Originally posted by chronoaug
Every season's blocking code is different. Of the past 15 seasons, it has been easy to rack up sacks whenever for all but 1-2. I dunno about the coordinating part though. Most the blitzes i saw were pretty shitty and had 3linemen and 1-2 LBs blitzing which isn't really much of a blitz considering it's still 5on5. Plus, a lot of OCs do respect the blitz and hold a FB or HB in when they're not putting them in the progressions (unless you're bhall who just likes getting sacks).

Fumbling more isn't going to make the game more fun though, just more random. I'd rather the inside/outside run game get more interesting, passing when WRs finish their route and stand there not be a guaranteed catch, qbs lead better, fix the DL/OL interaction to where a QB can stand there for infinity and CBs cover short crosses better.

Working on obvious sim issues is more important and will lead to more enjoyment rather than just trying to make box scores and end season stats for dots look better.

If you think turnovers and randomness are bad then I do not care what you'd rather have worked on. (As if it's either/or, which it's not.)
I've got news for you: Random things happen in football games. David Tyree. Miracle in the Meadowlands. Sea of Hands. Marshall's Wrong Way Run. The Immaculate Deception (it pains me to include that one). The Fumble (Byner). Holy Roller. Romo's mishandled PAT. Freeman's shoulderblade catch. Red Right 88. A sim that is predictable is boring. See season 28.

It's very disappointing that you would dismiss something like lack of turnovers (a part of the game most people feel is a critical element for real football teams to excel at) as just a thing people want to tweak for optimal stats. So you think an OC holding a 50 strength 20 blocking scat back in to block when they didn't like their route anyway is respecting the blitz? I beg to differ. Oh yeah, we want balance between deep and short passing and inside and outside running but let's not have any drives derailed by turnovers because those are RNG. God forbid we allow the creation of defensive dots who can make an impact. Let's just encourage defensive dots that are good at swatting passes and politely dragging offensive players down to the ground. No, fuck that, that is not football.

Originally posted by chronoaug
I just worry people are trying to create an awful hybrid of s26 and s17 (or 18?) sims where offense is unstoppable with the exception of random INT/Fumbles that are often returned for TDs and then with a special teams where every time is either a TD or a fumble. There is no point to even trying to gameplan with the exception of guessing if the team is blitzing to hold all your blockers in but risk throwing into a cover 9 for a guaranteed INT or get sacked immediately and fumble the ball.

I don't think anyone wants random defensive plays. I think most of us want builds to matter on both sides of the ball. Players built to throw the ball well should do so but occasionally fumble when hit by dots that are built to force fumbles and occasionally get picked off by dots that are built to get INTs. HBs should be able to make lower agility/vision defenders miss if they are elusive and run over weaker defenders if they are a powerback , even catch passes with consistency when they are built for that role. Pass rushing specialists who don't invest in the attributes and AEQ to force fumbles should do so rarely, coverage CBs should make poor blitzers, etc. But defensive dots built to create turnovers should be viable in that role. Deficient in other areas sure, but able to make highlight style plays against dots who aren't built to minimize those plays. Applies to every area of the game tbh.

Originally posted by merenoise
I don't think anyone wants random defensive plays. I think most of us want builds to matter on both sides of the ball. Players built to throw the ball well should do so but occasionally fumble when hit by dots that are built to force fumbles and occasionally get picked off by dots that are built to get INTs. HBs should be able to make lower agility/vision defenders miss if they are elusive and run over weaker defenders if they are a powerback , even catch passes with consistency when they are built for that role. Pass rushing specialists who don't invest in the attributes and AEQ to force fumbles should do so rarely, coverage CBs should make poor blitzers, etc. But defensive dots built to create turnovers should be viable in that role. Deficient in other areas sure, but able to make highlight style plays against dots who aren't built to minimize those plays. Applies to every area of the game tbh.

Well said mere. The fewer the types of builds that can matter, the worse this game will be.

