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 / Suggestions / The elephants in the room Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 4 > >| | |
| Rating: | |
| Poster | Message |
| posted: 2023-04-06 14:01:17 (ID: 100173328) Report Abuse | |
|
wsfjlt wrote:
I would also carry forward lopsided play to the following games and get worse from week to week. If you are using lopsided plays, there should not be a benefit at the beginning of the match. Good coaches, even poor ones can see, every time they get into the flexbone the HB gets the ball and runs this pattern, so why would any defense be surprised by the play, wouldn't they be prepared for it. A team to heavy on run, or pass, should have a lopsided penalty, that is forwarded game to game, like physical condition and team chemistry, call it predictability factor. Uh, how radical. I like it. Are we sure we wanna screw several games for the manager in a row? Maybe we need something different like a per player lopsided tag we carry from game to game. So a player who is part of "pass to the left all game long" would have the burden of a "this guy is catching outside left passes all game long" tag with him, and we would lower his performance on such players step by step. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2023-04-06 16:04:53 (ID: 100173329) Report Abuse | |
|
pete wrote:
Maybe we need something different like a per player lopsided tag we carry from game to game. So a player who is part of "pass to the left all game long" would have the burden of a "this guy is catching outside left passes all game long" tag with him, and we would lower his performance on such players step by step. This is similar to what I was originally suggesting. If certain players are getting all the offensive touches, the defenses should be able to key in on that. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Captain Jack
|
posted: 2023-04-06 16:32:14 (ID: 100173330) Report Abuse |
|
Olband wrote:
pete wrote:
Maybe we need something different like a per player lopsided tag we carry from game to game. So a player who is part of "pass to the left all game long" would have the burden of a "this guy is catching outside left passes all game long" tag with him, and we would lower his performance on such players step by step. This is similar to what I was originally suggesting. If certain players are getting all the offensive touches, the defenses should be able to key in on that. Exactly. Coaches would prepare for it prior to the game and would be more able to shut it down. I've always thoguht that defences should react more in RZA. This may be going outside the scope of the current argument but if, for example a team continually goes for it on 4th-1 etc the D should reactand eventually shut it down. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2023-04-06 19:34:12 (ID: 100173332) Report Abuse | |
|
Predictability factor would rate the offences predictability.
If they only passed every down then the defense would no they never run and play against the pass 100% of the time so yes the predictable factor this team would be 100% Opposed to a team that mixed it up quite well running from and passing from all formations, yes they may run more from one formation or pass more but it is mixed up so they might have a predictable factor of 5 to 10% and maybe no penalty for those who keep their predictability under 20% and then a small penalty for those who keep it under 30 larger for those at 40 and then maybe a huge penalty for 50 and keep the grade going up. It would make us all have to work on our game plans not to be to predictable. I also think predictability should hurt the whole team. If you know they are going to pass, it hurts the play of the offensive line as the defense knows what or how the offensive line is going to play. They also know that the receivers are not blocking so the defensive backs would try to block them off the line so they couldn't run their patterns, not worrying about the receivers putting a block on them for a running back to fly by them. I could go on about how predictability of a team would kill them in real life. The only predictability factor that I would down rate or allow without penalty is a team that is up by 20 or more points and their offense switches over to run all the time in the 4th quarter. Yes it is predictable for that game only and yes other teams would predict it as well but there is a commonsense factor. Like wise if a team is down by 20 points they should not loose predictability points for going to a pass heavy game plan, again this is commonsense and yes predictable for that game but not to be carried over as everyone would expect that in those circumstances. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
4 Aces
|
posted: 2023-04-06 22:08:26 (ID: 100173333) Report Abuse |
 I agree this to me is the most unrealistic aspect of RZA. I played a team that had something like 1600 pass plays all out of the same formation & 0 zero runs (all season long). They were still having success in the fourth quarter as if my defense had no brains at all. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2023-04-07 00:01:38 (ID: 100173334) Report Abuse | |
|
4 Aces wrote:
I agree this to me is the most unrealistic aspect of RZA. I played a team that had something like 1600 pass plays all out of the same formation & 0 zero runs (all season long). They were still having success in the fourth quarter as if my defense had no brains at all.I'm wondering how complicated it would be to give the defense the same directional options as the offense. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2023-04-11 14:05:19 (ID: 100173406) Edits found: 1 Report Abuse | |
|
I was considering this some more with the s2 thread in the discussions forum.
I will play the game whichever way Pete decides to bounce the ball, but I personally dislike the idea of taking options away from the playbook. In addition to the previously mentioned reasons such as being able to target your best players more, I enjoy being able to plan out where/when I want a play to go a certain direction, ie running behind the TE, or going inside/outside depending on the situation. Having more options adds enjoyment to the game, I feel. But yes, if certain players/parts of the field are focused on almost solely, there should be a defensive adjustment to counter this. I propose that overly focusing on getting the ball to certain parts of the field, or to certain players, be they RBs,WRs, or TEs, should be included in lopsided tactics, giving the defense a bonus the more this happens. I don't know exactly how the lopsided tactics currently works, or how big a penalty it incurs, but it seems like it could be applied to these situations when abused, right? I also propose allowing a manager more options to plan against such tactics if they're willing to take the time to scout an opponent and take the risk that those tactics will be employed. (see my WR double-team formation suggestion for one option.) Edit add: I'd also suggest adding increased energy loss to OL when pass-blocking. This is true to RL, and would make using pass-only offenses less effective over the course of a game. Last edited on 2023-04-12 14:49:44 by Olband |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2023-05-14 19:18:21 (ID: 100174014) Report Abuse | |
|
Olband wrote:
I also propose allowing a manager more options to plan against such tactics if they're willing to take the time to scout an opponent and take the risk that those tactics will be employed. I would like this very much, too. It would be great if I'd somehow have an opportunity to react to obvious onesided tactics by the opponent. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2023-05-15 07:45:35 (ID: 100174026) Report Abuse | |
|
imo easiest way to impliment this would be a slider for the defense in the playbook
Key on run vs Key on pass Key on run would mean better against the run but worse against the pass and vice versa |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2023-05-15 09:16:36 (ID: 100174033) Report Abuse | |
|
HH_KMN wrote:
imo easiest way to impliment this would be a slider for the defense in the playbook Key on run vs Key on pass Key on run would mean better against the run but worse against the pass and vice versa Would you implement this instead of "prefer rush/pass"? If so, wouldn't that be a detriment when planning for an opponent who's utilizing a balanced playbook? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 4 > >| | |
| Main / Suggestions / The elephants in the room | |
