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 Rebalancing Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< 2 3 4 5 6 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2013-04-19 09:44:04 (ID: 92060) Report Abuse |
|
I see there has been some formation rebalancing for Gun 2WR, Gun 4WR, dime and goalline.
Does this mean the paranoid, lazy, 'only defend the gun with Dime' whingers have been satisfied? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2013-04-19 09:57:46 (ID: 92062) Report Abuse | |
|
JonnyP wrote:
NO
I see there has been some formation rebalancing for Gun 2WR, Gun 4WR, dime and goalline. Does this mean the paranoid, lazy, 'only defend the gun with Dime' whingers have been satisfied? that was not the goal of this change |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2013-04-19 10:03:03 (ID: 92063) Report Abuse |
|
Sorry Pete, the comment was not aimed at you, just the lazy moaners who refused to try anything other than Dime against the Shotgun, but who then howled when the could not stop the run.
If the effectiveness of the Dime has been improved then they will have succeeded though.... It was already devastatingly good against the Gun when the O was attempting to pass, if it can now stop the run better as well that encourages a 'no-brain' approach to defense. Last edited on 2013-04-19 10:04:40 by JonnyP |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
KingOfTh3Hil
|
posted: 2013-04-19 10:03:35 (ID: 92064) Report Abuse |
|
JonnyP wrote:
I see there has been some formation rebalancing for Gun 2WR, Gun 4WR, dime and goalline. Does this mean the paranoid, lazy, 'only defend the gun with Dime' whingers have been satisfied? Atleast that is better then having ppl mainly using only 1 formation for offence and relying on it. And using its exploits to win games... Using mainly 1 formation for an offence is also a "no-brainer" Last edited on 2013-04-19 10:04:22 by KingOfTh3Hil |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2013-04-19 10:06:29 (ID: 92065) Report Abuse |
|
With a decent set of DBs you could pretty much stifle the SG4WR using 3-4-4. My own results using 3-4-4 were very good against the pass.
Yes, you would give up an occasional breakaway TD, but isn't that realistic? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2013-04-19 10:12:29 (ID: 92066) Report Abuse |
|
KingOfTh3Hil wrote:
Using mainly 1 formation for an offence is also a "no-brainer" 100% disagree, the coaching system encourages the use of FB or HBs, not both. Then you just find the offensive formations which best suit the choice of coaches. The spread formations are a good addition for those who use RBs. The Proset was ALREADY a very good balanced formation for RB users, and in my mind, probably the strongest formation in the game. I use the Gun, and have used it since day one, because I want to create a pass 1st offense, with a few rushing plays to keep the defense guessing. Nothing to do with exploits. However, it is because people persistently panic about my passing game and line up in the Dime that I have had to switch to a more balanced run/pass approach. If the Dime has now been overpowered, that is somewhat worrying. Just pick a D based on formation and leave it... THAT'S a no-brainer. You COULD stop the gun before with other formations, you just needed the personnel. Last edited on 2013-04-19 10:16:25 by JonnyP |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
hosh13
|
posted: 2013-04-19 11:17:36 (ID: 92078) Report Abuse |
|
IMO, the singleback formations will be more potent for passing but riskier on sacks/INTs since the HB won't block.
It will also run better *assuming* the HB is a better runner than the FB. It also depends on how Ds will approach the SGs vs the SBs - maybe the Ds will initially be more run orientated vs the SBs? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2013-04-19 11:27:26 (ID: 92081) Report Abuse |
|
hosh13 wrote:
IMO, the singleback formations will be more potent for passing but riskier on sacks/INTs since the HB won't block. Surely that just factors in another error into the game mechanism, as in real-life HBs DO block, they just (usually) are not as good at it.... |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
KingOfTh3Hil
|
posted: 2013-04-19 11:35:47 (ID: 92084) Report Abuse |
|
hosh13 wrote:
IMO, the singleback formations will be more potent for passing but riskier on sacks/INTs since the HB won't block. It will also run better *assuming* the HB is a better runner than the FB. It also depends on how Ds will approach the SGs vs the SBs - maybe the Ds will initially be more run orientated vs the SBs? becourse of that, i think singleback is better then shotgun after what you said, but i think 4WR/2WR will be a better passing formation due to the blocking ability and the singleback better for running and it opends up for a more upside/downside for the managers to choose from rathern then just play 4wr all the time.... (i think the FB should be downgraded so that he isent that powerfull in the run aswell) Last edited on 2013-04-19 11:39:42 by KingOfTh3Hil |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
hosh13
|
posted: 2013-04-19 11:36:39 (ID: 92086) Report Abuse |
|
JonnyP wrote:
hosh13 wrote:
IMO, the singleback formations will be more potent for passing but riskier on sacks/INTs since the HB won't block. Surely that just factors in another error into the game mechanism, as in real-life HBs DO block, they just (usually) are not as good at it.... My interpretation is that the RB would be a better receiver and so would typically be running a pattern and thus thinning the pass D out. I have the same interpretation of the Pro Set.  |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< 2 3 4 5 6 > >| | |
| Main / Discussions / Formation Rebalancing | |
