Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Dolphanatic
Yeah keep that in mind, all you aspiring World Leaguers... That one team that you're probably not on won't be interested your dot if it's not built to their formula.



For everyone else, try what you want. It's your dot and your money, and you'll probably get bored with the dot before the year and a half it takes to grow up is over... Either that or the team you're on will fall apart anyway.


Thanks for all the help auto correct.




all true - but if you build a WL quality dot, you'll enjoy how well they perform at all levels, like our cover CB here

https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/player.pl?player_id=4735188&playoffs=0

Settle down ladies. Debunch thy panties. I said ' I would '. I don't think anyone knows how many more INTs are available with that approach, let alone what the trade-off in missed tackles would be.

IMHO, to me building completely for only the INT's (talkin CB's) isn't horrible... but you wouldn't want more than one or two at best on the team. INT CB's, to be worth it, must spend both time (training) and $ (SP's) on Catching which takes away from Tackling and Strength... without which, top level PHB's gonna hand you your lunch even IF you have 2 MT% pieces, DvG, and everything else you can think of... which you likely won't because it's all about the INT for those SA's, VA's, and all EQ.
I prefer to build 'Deflect' CB's instead where you can ignore Catching and still end up with a dot that shuts down receivers... and makes tackles. But that's my style and not everyone elses'.

Originally posted by Theo Wizzago
IMHO, to me building completely for only the INT's (talkin CB's) isn't horrible... but you wouldn't want more than one or two at best on the team. INT CB's, to be worth it, must spend both time (training) and $ (SP's) on Catching which takes away from Tackling and Strength... without which, top level PHB's gonna hand you your lunch even IF you have 2 MT% pieces, DvG, and everything else you can think of... which you likely won't because it's all about the INT for those SA's, VA's, and all EQ.
I prefer to build 'Deflect' CB's instead where you can ignore Catching and still end up with a dot that shuts down receivers... and makes tackles. But that's my style and not everyone elses'.

the CB I referenced made 40 tackles and missed 3 in WL in his first plateau season along with 8 interceptions - you can accomplish both

Originally posted by reddogrw
the CB I referenced made 40 tackles and missed 3 in WL in his first plateau season along with 8 interceptions - you can accomplish both

Just asking but were those 40 tackles mostly against PHB's? I get it though... there are those out there that are better at building INT CB's than me, for sure. I just found it easier to go for the Deflect instead.

Originally posted by Theo Wizzago
Just asking but were those 40 tackles mostly against PHB's? I get it though... there are those out there that are better at building INT CB's than me, for sure. I just found it easier to go for the Deflect instead.


easier? yes. useful? not really.

Intercept it, knock it loose or gtfoh

Even good deflect CBs allow way too many catches. You need the INT guys to put the fear in the passing game.

Originally posted by reddogrw
all true - but if you build a WL quality dot, you'll enjoy how well they perform at all levels, like our cover CB here

https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/player.pl?player_id=4735188&playoffs=0


so i'm still toying with this idea.... I'll study this guy in depth.

Right off the top, he was targeted 69 times, he had 7 PDs 8 INTs and 37 allowed... I want to find out what happened to the other 17 passes.

This could take a while



1- https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=3008516&pbp_id=303211
2- https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=3008521&pbp_id=361547
3 - https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=3008527&pbp_id=423754 ##
4- https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=3008527&pbp_id=423766
5- https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=3008534&pbp_id=485620 ##
6- https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=3008534&pbp_id=485735 ##
7- https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=3008534&pbp_id=486426
8- https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=3008534&pbp_id=486949 ##

so about half way, and it looks like half of all of the "missing" targets had a theoretical chance of being caught after the WR missed. going to keep going

9- https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=3008534&pbp_id=487032
10- https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=3008538&pbp_id=543052 ##
11- https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=3008562&pbp_id=778336
12- https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=3008568&pbp_id=834159
13- https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=3008568&pbp_id=834260 ##
14- https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=3008568&pbp_id=834310 ##
15- https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=3008581&pbp_id=949948
16- https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=3008581&pbp_id=949959

found a hole in my method... https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=3008587&pbp_id=1008169 credited with a INT without being targeted, i wasn't accounting for plays like that in the other games.. hopefully the math will work out...

