This just looks awful, not sure what to say (helped my TE, but still awful).

http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=2057523&pbp_id=10539928

there is no way the pathing should be like this, is there? 24/38 ticks (from catch to tackle) spent running up field then having to come back to make the tackle?

Yeah that's odd, and it's a high level dot, built by a user that should build pretty well. I'd be interested to know the vision though.

My first thought was some sort of failed vision check too. May have delayed the transition from coverage to pursuit. Although knowing his vision would help, even the highest vision dots will fail checks occasionally. So we'll need additional, similar replays as well.

Originally posted by geekor
This just looks awful, not sure what to say (helped my TE, but still awful).

http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=2057523&pbp_id=10539928

there is no way the pathing should be like this, is there? 24/38 ticks (from catch to tackle) spent running up field then having to come back to make the tackle?

You see this all the time and I have reported and it is always ruled not a bug. It is the math Bort uses to determine intercept point. It is crazy and it is bullcrap.

It almost looks like the player is trying to contain/be the cover against the receiver. yes it happens a lot, not sure if it's intended to work that way. If i ever get a chance i'll try to pull up some examples.

not enough punting imo

Nothing new in over a month.

Thread moved by moderator.