Warrior General Games

daily dose

QB! and QB2 like RB1 and RB2 on depth chart

Beautiful idea.

_scramblevector CheckForScramble(float vision, _playtype play, int scramblesetting, player* passrushers) {
case scramblesetting of
3: //this is scramble often
visioncheckresult == VisionCheck (vision, passrushers, preset_low_difficulty);
WRscheckresult == WRsOpenCheck(play);
closestrusherdistance == GetDistance(GetClosestPassRusher(passrushers));

if (visioncheckresult && !WRscheckresult && (closestrusherdistance < preset_safe_distance)) {
return GetSafeDirection(passrushers); //either WRs were open, the pass rushers were still not close enough or he didn't see them.
} else if (WRsOpenCheck(play) { return NULL }//Ideally this should be checked before ever checking for a scramble, so this is just a failsafe. This means the WRs are open. QB should pass.
} else if (!visioncheckresult) {
return [0,0] // stays put, didn't see the rushers. Brace for impact!!
} else return [0,0] // rushers are still far enough, no need for a scramble yet. Check next <preset number of ticks>

1: //this is scramble almost never
visioncheckresult == VisionCheck (vision, passrushers, preset_low_difficulty);
WRscheckresult == WRsOpenCheck(play);
closestrusherdistance == GetDistance(GetClosestPassRusher(passrushers));
RNGfactor = rndnumber(0.5);

if (visioncheckresult && !WRscheckresult && (closestrusherdistance < (preset_safe_distance * RNGfactor))) {
return GetSafeDirection(passrushers); //either WRs were open, the pass rushers were still not close enough or he didn't see them. Note the RNGfactor meaning that he will only scramble if he is closer than a number that goes between half the preset safe distance and 0.
} else if (WRsOpenCheck(play) { return NULL }//Ideally this should be checked before ever checking for a scramble, so this is just a failsafe. This means the WRs are open. QB should pass.
} else if (!visioncheckresult) {
return [0,0] // stays put, didn't see the rushers. Brace for impact!!
} else return [0,0] // rushers are still far enough, no need for a scramble yet. Check next <preset number of ticks>

/* scramble sometimes could be done in a way similar to almost never scramble, just with a different RNGfactor */
}


thanks bro

Originally posted by Houston Oilers


I agree

Bump for what should be priority #1.

Support.

Originally posted by Hagalaz
Not a high-priority suggestion, but something fun nonetheless.

I think this statement says it all.. It would be a great addition to the game and I think that it will come into existence.

Hopefully sooner rather than later, rite?

Originally posted by tjsexkitten82
Support.

Originally posted by Landrys Legacy
QB! and QB2 like RB1 and RB2 on depth chart

Lolexploits. But I'd have fun with it.

Well it seems my thread is still around. I wonder if something will be done 5 seasons after it was created...

....

Nah

Originally posted by Hagalaz
Well it seems my thread is still around. I wonder if something will be done 5 seasons after it was created...

....

Nah

):

There are teams, and we all know of them, that have one QB that does some passing, and another QB that does nothing but rush. That rushing QB is mostly responsible for leading their league in rushing yards and rushing TDs, season after season. Their HB/RB/TE/WRs hardly ever get in the game play. Personally a QB that never passes and ends up rushing for 100+ TDs in a season is a total exploit of what you are showing here. That really is total BS. There is hardly any defensive plays that will deal with that. If there is one main complaint from many non-'exploiting' teams, it is that - QBs that are not QBs but a running back. Totally unrealistic, but a staple here.

Scrambling is one thing, but controlling the games with just one running QB is the issue.

Just my personal gripe.

Originally posted by emmittrules
There are teams, and we all know of them, that have one QB that does some passing, and another QB that does nothing but rush. That rushing QB is mostly responsible for leading their league in rushing yards and rushing TDs, season after season. Their HB/RB/TE/WRs hardly ever get in the game play. Personally a QB that never passes and ends up rushing for 100+ TDs in a season is a total exploit of what you are showing here. That really is total BS. There is hardly any defensive plays that will deal with that. If there is one main complaint from many non-'exploiting' teams, it is that - QBs that are not QBs but a running back. Totally unrealistic, but a staple here.

Scrambling is one thing, but controlling the games with just one running QB is the issue.

Just my personal gripe.


Agree with you and we use a scrambler QB...... Would be better to see them move around behind the line of scrimmage more and run laterally to keep a play alive.... I always envisaged the scrambler more as the guy that dodges the pass rush and takes it outside the pocket, rolling to the sideline or something so a LB/Safety has to come up then he throws it to the open man....

Having a QB1 / QB2 will just lead to exploits as noted with one of the guys just coming in to run with the defence constricted by the Sim and not allowed to adjust accordingly.