Considering there are far better VAs for a corner it's safe to say it's a waste. Unless stat whoring and not helping your team is your main goal.
Forum > FAQ's, Player Guides and Newbie Help > Prime time player
I'll chuck my 2 centavos here... with each VA there's a set of parameters that determine WHEN it comes into effect and the VA's that fire more often are, IMO, generally better than those that only fire in very specific places/times. I mean... I liked using Red Zone Freak... and it does work... but ONLY when you dot is playing and the ball is in the red zone... which is... maybe... like 10% of the entire game... or even less? I'd rather have a VA that fires all game long than one that only works in a highly limited part of any game. I would put Prime Time Player in the 'limited' category... which is why I'd say it's not a worthy VA... IMO.
bhall43
offline
offline
Originally posted by Theo Wizzago
I'll chuck my 2 centavos here... with each VA there's a set of parameters that determine WHEN it comes into effect and the VA's that fire more often are, IMO, generally better than those that only fire in very specific places/times. I mean... I liked using Red Zone Freak... and it does work... but ONLY when you dot is playing and the ball is in the red zone... which is... maybe... like 10% of the entire game... or even less? I'd rather have a VA that fires all game long than one that only works in a highly limited part of any game. I would put Prime Time Player in the 'limited' category... which is why I'd say it's not a worthy VA... IMO.
The problem with RZF is that it is very hard to know when it is working or not. It isn't a VA that always fires. Just has a chance to. And it isn't easy to decipher that speed bump in the RZ.
I'll chuck my 2 centavos here... with each VA there's a set of parameters that determine WHEN it comes into effect and the VA's that fire more often are, IMO, generally better than those that only fire in very specific places/times. I mean... I liked using Red Zone Freak... and it does work... but ONLY when you dot is playing and the ball is in the red zone... which is... maybe... like 10% of the entire game... or even less? I'd rather have a VA that fires all game long than one that only works in a highly limited part of any game. I would put Prime Time Player in the 'limited' category... which is why I'd say it's not a worthy VA... IMO.
The problem with RZF is that it is very hard to know when it is working or not. It isn't a VA that always fires. Just has a chance to. And it isn't easy to decipher that speed bump in the RZ.
Originally posted by bhall43
The problem with RZF is that it is very hard to know when it is working or not. It isn't a VA that always fires. Just has a chance to. And it isn't easy to decipher that speed bump in the RZ.
Agree... there's nothing that showed in watching the plays that would indicate it working but the 2 CB's I had with it had 72% and 68% of all their INTS (after VA was installed) in the red zone... and, when I later swapped it out for a different VA (late in plateau) the percentages dropped to around 30ish for both. That's kinda how I knew it was doing SOMETHING at least. So many other things could also come into play but that was something I had in my stats that I noticed and could relate to and see.
(edit) Yeah... I know many other factors could explain this as well so I just had to shrug and say the effect was 'something' even if it was minimal.
The problem with RZF is that it is very hard to know when it is working or not. It isn't a VA that always fires. Just has a chance to. And it isn't easy to decipher that speed bump in the RZ.
Agree... there's nothing that showed in watching the plays that would indicate it working but the 2 CB's I had with it had 72% and 68% of all their INTS (after VA was installed) in the red zone... and, when I later swapped it out for a different VA (late in plateau) the percentages dropped to around 30ish for both. That's kinda how I knew it was doing SOMETHING at least. So many other things could also come into play but that was something I had in my stats that I noticed and could relate to and see.
(edit) Yeah... I know many other factors could explain this as well so I just had to shrug and say the effect was 'something' even if it was minimal.
Edited by Theo Wizzago on Mar 11, 2015 21:58:45
bhall43
offline
offline
Originally posted by Theo Wizzago
Agree... there's nothing that showed in watching the plays that would indicate it working but the 2 CB's I had with it had 72% and 68% of all their INTS (after VA was installed) in the red zone... and, when I later swapped it out for a different VA (late in plateau) the percentages dropped to around 30ish for both.
That is a pretty large % but I would then have to ask what total INT's we are talking about here and also when you say they happened in the RZ were they just interceptions in the RZ or interceptions in which the play itself started in the RZ?
Agree... there's nothing that showed in watching the plays that would indicate it working but the 2 CB's I had with it had 72% and 68% of all their INTS (after VA was installed) in the red zone... and, when I later swapped it out for a different VA (late in plateau) the percentages dropped to around 30ish for both.
That is a pretty large % but I would then have to ask what total INT's we are talking about here and also when you say they happened in the RZ were they just interceptions in the RZ or interceptions in which the play itself started in the RZ?
Originally posted by bhall43
That is a pretty large % but I would then have to ask what total INT's we are talking about here and also when you say they happened in the RZ were they just interceptions in the RZ or interceptions in which the play itself started in the RZ?
Eh... so so, really. I would love to have a MUCH larger sample than 2 CB's and the limited time they're in plateau. I DO think that might have skewed the numbers overmuch. If I was to hazard a guess to a more true number it'd be around 45% of the total INT's. So much to take into account... how often there was red zone chances, how often the CB was thrown at overall... ect, ect. I still think it works... I just think results will always vary just due to the nature of the game.
(edit) I still think this particular VA falls into that category of 'limited' as in it requires a small set of parameters for it to even be active in. I still prefer a VA that fires at all times (when it fires) of a game or, at least, as much of the game as possible (example Special Teamer... only works on ST's but is supposed to ALWAYS work on ST's so, for a ST build, it's an awesome VA.)
That is a pretty large % but I would then have to ask what total INT's we are talking about here and also when you say they happened in the RZ were they just interceptions in the RZ or interceptions in which the play itself started in the RZ?
Eh... so so, really. I would love to have a MUCH larger sample than 2 CB's and the limited time they're in plateau. I DO think that might have skewed the numbers overmuch. If I was to hazard a guess to a more true number it'd be around 45% of the total INT's. So much to take into account... how often there was red zone chances, how often the CB was thrown at overall... ect, ect. I still think it works... I just think results will always vary just due to the nature of the game.
(edit) I still think this particular VA falls into that category of 'limited' as in it requires a small set of parameters for it to even be active in. I still prefer a VA that fires at all times (when it fires) of a game or, at least, as much of the game as possible (example Special Teamer... only works on ST's but is supposed to ALWAYS work on ST's so, for a ST build, it's an awesome VA.)
Edited by Theo Wizzago on Mar 12, 2015 20:02:32
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
