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 / New Thread about coaches Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 6 7 8 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
|
Buffalo
|
posted: 2012-01-07 20:19:31 (ID: 22808) Report Abuse |
|
Admin wrote:
I am afraid, there is no solution for this problem. We could do things like "the SF guy has to play max 50% of all plays as other position"....but this makes it really complicating. There is only the possible downside for having the useless SF on the field, too. Don't make it to comlicating for you and us. I think with the Roster addition, today, the "exploitation" is on a very low level. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2012-01-07 20:25:40 (ID: 22812) Report Abuse |
|
I like the idea of allowing players to play out of position, but with a penalty based on how similar the positions are.
Suggestion: QB - can only play QB FB - can play RB at 75% of ability RB - can play FB at 75% TE - can play WR at 75% WR - can play TE at 75% OL - can only play OL DL - can play LB at 50% LB - can play DL/CB/SF at 50% CB - can play SF at 75% or LB at 50% SF - can play CB at 75% or LB at 75% K can play P at 50% P can play K at 50% |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
bellj
|
posted: 2012-01-07 20:31:01 (ID: 22815) Report Abuse |
|
JonnyP wrote:
I like the idea of allowing players to play out of position, but with a penalty based on how similar the positions are. Suggestion: QB - can only play QB FB - can play RB at 75% of ability RB - can play FB at 75% TE - can play WR at 75% WR - can play TE at 75% OL - can only play OL DL - can play LB at 50% LB - can play DL/CB/SF at 50% CB - can play SF at 75% or LB at 50% SF - can play CB at 75% or LB at 75% K can play P at 50% P can play K at 50% Something like this would be OK. We could also add in KR and Gunner to this list. Maybe with an even lower penalty, say only 5 or 10% less if another player plays as KR or Gunner. Then players at those positions could regain a little value in RZA. (And I know what happens in the NFL, so don't shoot my idea down on that basis. I am just talking about RZA here.) |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
KingOfTh3Hil
|
posted: 2012-01-07 20:35:09 (ID: 22816) Report Abuse |
|
JonnyP wrote:
I like the idea of allowing players to play out of position, but with a penalty based on how similar the positions are. Suggestion: QB - can only play QB FB - can play RB at 75% of ability RB - can play FB at 75% TE - can play WR at 75% WR - can play TE at 75% OL - can only play OL DL - can play LB at 50% LB - can play DL/CB/SF at 50% CB - can play SF at 75% or LB at 50% SF - can play CB at 75% or LB at 75% K can play P at 50% P can play K at 50%  |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Lee1950
|
posted: 2012-01-07 20:38:34 (ID: 22817) Report Abuse |
|
bellj wrote:
JonnyP wrote:
I like the idea of allowing players to play out of position, but with a penalty based on how similar the positions are. Suggestion: QB - can only play QB FB - can play RB at 75% of ability RB - can play FB at 75% TE - can play WR at 75% WR - can play TE at 75% OL - can only play OL DL - can play LB at 50% LB - can play DL/CB/SF at 50% CB - can play SF at 75% or LB at 50% SF - can play CB at 75% or LB at 75% K can play P at 50% P can play K at 50% Something like this would be OK. We could also add in KR and Gunner to this list. Maybe with an even lower penalty, say only 5 or 10% less if another player plays as KR or Gunner. Then players at those positions could regain a little value in RZA. (And I know what happens in the NFL, so don't shoot my idea down on that basis. I am just talking about RZA here.) Nice concept. I'd even go further (since I don't have to program this monster  ):
FB - can play RB at 70% of ability if Blocking>Carrying FB - can play RB at 90% of ability if Carrying>Blocking TE - can play WR at 70% of ability if Blocking>Catching TE - can play WR at 90% of ability if Catching>Blocking |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2012-01-07 20:39:24 (ID: 22818) Report Abuse |
|
bellj wrote:
JonnyP wrote:
I like the idea of allowing players to play out of position, but with a penalty based on how similar the positions are. Suggestion: QB - can only play QB FB - can play RB at 75% of ability RB - can play FB at 75% TE - can play WR at 75% WR - can play TE at 75% OL - can only play OL DL - can play LB at 50% LB - can play DL/CB/SF at 50% CB - can play SF at 75% or LB at 50% SF - can play CB at 75% or LB at 75% K can play P at 50% P can play K at 50% Something like this would be OK. We could also add in KR and Gunner to this list. Maybe with an even lower penalty, say only 5 or 10% less if another player plays as KR or Gunner. Then players at those positions could regain a little value in RZA. (And I know what happens in the NFL, so don't shoot my idea down on that basis. I am just talking about RZA here.) Oops, should have said SF can play LB at 50% 
And I would make KR freely available to any WR/RB/FB/CB/SF with no penalty And G freely available to any LB/CB/SF, also with no penalty Also remove KR and G as primary positions, and have them as permanent secondary positions to each of the groups defined above. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Buffalo
|
posted: 2012-01-07 20:40:20 (ID: 22819) Report Abuse |
|
I don't think that you want to reduce the skills by 25% or 50%.
Please don't make it to compliction. With these additions you have to calculate if it is worth to play with a player out of position or is your weekest player on this position allways better. I have the impression that some people, want to kill the playing out of position in a "harsh" way. Than you can directly say, that you can put a CB only as CB in you DC and a WR only as WR in your DC. This is far away from real football, but if this should be the way at RZA, than do it. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
NYDOGS
|
posted: 2012-01-07 20:45:40 (ID: 22820) Report Abuse |
|
Buffalo wrote:
I don't think that you want to reduce the skills by 25% or 50%. Please don't make it to compliction. With these additions you have to calculate if it is worth to play with a player out of position or is your weekest player on this position allways better. I have the impression that some people, want to kill the playing out of position in a "harsh" way. Than you can directly say, that you can put a CB only as CB in you DC and a WR only as WR in your DC. This is far away from real football, but if this should be the way at RZA, than do it. I'm agree that the penalty is too huge! A guy should play first at his primary position but could also help at another quite similar one without so much penalty. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2012-01-07 20:57:14 (ID: 22821) Report Abuse | |
|
KingOfTh3Hil wrote:
well, you could add that a player isent allowed to play out of possition at all. A WR must play as an WR and not as an TE and so on. and if someone does he plays maybe 50% worse or something, This is drastic and maybe unreal but players would definitely have players at the "right" position if this would be a reality in this game. Exept for special teams ofc, there everyone would be allowed to play without penalty. I like this. It's a simple rule woithout any x% stuff. Maybe 50% is quite harsh, but 25% would do it in my oppnion. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Ranagol
|
posted: 2012-01-07 21:34:50 (ID: 22825) Report Abuse |
|
And if I neglected my FB AC, so it has 0 CP, wouldn't it be a better choice to list them as RB in the DC? With training involved as well, playing out of position for a 25% penalty (any higher than this is way to harsh imo) is kind of worth it to have better skills for my players. Especially if I'm planing for the long run, soon the FB (listed as RB and training under the high CP RB AC) will have better skills even WITH the 25% penalty, than he could get with a 0 CP AC training him and no penalty. Of course I could also be speculating here and an AC doesn't have this much of an impact on training...
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 6 7 8 > >| | |
| Main / Discussions / New Thread about coaches | |
