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 v3 bashing goes here Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 6 8 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
|
andrew2scott2
|
posted: 2013-04-02 11:51:49 (ID: 89398) Report Abuse |
|
But the OLB in real life would bump out to help the CB out to cover the WR short.
If not the slot WR would be open all day long So it would be 5 on 5 in the box |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
E Logic
|
posted: 2013-04-02 13:29:30 (ID: 89410) Report Abuse |
|
clearly the engine needs some serious work if i can lose a game like that. match
I am almost 10% better rated in all areas. my O line is far better. my recievers are far better. my CB are far better. My RB are far better my team has far more experience. i have far better coaches. my tactics until the 4th quarter when he started to run after 3 quarters of just passing could not have been much better than they were. yet almost every pass was completed while i struggled and condidering when i play far better teams not even they have ever passed aswell as this crap team did. he was able to run when needed yet his O-line is extreamly bad, even when i did have a 5 man line his O-line was said to have crushed the D-line so if he could do that my O-line should have desroyed his D-line on every play and i should have got 10+yards on nealy every run. he used one offensive formation for at least 80% of the time and passed it on almost every play until the 4th quarter. is there some sort coding that in play-offs everything goes out the window and its just random who wins no matter what the ratings or tactics are because it can be the only explanation for this rusult. i dont see how i could have done much more to win the game and to be honest i shouldnt of had to do anything speacial considering how the two teams matched up. which is why i had a solid well balenced defence yet it seems like all ratings and facts went out the window. i did think you needed to be well balenced to win with engine V3 yet this game has clearly proved me wrong. the first 3 quarters all he did was pass and managed to get huge success from it, from the big-I formation against mainly the 3-3-5 even with one of my DE breaking through on every other play. yet i got no sacks and clearly the QB wasnt being hurried as he complated a ridiculus amounts of passes.im still scraching my head as i dont see how this result happend. looking back maybe i needed to play the dime vs the big I-formation i may have had a chance of winning then against such a well balenced and superior team like the superheros on vacation  Last edited on 2013-04-02 13:51:25 by E Logic |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2013-04-02 13:43:51 (ID: 89416) Report Abuse | |
|
Dont get me wrong...but I think using the rating to determine of someone should win or lose, is just wrong. Having a good built team (=strong rating) doesn't mean anything about skills on tactics. Since AF is a sport based on tactics, tactics should win over ratings, you agree?
It is just I see many people writing again and again about better rating but losing.. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Firenze
|
posted: 2013-04-02 13:48:01 (ID: 89418) Report Abuse |
|
pete wrote:
Dont get me wrong...but I think using the rating to determine of someone should win or lose, is just wrong. Having a good built team (=strong rating) doesn't mean anything about skills on tactics. Since AF is a sport based on tactics, tactics should win over ratings, you agree? It is just I see many people writing again and again about better rating but losing.. I think agents tend to under rate roster depth. More depth = more consistency. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
E Logic
|
posted: 2013-04-02 13:50:32 (ID: 89419) Report Abuse |
|
pete wrote:
but as i said his tactics were very bad too as he was able to pass consistantly from the big-I formation against 3-3-5 which with my surerior players should have been enough to stop him yet he got 4 TD by doing this. he had maybe 6 or 7 runs in the the frist 3 quarters and the rest were passes from the big-I formation yet he had a stupid amount of success from doing this. so as i said the engine is clearly broken when taking into account the ratings, coaches, experience, homefield advantage and TACTICS and he was still able to win. ridiculus.