Originally posted by TrevJo
If you think turnovers and randomness are bad then I do not care what you'd rather have worked on. (As if it's either/or, which it's not.)
I've got news for you: Random things happen in football games. David Tyree. Miracle in the Meadowlands. Sea of Hands. Marshall's Wrong Way Run. The Immaculate Deception (it pains me to include that one). The Fumble (Byner). Holy Roller. Romo's mishandled PAT. Freeman's shoulderblade catch. Red Right 88. A sim that is predictable is boring. See season 28..

Random fumble or INT happen? Cool. Thats fun.

Random INT happens because QB throws some awkward bad pass 20 yards in the wrong direction resulting in a pick 6? FU GLB. I just got morale spiraled.

I like RNG, just not when you put in a gameplan that you worked hard on only to watch a shit ton of RNG decide the game making whatever you did not matter at all.

Originally posted by bhall43
Random fumble or INT happen? Cool. Thats fun.

Random INT happens because QB throws some awkward bad pass 20 yards in the wrong direction resulting in a pick 6? FU GLB. I just got morale spiraled.

I like RNG, just not when you put in a gameplan that you worked hard on only to watch a shit ton of RNG decide the game making whatever you did not matter at all.

This is true...
It should fall on the cords and the build to determine the outcome of any play.. The word Random is scary..

Originally posted by bhall43
Random fumble or INT happen? Cool. Thats fun.

Random INT happens because QB throws some awkward bad pass 20 yards in the wrong direction resulting in a pick 6? FU GLB. I just got morale spiraled.

I like RNG, just not when you put in a gameplan that you worked hard on only to watch a shit ton of RNG decide the game making whatever you did not matter at all.

Pretty much this.

Plus, once turnover builds become even sort of effective, then the only acceptable build is a pure INT CB and FFum LBs/Dline and maybe SS. Once people find a gimmick blitz that works slightly more than others, people spam it into oblivion where the Oline/blockers probably don't mean much. Once there is an outside run or screen that works well it's going to be put in the spam roulette with 50yd lead pass, pitch/screen to avoid blitz and then we just see who wins in the big play showdown.

I do believe in things snowballing really fast because it has always been how GLB works. Find one thing that is sorta effective and that's all you every team build and spam with playcalls and blitzes. If we're going to talk about changes, this always has to be taken into account.

If we're still struggling on OL/DL interaction and not allowing triple covered catches just because a WR ended his route and is waddling around, i just want to get some of those things fixed and see how the sim behaves. I liked some of the initial s29 changes and could make for an interesting sim. I don't want to start toying with overpowered turnovers quite yet since bort didn't previously start working on it. I'd rather him take his time with something like that for s30

Here's one play that summarizes a lot of what is wrong with the GLB passing game, and running game as well. Here is a 1st & 10 play, where the D is playing 9 of the 11 players within 3 yards of the LOS & the deepest defender 7 yards off the ball. Both safeties are outside the tackles and 3 yards off the LOS. You can't run wide against the D & maybe you'll get 2.5 yards up the middle. The CB covering the TE is also tight.

At the snap of the ball, the TE (156 speed) blows by the CB by nearly 5 yards while the SS on that side doubles the WR2. The QB reads the TE on his second read (TE still ahs the CB beat by 5 yards), throws the ball, but of course it's short and both he CB & SS are all over the TE by the time the ball gets there...

http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=2057425&pbp_id=10633777

In real life, 75% of the time the QB hits the TE & he's gone for a TD. In GLB it's more like 5% of the time & Only when there is a bad pass.

My point is, with the way throwing & coverage works, there's no need or incentive to keep the safeties back. IMO a lot could be gained in this game by giving DCs incentive to keep safeties deep. Like 1) having QBs lead better so if the WR / TE does get a step or 2 the CB is burnt 2) giving the safeties a big pass deflection bonus if they are in a deep zone & arrive at the WR by the time the ball gets there.

This would also help out the outside run game a lot. DCs would still be able to shut down the outside runs by running a D like the one in this play, but they'd be taking a serious risk in coverage. If they moved the S's back into a cover 2, the run D would suffer and so on...

inb4tl;dr

Originally posted by SeattleNiner
Here's one play that summarizes a lot of what is wrong with the GLB passing game, and running game as well. Here is a 1st & 10 play, where the D is playing 9 of the 11 players within 3 yards of the LOS & the deepest defender 7 yards off the ball. Both safeties are outside the tackles and 3 yards off the LOS. You can't run wide against the D & maybe you'll get 2.5 yards up the middle. The CB covering the TE is also tight.

