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 / Lopsided tactics Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 3 16 17 18 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
|
Buddy Ryan
|
posted: 2013-10-03 14:23:07 (ID: 100009435) Report Abuse |
|
pete wrote:
For the priorities...some things are built on top of others...it makes no sense to have a multioption playbook before the inner balance of the engine is not ready for it. well thats what I was saying... I want more focus on the "inner balance of the engine" instead of just adding stuff like the "no PB penalty" to deal with its flaws... Last edited on 2013-10-03 14:24:10 by Buddy Ryan |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2013-10-03 14:25:02 (ID: 100009436) Report Abuse |
|
OK, so to clarify - there is NO penalty at all for this approach? It's ok to leave some gaps with a view to random plays being for those gaps?
If so, that's not quite how the announcement reads - it gives the impression that any use of the random settings leads to a small penalty of some form. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2013-10-03 14:31:44 (ID: 100009438) Report Abuse | |
|
JonnyP wrote:
OK, so to clarify - there is NO penalty at all for this approach? It's ok to leave some gaps with a view to random plays being for those gaps? If so, that's not quite how the announcement reads - it gives the impression that any use of the random settings leads to a small penalty of some form. Any use of ONLY random settings... |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2013-10-03 14:32:08 (ID: 100009440) Report Abuse | |
|
Buddy Ryan wrote:
pete wrote:
For the priorities...some things are built on top of others...it makes no sense to have a multioption playbook before the inner balance of the engine is not ready for it. well thats what I was saying... I want more focus on the "inner balance of the engine" instead of just adding stuff like the "no PB penalty" to deal with its flaws... Definition: no PB = inner balance |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Buddy Ryan
|
posted: 2013-10-03 14:33:46 (ID: 100009441) Report Abuse |
|
JonnyP wrote:
OK, so to clarify - there is NO penalty at all for this approach? It's ok to leave some gaps with a view to random plays being for those gaps? If so, that's not quite how the announcement reads - it gives the impression that any use of the random settings leads to a small penalty of some form. and what happens if the playbook covers only stuff like for example 3rd-and-long or situations at the end of halves or when falling behind in the second half; when to kick/punt/go for it etc? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2013-10-03 14:37:54 (ID: 100009443) Report Abuse | |
|
It is a question of having a playbook at all covering not only FG/punt situations, and the balance inside the playbook for non punt/non FG plays...
So if you have only 3rd down rules as example, you are still OK...if you would have only 3rd down rules saying sg4wr left rush, your would be in trouble...clear enough? You guys put in more than there is |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2013-10-03 14:38:12 (ID: 100009444) Report Abuse |
|
pete wrote:
JonnyP wrote:
OK, so to clarify - there is NO penalty at all for this approach? It's ok to leave some gaps with a view to random plays being for those gaps? If so, that's not quite how the announcement reads - it gives the impression that any use of the random settings leads to a small penalty of some form. Any use of ONLY random settings... What if 2nd and 4-6 is set to random for the whole game? Sorry to be picky, but the wording needs to be totally clarified. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2013-10-03 14:41:35 (ID: 100009445) Report Abuse | |
|
check the post above
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2013-10-03 14:59:44 (ID: 100009446) Report Abuse |
|
I think we are talking at crossed purposes a little - I fully understand the implication of using 1 play from 1 formation for a specific down all game, but my question is specifically about the stated penalty in the announcement for people who use the random match settings.
If some has this offensive playbook: Punt Situations Field Goal situations 4th and 1 - go for it if losing 1st and Goal situations, various depending on score/quarter etc Nothing else - therefore random plays from match settings get used for all other circumstances Are there ANY penalties at all for that style of playbook? Please, just a simple yes or no. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2013-10-03 15:03:01 (ID: 100009450) Report Abuse | |
|
Not possible, depends on relations inside the playbook...
Next question: how are these relations set? No answer, sorry |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 3 16 17 18 > >| | |
| Main / Discussions / Lopsided tactics | |
