Warrior General Games

Originally posted by yello1
+1

But WTHeck is with the fall down anyway? I can not recall ever seeing an interception in real football that caused the defender to fall down.

I would rather the second one be

"eliminate the fall down silliness. Take It To The House allows an defender to have a chance of a boost of speed upon making an interception. Each additional level increases the chance of the VA triggering and the amount of the boost to speed and agility." - basically a First Step that triggers only on interceptions.

are you dumb? Ed Reed in the playoffs this season fell down after a pick... polamalu has tons of diving interceptions, theres hundreds if INTs that result in a defender ending up on the ground.

do you even watch football?

Originally posted by Ken1
So basically, you'd like over 3 times as many pick sixes per interception as real life.

We keep telling you that people want their dots to do something. You don't listen and keep going on about realism. Why don't you first try building players all the way to the end game, have things get nerfed and watch them basically do nothing before you tell us how things should be.

+1

Originally posted by Greywolfmeb
Originally posted by Ken1

So basically, you'd like over 3 times as many pick sixes per interception as real life.

We keep telling you that people want their dots to do something. You don't listen and keep going on about realism. Why don't you first try building players all the way to the end game, have things get nerfed and watch them basically do nothing before you tell us how things should be.

Quality post.

3 times the amount of real life would be just fine with me, in a game where you pay to see your dots do something it is always nice when they, you know, do something...

+1 secondary needs alittle something.

+1

Originally posted by John Hinckley, Jr.
Quality post.

3 times the amount of real life would be just fine with me, in a game where you pay to see your dots do something it is always nice when they, you know, do something...

How about, you know, making an interception-- and still having a chance (as the current system certainly makes returns too hard) to run it back, even for an occasional TD, based on their build, at what is for the average build the realistic rate of close to, 10%?

If you're saying just seeing your dot get a pick isn't exciting, whether or not it's run back, I don't believe you though.

Has everyone been disinterested in forcing fumbles even though for umpteen seasons a non-trivial return of fumbles was next to impossible? A lot of force fumble dots were made in that time.

Originally posted by Ken1
How about, you know, making an interception-- and still having a chance (as the current system certainly makes returns too hard) to run it back, even for an occasional TD, based on their build, at what is for the average build the realistic rate of close to, 10%?

If you're saying just seeing your dot get a pick isn't exciting, whether or not it's run back, I don't believe you though.

Has everyone been disinterested in forcing fumbles even though for umpteen seasons a non-trivial return of fumbles was next to impossible? A lot of force fumble dots were made in that time.




Seriously keep this on topic and about the VAs suggested. Also STFU and GTFO we are tired of the same rhetoric

This is a suggestion that, if the sim stays the same, would be a good addition IMO.

+1

Naw...... we don't need to go back to 5 INTs a game TBH

Originally posted by dss02
Seriously keep this on topic and about the VAs suggested. Also STFU and GTFO we are tired of the same rhetoric

No. No one but an Admin can tell me to STFU or GTFO; and seeing I'm not breaking any rules, they won't.

And it was relevant to a post Hinckley made, so talk to him about going off topic.

I like the first half of the first one, where it fires when the receiver isn't there to contest the INT. The second one shouldn't be fixed with a VA, they need to fix it via code. Although I do like the idea of Never Give up increasing the rate the defender gets up after INTs and FRecoveries.

Originally posted by dss02
Originally posted by Ken1

How about, you know, making an interception-- and still having a chance (as the current system certainly makes returns too hard) to run it back, even for an occasional TD, based on their build, at what is for the average build the realistic rate of close to, 10%?

If you're saying just seeing your dot get a pick isn't exciting, whether or not it's run back, I don't believe you though.

Has everyone been disinterested in forcing fumbles even though for umpteen seasons a non-trivial return of fumbles was next to impossible? A lot of force fumble dots were made in that time.




Seriously keep this on topic and about the VAs suggested. Also STFU and GTFO we are tired of the same rhetoric

Don't worry about Ken1. He is a proven liar with no credibility. Pretty much everyone is tired of his schtick as evidenced by every thread he's posted in over the last couple of days. No one seems to agree with his completely crazy NFL fixation anyway. Pay no mind to him, no matter what you say, and no matter how much logic is involved he is going to try to derail threads in his whiny, shrill little way. Eventually he will realize what a pariah he has become (again) and leave the game (again).

Besides, every time he comes into the thread it adds one to the post count and that is never a bad thing for suggestions.

Originally posted by TehKyou
I like the first half of the first one, where it fires when the receiver isn't there to contest the INT. The second one shouldn't be fixed with a VA, they need to fix it via code. Although I do like the idea of Never Give up increasing the rate the defender gets up after INTs and FRecoveries.

I agree completely, but from what Catch has posted this season it seems like they are content with that very broken fix. At the least I'd like to see something to mitigate the colossal failure that the change to interceptions has been this season.

Originally posted by John Hinckley, Jr.
Don't worry about Ken1. He is a proven liar with no credibility.

That's how you've painted me with your stalking, when you're the one who's lied about me, and in many other cases distorted my views. You've done a really good job of trolling and stalking me, to the point that you've had a lot of success in dishonestly getting people to stop listening to me.

Mr. Hinckley is projecting.

Some people can disagree with me politely, but you certainly are not one of them.