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 / Playbook efficacy Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< 2 3 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
| posted: 2022-12-01 17:29:45 (ID: 100170656) Report Abuse | |
|
I'm going to put out a guess at how much different factors affect the outcome of any particular match. I'd love to hear others' opinions on both my numbers and on their preference of how RZA plays.
I'm guessing that 75% of a match's outcome is based on player training/experience levels, 20% is luck, and 5% is playbook use. It seems to me that while a bad playbook can lose you a game, a fair to great one won't have as much impact as either the skill of the team or even dumb luck. This is not a new idea, but this game is a player and finance management game, not a coaching game, so I'm ok with the player skills being most important impact on matches. The thing that gets me is that the playbook is enjoyable to tinker with, trying to outwit your opps, etc. But in the end it doesn't seem to have much impact. So understanding what the game is and is not, I'm not sure what to do with my feelings about the playbook. On one hand it feels like it should be more important than it is, because of the options it does have available, but then I wouldn't want to take away from the time and effort it takes to train and manage a team. (If anything, it'd be nice to have a little more options with the playbook to match it to your team's strengths, but there've already been those suggestions/discussions... being able to put certain players in for certain formations, etc.) |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
pderekdactyl
|
posted: 2022-12-01 19:53:23 (ID: 100170660) Report Abuse |
|
Those %s vary widely from game to game.
There have been some wild results that are close to 99% due to luck. There have been results, even in Elite and even in bowls, that had close to even rosters and appeared to have close to even game day luck but were blowouts due to playbook. There have been games driven completely by roster construction. The marginal gains decrease the higher/better you get with both the playbook and roster. But, the margins are also incredibly slim for basically all elite playoff teams so maybe that extra playbook/skill/trait difference is the difference between losing in WC round vs winning the bowl, or maybe it's entirely luck driven like Rufio's current playoff run. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2022-12-01 19:55:20 (ID: 100170661) Report Abuse | |
|
pderekdactyl wrote:
or maybe it's entirely driven by cheating like Rufio's current playoff run. Fixed that for you. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2022-12-01 20:39:11 (ID: 100170662) Report Abuse | |
|
I think PB plays a more significant role than just 5%. Maybe 20% (and luck/randomness at 5%). I am stating this based on what I have dealt with my team. I never managed to work a lot on my PB while I have been keeping squads with over 80% rating on matchday. I have lost many times to teams with lower ratings so I think PB is really important (but I agree that team building - skills and experience - and a lot of money is really important to achieve success).
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2022-12-01 21:31:17 (ID: 100170664) Report Abuse | |
|
linkleo911 wrote:
I think PB plays a more significant role than just 5%. This. If managers do not believe, play a scrimmage, and put the same team in there, but one superb playbook, and a bullshit playbook. If it was just 5% playbook importance, you should not see a big difference. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2022-12-01 22:18:02 (ID: 100170665) Report Abuse | |
|
The problem I see with playbooks are formation related.
Example. 5-3-3 and 4-4-3 are run D formations/line of scrimmage short stuff but often seem to work well as a pass D - which they normally should not. Pass D 3-3-5 + seems to have some difficulty stopping passes and oddly at times are strong run D. 4-3-4 base is almost useless. It's whatever the creator feels for the season should be effective instead of realistic. Cheers! |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2022-12-01 22:25:51 (ID: 100170666) Report Abuse | |
|
pete wrote:
linkleo911 wrote:
I think PB plays a more significant role than just 5%. This. If managers do not believe, play a scrimmage, and put the same team in there, but one superb playbook, and a bullshit playbook. If it was just 5% playbook importance, you should not see a big difference. I can see that, when all other things are equal, and I'm not saying the playbook is worthless, just that it's value pales in comparison with team quality. Put a 70% team with an awesome playbook against an 80% team with a mediocre one and 9 times out of 10 the better team is going to win, and more likely if/when the 70%er takes the win it's more likely luck getting them there than the playbook. I know I'm taking a small sampling from my own experience and not running stats on hundreds of games. I think most everyone will agree that a significantly better team will win most of the time regardless of playbook. I can put in a very watery playbook in when I'm going against a lower team in SC and not worry about taking the win, and I can research and plan out a killer playbook against an elite team and still get my butt kicked up and down the field. (see my record against TigerCats) But other times I'll pull off an upset win (see against SD Blitz 2x) and I think it's more that I got lucky than my playbook being better than his. I've seen some elite teams run a very predictable playbook, and yet they keep showing up in the top league. Because they're better at managing a team than plotting a playbook... or else they don't bother because they can get by without it. To Cheese's point, if you have two elite teams going head to head, than yes, you've eliminated the team quality difference, so playbook can have a much greater effect on a game. If you're not in Elite, you don't have that situation for most games. But that just illustrates my point more. The only argument is how much luck plays a part or not. And yes, Skid, I'm disappointed by the 4-3-4 flaws. But no, I'm not disappointed in the game itself. It's a lot of fun, so tip of my cap to Pete  |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Maynard
|
posted: 2022-12-01 23:15:44 (ID: 100170669) Report Abuse |
|
Not trying to be cute when I suggest Pete's success the last couple of seasons, despite having a relatively "light" roster, is all the proof I need that the playbook holds a lot of weight.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2022-12-02 11:41:18 (ID: 100170673) Report Abuse | |
|
I like the playbook and spend time on it. I make small modifications to adapt it to each opponent. The result is that this season I have not lost a single game against an opponent with a higher Overall Ratio than my team's (or so I think).
Therefore, I believe that the weight of the PB in the game is enough. It is also true that I have faced opponents with very predictable PBs and " I knew how to beat them", but my roster was not good enough and I lost. And I think that's the way it should be. Therefore, I see no need for change on that side of the game. And about performance of some formations: I look at the performance of formations (offense and defense) in RZA, not in real life football. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2022-12-02 12:50:43 (ID: 100170674) Report Abuse | |
|
Olband wrote:
Put a 70% team with an awesome playbook against an 80% team with a mediocre one and 9 times out of 10 the better team is going to win I receive complaints from time to time, since I am such a team that beats better rated teams on a quite regular base. So, I am the example for "playbooks matter"  |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< 2 3 > >| | |
| Main / Discussions / Playbook efficacy | |