Dont get me wrong...but I think using the rating to determine of someone should win or lose, is just wrong. Having a good built team (=strong rating) doesn't mean anything about skills on tactics. Since AF is a sport based on tactics, tactics should win over ratings, you agree? It is just I see many people writing again and again about better rating but losing.. its a good thing that a worse team can beat a better team but i would expect them to have to tactically out play there oppponent yet this was far from the case in this match. when you look at the first 3 quarters my defence was almost always in a very good formation against what the offence was doing yet i could do nothing to stop his poor rated players despite being tactically better than him which isnt hard considering he uses only 2 offensive formations and about 80% of the time it was the big-I formation from which he passed about 90% of the time in the first 3 quarters. i do think engine 3 is an improvement and before today i would have said a very good engine compared to other games but now seeing as a team like today with very bad tactics were able to win i now have some seriou doubts. Last edited on 2013-04-02 14:07:43 by E Logic |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
sh8888
|
posted: 2013-04-02 14:06:50 (ID: 89423) Report Abuse |
|
E Logic wrote:
but as i said his tactics were very bad too as he was able to pass consistantly from the big-I formation against 3-3-5 which with my surerior players should have been enough to stop him yet he got 4 TD by doing this. he had maybe 6 or 7 runs in the the frist 3 quarters and the rest were passes from the big-I formation yet he had a stupid amount of success from doing this. so as i said the engine is clearly broken when taking into account the ratings, coaches, experience and TACTICS and he was still able to win. ridiculus . Nice rant, but .......... Actually, I think his tactics were, on balance, probably better than yours. He used the Big-I plenty, but he mixed it up nicely .... meaning that he caught you defending the pass with the 3-3-5 and he ran on you (7.2 ypc vs Big-I) His Passing was pretty good (63% completion rate) vs your 46.6%. He threw 2 ints, you threw 1. Neither Team got any Sacks, so maybe your D isn't as "superior" as you said it is. The Passing, Rushing and total yardage were all slightly in his favour. He also had 57% time of possession, thereby tiring your D. However, he wasn't perfect, and he got caught defending the pass with the 4-4-3 too often, and it cost him a few TD's. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
E Logic
|
posted: 2013-04-02 14:12:42 (ID: 89425) Report Abuse |
|
i can tell you are just looking at the summary but you need to look at the first 3 quarters when he only had 6 or 7 runs and the rest were passes from the big- I formation and he was stiil able to get 4 TD against a 3-3-5. And despite using one dimentional tactics in the first 3 quarters he was able to take the lead just before the 4th quarter started so he was lucky to be able to run the clock out in the 4th quarter. had he not taken the lead there im sure he would have carried on passing 90% of the time from the big-I formation but it probably would not have matterd as apparently the 3-3-5 is not very good at stopping this anyway as demistrated in the first 3 quarters.
I said it in my post about the first 3 quarters you need to watch it play by play because if you look at the summary it looks like he was playing well balenced yet it couldnt be more wrong. so until you examine the game closely i would prefer you not to comment as you are undermining my arguement when you have not looked at the game play by play. Last edited on 2013-04-02 14:22:17 by E Logic |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
andrew2scott2
|
posted: 2013-04-02 14:19:57 (ID: 89426) Report Abuse |
|
All I know there alot of work yet to be done.
Before we get out of the beta stage that we are in. But we are getting closer and we must fix the things that make this game incomplete blocking ,receive ,and gang tackling The only way to really make thinks work right is to take the next step and make field position of the players matters. But there is no way right now for that to happen right now. We need a make a physical way to place the players. Like in Madden or GLB. That they would hopefully put the game in check and make the game more than numbers as it it now. Then soon after individual play calling in the playbook Last edited on 2013-04-02 14:21:53 by andrew2scott2 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
E Logic
|
posted: 2013-04-02 14:24:47 (ID: 89427) Report Abuse |
|
well as proven by my game. it clearly isnt about numbers at all or homefield advantage or experience or coaches or TACTICS. im starting to wonder what actually does make the biggest difference
Last edited on 2013-04-02 14:25:26 by E Logic |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
sh8888
|
posted: 2013-04-02 14:27:19 (ID: 89429) Report Abuse |
|
E Logic wrote:
i can tell you are just looking at the summary but you need to look at the first 3 quarters when he only had 6 or 7 runs and the rest were passes from the big- I formation and he was stiil able to get 4 TD against a 3-3-5. I said it in my post about the first 3 quarters play by play because if you look at the summary it looks like he was playing well balenced yet it couldnt be more wrong. so until you examine the game closely i would prefer you not to comment as you are undermining my arguement when you have not looked at the game play by play. I've looked at the whole game. The stats don't lie :- Rush from Big I :- 28 Pass from Big-I :- 34 The 4 TD's were from 4,5,2 & 1 yards ... so where's the problem with that ? ...... the 3-3-5 is a good pass defense, but it's not invincible. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 6 8 > >| | |
| Main / Discussions / engine v3 bashing goes here | |
