Warrior General Games

D line was to powerful. Now O line is to powerful. Can we get a compromise where both sides have an equal shot and the game is decided on which build is better.




please

maybe we should suggest that measurable stats aren't the basis for either sides?

the OL/DL line interaction should, most time, be about a pushing match. There should, a small % of the time, be a pancake, or rev-cake. No 300+ either way for a season though.

Does anyone want to get a good sense of whether they're working or not working?

The median yards per rush in the WL is 3.3: http://goallineblitz.com/game/team_stats.pl?league_id=280&conference_id=0&stat=rushing&sort=rushing_yards/carries&playoffs=0 , whereas in last year's NFL it was 4.2: http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=2&season=2011&seasonType=REG&role=TM&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-p=1&statisticCategory=RUSHING&conference=ALL&d-447263-s=RUSHING_AVERAGE_YARDS .

However, that doesn't mean that rushing is actually underpowered, because GLB subtracts sack losses from rushing yards and the NFL doesn't. Someone less lazy than me could, if they wanted to, figure out how much the teams in the middle of the GLB yards per rush attempt distribution are getting after sacks are taken out and figure where it stands in comparison to real life. My guess is they'll find it near to, or slightly lower than, the NFL average-- which would mean the offenses aren't getting an unrealistic advantage, but a pretty realistic one.

That has yet to be proven though, and it's even a little early on the WL stats as they've only played 2 games each.

Originally posted by Ken1
Does anyone want to get a good sense of whether they're working or not working?

The median yards per rush in the WL is 3.3: http://goallineblitz.com/game/team_stats.pl?league_id=280&conference_id=0&stat=rushing&sort=rushing_yards/carries&playoffs=0 , whereas in last year's NFL it was 4.2: http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=2&season=2011&seasonType=REG&role=TM&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-p=1&statisticCategory=RUSHING&conference=ALL&d-447263-s=RUSHING_AVERAGE_YARDS .

However, that doesn't mean that rushing is actually underpowered, because GLB subtracts sack losses from rushing yards and the NFL doesn't. Someone less lazy than me could, if they wanted to, figure out how much the teams in the middle of the GLB yards per rush attempt distribution are getting after sacks are taken out and figure where it stands in comparison to real life. My guess is they'll find it near to, or slightly lower than, the NFL average-- which would mean the offenses aren't getting an unrealistic advantage, but a pretty realistic one.

That has yet to be proven though, and it's even a little early on the WL stats as they've only played 2 games each.






still comparing a browser based game to real life human beings(NFL) playing football

Originally posted by ron2288


still comparing a browser based game to real life human beings(NFL) playing football



In some ways, it's doing better and better at simulating it. You act like it's impossible to get similar results, but it's not. Our frame of reference is the NFL and NCAA football, and people should be able to try out players and tactics they'd like to see, and get similar results. Compared to early on, the game has made great strides toward achieving that, although of course it will never be perfect.

Originally posted by Ken1
In some ways, it's doing better and better at simulating it. You act like it's impossible to get similar results, but it's not. Our frame of reference is the NFL and NCAA football, and people should be able to try out players and tactics they'd like to see, and get similar results. Compared to early on, the game has made great strides toward achieving that, although of course it will never be perfect.

The problem with your theory is in the NFL they can audible. In GLB we can not. So we have an avg of 3.3 yards and whats worse is even if I commit to stopping the run the O can avg 3 yards per carry. The Defense has no chance of stopping it right now. So as on OC I don't have to pass. 3 x 4 = 12 = first down with 2 yards to give. back to S8

Originally posted by Ken1
In some ways, it's doing better and better at simulating it. You act like it's impossible to get similar results, but it's not. Our frame of reference is the NFL and NCAA football, and people should be able to try out players and tactics they'd like to see, and get similar results. Compared to early on, the game has made great strides toward achieving that, although of course it will never be perfect.

look stat boy you miss the simple point

You are comparing dots that are programed to do as they are programed to do to acutal thinking human beings..(be it the NFL/NCAA/Or what the fuck ever)

again

comparing programed dots to human beings...

Originally posted by bedgood42
The problem with your theory is in the NFL they can audible. In GLB we can not. So we have an avg of 3.3 yards and whats worse is even if I commit to stopping the run the O can avg 3 yards per carry. The Defense has no chance of stopping it right now. So as on OC I don't have to pass. 3 x 4 = 12 = first down with 2 yards to give. back to S8

It is definitely higher than 3.3. Sack yardage is being subtracted, and the difference that makes is not insignificant.

But I doubt that even if you got the sack yardage out of there, it would be higher than 4.2, which means that overall it's a balance.

If you're saying there's not enough variance in there, which is what I think you might be saying, that might be a different issue; but from what I've seen this season I think there are definitely losses and 2 yard gains and the stuff that is needed to have a chance at a stop. We aren't seeing ridiculously high scores overall in well-matched games, so I don't think there's much of a problem.

I would certainly say that if the O-line got nerfed, something else would have to be buffed, like broken tackles and fakes, to create the same average with greater variance, or we'd end up with a sim where it was unrealistically hard to move the ball.

The audible point, I guess I should address. The short answer is: It works both ways.

Originally posted by ron2288
comparing programed dots to human beings...

Comparing dots programmed to simulate human beings to human beings. When the results are similar, we know that they're programmed well.

Originally posted by Ken1
Comparing dots programmed to simulate human beings to human beings. When the results are similar, we know that they're programmed well.

I could explain this to you, but as short minded as you are and how you can not grasp a simple concept there is not enough room on the servers for that type of post

Originally posted by Ken1


I would certainly say that if the O-line got nerfed, something else would have to be buffed, like broken tackles and fakes, to create the same average with greater variance, or we'd end up with a sim where it was unrealistically hard to move the ball.




I don't think the answer is nerfing O line. The recent buffs to O line seemed to work for them. They were just pushed a little to far. I think D line needs a small buff in the way of being able to actually break a block and make a play occasionally. Looks at the stat lines for PRO DTs. They literally are doing nothing.

In this game a well biult DTs should probably be able to avg 2-3 tackles for loss just on beating his O lineman 3 out of the 40 run plays in the entire game. Also 1 sack every other game would probably be about right.for a well built DT. 1 sack per season is pretty ridiculous.

Originally posted by ron2288


still comparing a browser based game to real life human beings(NFL) playing football



You do realize that the browser based game is supposed to be a computer simulation of real life human beings playing football, right?

Originally posted by ron2288
look stat boy you miss the simple point

You are comparing dots that are programed to do as they are programed to do to acutal thinking human beings..(be it the NFL/NCAA/Or what the fuck ever)

again

comparing programed dots to human beings...

Thinking?

Have you peaked under those helmets lately?

The Linemen do not seem like great thinkers to me.