17- https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=3008600&pbp_id=1116919
18- https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=3008600&pbp_id=1118282 ## yeah, this is broken... but only 1

===

So I'm cool with saying a third to a half of targets that are "missing" could be intercepted IN THEORY if the CB had invested in Catch% and catch SAs

so now the question becomes, how many tackles were as a result of that MT% gear? there's no way to answer that. What if you double the miss tackles? what if half of those potential catch INTs were actually turned into INTs? Is maybe an extra 3 or 4 INTs per season, worth 3 or 4 more missed tackles?

wow, that was almost 2 hours of my life...

Originally posted by Theo Wizzago
IMHO, to me building completely for only the INT's (talkin CB's) isn't horrible... but you wouldn't want more than one or two at best on the team. INT CB's, to be worth it, must spend both time (training) and $ (SP's) on Catching which takes away from Tackling and Strength... without which, top level PHB's gonna hand you your lunch even IF you have 2 MT% pieces, DvG, and everything else you can think of... which you likely won't because it's all about the INT for those SA's, VA's, and all EQ.
I prefer to build 'Deflect' CB's instead where you can ignore Catching and still end up with a dot that shuts down receivers... and makes tackles. But that's my style and not everyone elses'.

No offense but if you're asking your Cover CB to consistently tackle the teams pHB there might be a problem with your AI not the dots... I hear you on the deflect ball DB, I try to build balanced FS's now, when I used to sell out to the INT... your call though, we all build differently and that's what makes the game fun, if it was just one build strat we'd all be bored.

Without quoting TJ's post, what he's trying to show is one of my pet peeves about the game. I cannot even BEGIN to tell you how many times I've seen stupid stats on players when it comes to 'receptions allowed/passed defended' # of targets and INTS. There is absolutely no consistency in it at all. I've seen games where dots got 10 passes 'defended'... but only 3 targets. Other times where a dot shows 10 receptions allowed and only 3 targets. I've seen a dot make 3 INTS but get absolutely NO credit for a pass defended... even if he STOLE the damn pass right out of the receiver's hands. So when people tell me their dot leads the league with 'passes defended'... or gripe about a dot allowing so many 'receptions'... or claim the stats show one build is a better idea than another... I always say go back and watch (exactly as TJ did) each and every replay where such things happened (or didn't happen) and you'll end up with a totally different idea about what you think is 'great'. I know it's changed the way I see builds and even how to do tactic settings so you get better results with the dots you have (yours or someone elses' if you're the coach). Ok... rant over.

Originally posted by slashxtreme
No offense but if you're asking your Cover CB to consistently tackle the teams pHB there might be a problem with your AI not the dots... I hear you on the deflect ball DB, I try to build balanced FS's now, when I used to sell out to the INT... your call though, we all build differently and that's what makes the game fun, if it was just one build strategy we'd all be bored.

Yeah, that's why I said it's my style and not everyone else's. I could fill pages about all I've seen doing scouting way back in the day. Wish it was easy to explain how it changed everything for me. I went from being a highly mediocre dot builder that got offers from desperate teams to building dots that work, work well, and actually get offers from GOOD teams... even WL teams. All the stumbling I did for many seasons... toiling in Peewee to learn the game... all worth it. I know I can be OCD about things... and this game has really pushed my buttons for some time. It's why I'm still here, still questioning answers... and answering questions... and never saying that MY way is the best way... just sharing what I know and let people do what I did... gather knowledge and make better dots.

As for asking CB to make tackles on PHB's, I can tell you that today's PHB's run outside the box... and CB's play up on the line... and it happens more than you think. But, TBH, it's much better if you can get your LB's to make those tackles.

Had a thought. If anyone wants to know just how psycho I use to be about this crazy game, find JDBolick and ask him about me. Prepare for an onslaught of cursewords and everything else because I pestered that poor fella ta death with questions. Much of what I can do today I owe to him for being patient (as he was forced to be) with me (in the end) and sharing his views and thoughts and reasons and knowledge. Miss that ol' ornery bugger.

The same thing can happen the other way around too. Here the HB puts it on a plate for the LB. For a basically-rookie dot, that's still a pretty nice play by the LB imo to make the sprawling falling catch
https://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=3013071&pbp_id=57940

I've noticed also, sometimes the receiver does not cleanly make the catch and it bobbles around or maybe just moves a little and gives the other player a chance to deflect it or even catch it away. Sometimes the receiver will end up dropping the ball after all that but other times they will make the catch if it is not broken up first. You see that especially in the lower levels where the catching attribute is so bad it usually takes the WRs all day to haul in the catch and by then a DB has closed in and deflects the ball away, in a situation where had the WR made the initial catch the DB would have had no chance for the deflection.