Warrior General Games

beating a dead horse here, I know, but this is ridiculous if you can't control dots in coverage

http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=2310952&pbp_id=4085099
SS is set to cover zone shallow in a deep strong half. instead he backs up 15 yards deep from the deepest receiver (who happens to wander into the zone he SHOULD be in and catch an easy 1v1 pass). vision on that SS is 90+

zone coverage still working as intended?

I'm not saying zone coverage is good, but there looks to be something more than poor zone coding going on there...

Originally posted by zero
beating a dead horse here, I know, but this is ridiculous if you can't control dots in coverage

http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=2310952&pbp_id=4085099
SS is set to cover zone shallow in a deep strong half. instead he backs up 15 yards deep from the deepest receiver (who happens to wander into the zone he SHOULD be in and catch an easy 1v1 pass). vision on that SS is 90+

zone coverage still working as intended?

The problem is how you set up the D. The SS is never close enough to see any receiver enter the zone so he does the default action. You could ask the default actions be changed, but then next time a crossing receiver passes behind him for a long TD, I'm sure you would be very unhappy.

Originally posted by Dr. E
The problem is how you set up the D. The SS is never close enough to see any receiver enter the zone so he does the default action. You could ask the default actions be changed, but then next time a crossing receiver passes behind him for a long TD, I'm sure you would be very unhappy.

interesting explanation, yet idiotic in terms of logic if that's actually the way GLB is coded. especially when backpedaling towards the stands, he should see a crossing receiver pass into his supposed zone 15 yards in front of him.....

Originally posted by zero
interesting explanation, yet idiotic in terms of logic if that's actually the way GLB is coded. especially when backpedaling towards the stands, he should see a crossing receiver pass into his supposed zone 15 yards in front of him.....

If that was the case, why would anyone ever train vision or use skill points on it?

Oh yea, watch the NFL, you will see the safety, when assigned deep, doesn't bite up short. Well, those that do don't stay around very long.

90+ vision is what should make him able to see a crossing WR. what are you even talking about

and safeties in the NFL don't wander downfield and take themselves out of plays. poor comparison

Originally posted by zero
90+ vision is what should make him able to see a crossing WR. what are you even talking about

and safeties in the NFL don't wander downfield and take themselves out of plays. poor comparison


sure they do, it's common to see one who is apparently doing nothing down field, it is of course just a perception, he is really on an assignment to keep anyone from slipping down deep.

So what exactly is the suggestion here?

to have zone reaction based off of shallow / medium / deep?

or what?

Zone reaction should be based off of shallow / medium / deep. maybe DCs should have the ability to set the reaction.

Originally posted by Chysil
So what exactly is the suggestion here?

to have zone reaction based off of shallow / medium / deep?

or what?

the suggestion is that a dot set to shallow in a deep zone should not backpedal all the way down the field and leave his zone uncovered for useless reasons (re: because he didn't initially see a receiver)

we're talking INTEGRITY here. all I want is for dots to do what they are told. if a dot set to shallow doesn't cover shallow, then I'm led to believe something is wrong with the coding and it is rendering my human inputs useless. I don't care if the dot didn't see a receiver - I want the dot to cover what I tell it to. this game doesn't have to be perfectly realistic to actual, human football. in fact it is far from it. it is math and coding and should reflect the intentions of the coordinator. do any DCs in GLB care to have their safeties 15 yards downfield from any receivers for "safety reasons"? don't think so. it isn't necessary in GLB