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 2 16 17 18 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2013-10-03 15:25:26 (ID: 100009459) Report Abuse |
|
Pete, you are infuriatingly evasive, and unnecessarily so.
You know exactly what I am asking.... If a playbook only ever has a 'random' event for a specific situation, does the new change add any penalty simply due to the fact it is random? I couldn't be any clearer with my question, and there has to be a simple yes/no answer!!!! 
I'm not asking anything to do without how the relations between plays work, I don't want to know mechanics, you are trying to read far too much into my line of questioning, simply whether you have added a slight nerf for anyone who uses random plays for specific situations for an entire game? Last edited on 2013-10-03 15:28:09 by JonnyP |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2013-10-03 15:39:32 (ID: 100009461) Report Abuse |
|
The reason I'm pushing on this point...
We have some players who have been doing very well using the random match settings... eg SG4WR - balanced random rush/pass - every down I can understand the desire to reduce the effectiveness of this as a tactic, but has this change inadvertently affected some of us who use random plays all game on just a few situations - as in my example 2nd and 4-6? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Leijona
|
posted: 2013-10-03 16:08:41 (ID: 100009468) Report Abuse |
|
So if I use my playbook to play a completely SG4WR system it still works as long as it's specific enough?
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
wiesengrund
|
posted: 2013-10-03 16:16:27 (ID: 100009470) Report Abuse |
|
This change is brought to you by ... the Union of RZA Defensive Coordinators!
 I think of it this way: Pete just wants to encourage scouting. Which, in the long run, should be the goal of any American Football Simulation, of course. Last edited on 2013-10-03 16:16:35 by wiesengrund |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
KingOfTh3Hil
|
posted: 2013-10-03 16:34:07 (ID: 100009474) Report Abuse |
|
is it a minimum of plays in the playbook that gets into account for getting a penalty or not?
so basically lets say im about to use the game settings only for 4wr and then im just having around 10 settings in a playbook for like 3 and 1 yard 3 and 2-3 yard 3 and 11+ yards and so on + some punt and kicking rules Having these formations then in like wishbone, i-form and maybe 2wr set, does this penalty apply and get active or is it not getting active? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
mikemike778
|
posted: 2013-10-03 16:34:11 (ID: 100009475) Report Abuse |
|
wiesengrund wrote:
This change is brought to you by ... the Union of RZA Defensive Coordinators! I think of it this way: Pete just wants to encourage scouting. Which, in the long run, should be the goal of any American Football Simulation, of course. The thing is ... If you set your playbook as 1st and 10 = Big I Run then you will probably have a second playbook which has 1st and 10 set to Big I pass. And then roll a dice before the match to decide which playbook to use. Or have three playbooks so you can have 2 of them do one thing and the third do another. Making scouting pointless. There has to be percentages put into the playbook - ie 75% chance you would run and 25% chance you would pass. In the abscence of 'on the fly decisions, this is far more akin to what a team would do in real life. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
oneknee
|
posted: 2013-10-03 16:34:22 (ID: 100009476) Report Abuse |
|
So we have an offensive setup that is already quite limited ie choice between totally random (matching settings) or far too specific (playbook settings) that is penalised and the result is it is even more limited in what we can do on the offensive side of the ball!
For me this is the totally wrong approach, it should have been an improvement on the reaction of the defense and not more limitation on how we use the limited offensive options we had. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
oneknee
|
posted: 2013-10-03 16:36:20 (ID: 100009477) Report Abuse |
|
mikemike778 wrote:
wiesengrund wrote:
This change is brought to you by ... the Union of RZA Defensive Coordinators! I think of it this way: Pete just wants to encourage scouting. Which, in the long run, should be the goal of any American Football Simulation, of course. The thing is ... If you set your playbook as 1st and 10 = Big I Run then you will probably have a second playbook which has 1st and 10 set to Big I pass. And then roll a dice before the match to decide which playbook to use. Or have three playbooks so you can have 2 of them do one thing and the third do another. Making scouting pointless. There has to be percentages put into the playbook - ie 75% chance you would run and 25% chance you would pass. In the abscence of 'on the fly decisions, this is far more akin to what a team would do in real life.  yes many have been asking for this for some time. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
oneknee
|
posted: 2013-10-03 16:41:03 (ID: 100009478) 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. Yes its not very clear what this change means and what it is intending to counter? I thought the problem was single formations and not too much randomness. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
mikemike778
|
posted: 2013-10-03 16:47:33 (ID: 100009482) Report Abuse |
|
pete wrote:
Not possible, depends on relations inside the playbook... Next question: how are these relations set? No answer, sorry I appreciate you don't want to give everything away. But RZA requires far more admin and work than any other online game I know. Doing anything requires so much faffing about its true. I still have nightmares about the 30 odd contracts still to do. Getting to the point where you have to put in more time and effort than the entertainment level you get out of it. If you are going to force people to write new playbooks, we at least need to know what is considered Ok design wise. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 16 17 18 > >| | |
| Main / Discussions / Lopsided tactics | |