At the snap of the ball, the TE (156 speed) blows by the CB by nearly 5 yards while the SS on that side doubles the WR2. The QB reads the TE on his second read (TE still ahs the CB beat by 5 yards), throws the ball, but of course it's short and both he CB & SS are all over the TE by the time the ball gets there...

http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=2057425&pbp_id=10633777

In real life, 75% of the time the QB hits the TE & he's gone for a TD. In GLB it's more like 5% of the time & Only when there is a bad pass.

My point is, with the way throwing & coverage works, there's no need or incentive to keep the safeties back. IMO a lot could be gained in this game by giving DCs incentive to keep safeties deep. Like 1) having QBs lead better so if the WR / TE does get a step or 2 the CB is burnt 2) giving the safeties a big pass deflection bonus if they are in a deep zone & arrive at the WR by the time the ball gets there.

This would also help out the outside run game a lot. DCs would still be able to shut down the outside runs by running a D like the one in this play, but they'd be taking a serious risk in coverage. If they moved the S's back into a cover 2, the run D would suffer and so on...

inb4tl;dr

private

Originally posted by SeattleNiner
Here's one play that summarizes a lot of what is wrong with the GLB passing game, and running game as well. Here is a 1st & 10 play, where the D is playing 9 of the 11 players within 3 yards of the LOS & the deepest defender 7 yards off the ball. Both safeties are outside the tackles and 3 yards off the LOS. You can't run wide against the D & maybe you'll get 2.5 yards up the middle. The CB covering the TE is also tight.

At the snap of the ball, the TE (156 speed) blows by the CB by nearly 5 yards while the SS on that side doubles the WR2. The QB reads the TE on his second read (TE still ahs the CB beat by 5 yards), throws the ball, but of course it's short and both he CB & SS are all over the TE by the time the ball gets there...

http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=2057425&pbp_id=10633777

In real life, 75% of the time the QB hits the TE & he's gone for a TD. In GLB it's more like 5% of the time & Only when there is a bad pass.

My point is, with the way throwing & coverage works, there's no need or incentive to keep the safeties back. IMO a lot could be gained in this game by giving DCs incentive to keep safeties deep. Like 1) having QBs lead better so if the WR / TE does get a step or 2 the CB is burnt 2) giving the safeties a big pass deflection bonus if they are in a deep zone & arrive at the WR by the time the ball gets there.

This would also help out the outside run game a lot. DCs would still be able to shut down the outside runs by running a D like the one in this play, but they'd be taking a serious risk in coverage. If they moved the S's back into a cover 2, the run D would suffer and so on...

inb4tl;dr

That's a TD with the changes being tested. Assuming your QB checks off.

Updated OP with additional feedback and Bort updates to the test server.

not sure this will get seen by any/all of the testers, but just wanna jump in here and say thanks for your hard work

For outside running test....
http://test.goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=5528&pbp_id=145386
http://test.goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=5528&pbp_id=145384
http://test.goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=5581&pbp_id=156491
http://test.goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=5581&pbp_id=156487
I saw WR just try "Hard Block" and fall down, CB go to tackle ball carrier.
Will these shit "Hard Block" be fixed?
It's like every time WR do this they never success.
I would rather they don't do that.

http://test.goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=5528&pbp_id=145398
And even this play runner make 9.5 yds gain, it's still a huge problem in FB path.
What make FB turn back to block RDE when there already are LG and LT?
Further more, FB then run to the middle, totally opposite where ball carrier go to.

Originally posted by aaasahi
http://test.goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=5528&pbp_id=145398
And even this play runner make 9.5 yds gain, it's still a huge problem in FB path.
What make FB turn back to block RDE when there already are LG and LT?
Further more, FB then run to the middle, totally opposite where ball carrier go to.

Agree.....the FB needs to lead block....not block the first person he sees. If the DE makes the tackle than the OT failed his job. I hate seeing the FB block a player that is already being blocked while a defender comes in from the outside and shuts down the pitch for a loss because there was no FB to "lead block".