is: - if Pete separates 'passes dropped' from 'passes defended' in the stats, so we can see where the imbalance stems from - or I play a scrimmage with a depth chart that has the worst secondary possible (trainee linemen at CB for example), as that game was starters vs starters... a 60% pass attack vs a 60% pass defense I removed medium passes from the PB. Thank You! The aim of my tests is hopefully to get Pete to rethink how the medium/long passes are calculated. We go on and on about the TM, but this is after all an American Football simulation, so the match engine is what is most important... this sort of stuff should take priority. I know people have come on here and said 'I've made medium passes work' - sorry, but if you properly study the stats when you actually call them in your PB, I'm pretty certain you will find you have not. My next test is to see if I can get them to work against a bot team in the cup, so don't laugh too much if I lose bizarrely  |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2013-02-02 12:56:46 (ID: 80287) Report Abuse | |
|
if i would just raise the completions of medium and deep passes it would imbalance the pass/rush ratio...so it is a bit more complicating then you might think
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
dark_wing
|
posted: 2013-02-02 13:05:53 (ID: 80289) Report Abuse |
|
JonnyP wrote:
dark_wing wrote:
JonnyP wrote:
The only way I can really get more info now is: - if Pete separates 'passes dropped' from 'passes defended' in the stats, so we can see where the imbalance stems from - or I play a scrimmage with a depth chart that has the worst secondary possible (trainee linemen at CB for example), as that game was starters vs starters... a 60% pass attack vs a 60% pass defense I removed medium passes from the PB. Thank You! The aim of my tests is hopefully to get Pete to rethink how the medium/long passes are calculated. We go on and on about the TM, but this is after all an American Football simulation, so the match engine is what is most important... this sort of stuff should take priority. I know people have come on here and said 'I've made medium passes work' - sorry, but if you properly study the stats when you actually call them in your PB, I'm pretty certain you will find you have not. My next test is to see if I can get them to work against a bot team in the cup, so don't laugh too much if I lose bizarrely Medium passes was in my PB from the last seasons for situations "the 2-nd and short". But I don't remember a big effect of this... |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
holmeboy
|
posted: 2013-02-02 13:11:49 (ID: 80290) Report Abuse |
|
JonnyP wrote:
We go on and on about the TM, but this is after all an American Football simulation, so the match engine is what is most important... this sort of stuff should take priority. I know people have come on here and said 'I've made medium passes work' - sorry, but if you properly study the stats when you actually call them in your PB, I'm pretty certain you will find you have not. My next test is to see if I can get them to work against a bot team in the cup, so don't laugh too much if I lose bizarrely Lol, I thought of doing the same but didn't want to risk it... Want to try make the playoffs this year! Also this is the reason why I've said in other threads we should just make small tweaks to the current TM rather than spend all this time arguing and trying to come up with a new system... |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2013-02-02 13:22:52 (ID: 80294) Report Abuse |
|
pete wrote:
if i would just raise the completions of medium and deep passes it would imbalance the pass/rush ratio...so it is a bit more complicating then you might think Are you sure? At the moment they are useless, there is no good reason to even have then in the playbook other than to trap newbies. If you sort out blitzing, that would help - give DT/DE a proper chance of getting a sack on the longer pass plays - (in an earlier test game, my QBs threw around 300 long/medium passes, and did not even get sacked once). Increase chance of completion Increase chance of sack (a 20 speed DT CAN catch a 50 speed/30 agility QB if he is not looking!) Increase chance of forcing the QB to scramble Add in an option for the QB to dump the ball short to a TE (or even RB/FB!) if the intended receivers running the med/long route are not open |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
panoramix
|
posted: 2013-02-02 13:24:06 (ID: 80295) Report Abuse |
|
pete wrote:
if i would just raise the completions of medium and deep passes it would imbalance the pass/rush ratio...so it is a bit more complicating then you might think Perfectly understanding. Two suggestions: - split screen passes (-2 -> 0 yds) and short passes (1 -> 10 yds) - increase the completion percentage on short/screen passes (50% or less is not realistic for a QB with INT, PAS and VIS over 40). |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
panoramix
|
posted: 2013-02-02 13:26:01 (ID: 80297) Report Abuse |
|
JonnyP wrote:Increase chance of completion
Increase chance of sack (a 20 speed DT CAN catch a 50 speed/30 agility QB if he is not looking!) Increase chance of forcing the QB to scramble Add in an option for the QB to dump the ball short to a TE (or even RB/FB!) if the intended receivers running the med/long route are not open Oh YES!  |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2013-02-02 13:39:35 (ID: 80302) Report Abuse |
|
panoramix wrote:
JonnyP wrote:Increase chance of completion
Increase chance of sack (a 20 speed DT CAN catch a 50 speed/30 agility QB if he is not looking!) Increase chance of forcing the QB to scramble Add in an option for the QB to dump the ball short to a TE (or even RB/FB!) if the intended receivers running the med/long route are not open Oh YES!
The key is to make them a viable playcall. Right now for medium passes, it seems we have roughly: 5% chance of it breaking for TD 10-15% chance of 10-15 yard completion 5-10% chance of INT The rest of the plays are incomplete. And these were against a D in 5-3-3 expecting a run play 
A realistic balance should be more like (against a more typical 3-4-4 or 4-3-4): 3-5% break for TD 15-30% complete for intended yardage (10-20 yards) 5%-10% chance for INT 10-15% chance QB looks shorter for a low yardage, safe completion to a back or TE 1-20% chance to hurry QB, causing: - increased INT chance - sack - QB scramble - slightly increased chance of QB looking short - greatly reduced chance of completion for intended yardage - greatly increased chance of throwing the ball away incomplete Obviously, more precise figures depend on individual player stat matchups, but they should be somewhere within those ranges for relatively balanced teams. A team with a strong passing attack should be able to consistently shred a poor secondary with short and medium passes to a variety of receivers. This doesn't mean a return to loads of breakaway TDs, it means consistently moving the ball with a completion % of 60%+, a YPA of around 8 or more, and a much wider range of pass completion distances. 15 to 20 yard passes (with 0 YAC) are among the most common in football. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
hosh13
|
posted: 2013-02-02 15:15:59 (ID: 80320) Report Abuse |
|
My ideal passing setup -
3 options in the playbook - aggressive, balanced and conservative. Aggressive - QB most focussed on getting the ball down the field - most INTs. But if the QB, WR and OL are talented then INTs normal and super potent passing attack. 
Balanced - QB takes what's there - his and his teams skills, and the D's, dictate the outcomes. Avg chance of INTs Conservative - for rookie QBs or simply mistake free orientated managers/coaches. Least chance of INTs - would only go deep when needed or if a WR/TE is very open. Forcing a QB to go med/deep on a play doesn't work for me as a concept at all - it takes most of the QBs ability out of the equation and makes him do dumb stuff. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 4 5 7 > >| | |
| Main / Discussions / Engine 3.0 | |
