Add this as a penalty based on advanced defensive player tactics such as man coverage distance, coverage type, and, of course, attribute checks (vision, confidence,e tc). The closer the CB/SS/FS/LB plays to the offensive player, the greater the chance to intercept the pass (assuming correct coverage type tendencies), but, also, the greater the chance for pass interference to be called. How pass interference isn't in this game is mind-boggling. It's one of the most commonly called penalties in the game of football. If your dot is playing closer to the defender, there ought to be some risk/reward for these settings.
Forum > Suggestions > Pass Interference
SG✬21
offline
offline
-1 until the pass game isn't so OP. Just adding this will only hurt defense's even more, right now its extremely easy to complete a pass on offense and if this was implemented then the offense would be able to move the ball even more efficiently.
drewd21
online
online
Originally posted by SG✬21
-1 until the pass game isn't so OP. Just adding this will only hurt defense's even more, right now its extremely easy to complete a pass on offense and if this was implemented then the offense would be able to move the ball even more efficiently.
Beat me to it
-1 until the pass game isn't so OP. Just adding this will only hurt defense's even more, right now its extremely easy to complete a pass on offense and if this was implemented then the offense would be able to move the ball even more efficiently.
Beat me to it
I get whatcher pitchin BDizzle... but GLB has a LONG way to go before we start putting more into it. Holding penalties are also lacking as are many others (penalties). Maybe someday when we can get blocking pathing much better and the out-of-this-world offenses back more in line with the defensive side of the game (or amp up the damn D!) then I'm against adding more junk into the yard. It's already a mess. -1
SG✬21
offline
offline
Originally posted by Theo Wizzago
I get whatcher pitchin BDizzle... but GLB has a LONG way to go before we start putting more into it. Holding penalties are also lacking as are many others (penalties). Maybe someday when we can get blocking pathing much better and the out-of-this-world offenses back more in line with the defensive side of the game (or amp up the damn D!) then I'm against adding more junk into the yard. It's already a mess. -1
exactly, just implementing this will add to the multitude of headaches DCs have each game
I get whatcher pitchin BDizzle... but GLB has a LONG way to go before we start putting more into it. Holding penalties are also lacking as are many others (penalties). Maybe someday when we can get blocking pathing much better and the out-of-this-world offenses back more in line with the defensive side of the game (or amp up the damn D!) then I'm against adding more junk into the yard. It's already a mess. -1
exactly, just implementing this will add to the multitude of headaches DCs have each game
Black Peter
offline
offline
Originally posted by BDizzle80
Add this as a penalty based on advanced defensive player tactics such as man coverage distance, coverage type, and, of course, attribute checks (vision, confidence,e tc). The closer the CB/SS/FS/LB plays to the offensive player, the greater the chance to intercept the pass (assuming correct coverage type tendencies), but, also, the greater the chance for pass interference to be called. How pass interference isn't in this game is mind-boggling. It's one of the most commonly called penalties in the game of football. If your dot is playing closer to the defender, there ought to be some risk/reward for these settings.
Oh yeah! Hell, the offense needs more of a boost that the insane advantage they already have!
-1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
Add this as a penalty based on advanced defensive player tactics such as man coverage distance, coverage type, and, of course, attribute checks (vision, confidence,e tc). The closer the CB/SS/FS/LB plays to the offensive player, the greater the chance to intercept the pass (assuming correct coverage type tendencies), but, also, the greater the chance for pass interference to be called. How pass interference isn't in this game is mind-boggling. It's one of the most commonly called penalties in the game of football. If your dot is playing closer to the defender, there ought to be some risk/reward for these settings.
Oh yeah! Hell, the offense needs more of a boost that the insane advantage they already have!
-1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
Originally posted by Toriq
Oh yeah! Hell, the offense needs more of a boost that the insane advantage they already have!
-1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
There would be no advantage to the offense if your defensive dot picked the pass off. It's a high risk, high reward suggestion.
Thanks, everyone else who sees that this might be an idea worthy to be added in the distant future.
Oh yeah! Hell, the offense needs more of a boost that the insane advantage they already have!
-1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000
There would be no advantage to the offense if your defensive dot picked the pass off. It's a high risk, high reward suggestion.
Thanks, everyone else who sees that this might be an idea worthy to be added in the distant future.
Originally posted by BDizzle80
Thanks, everyone else who sees that this might be an idea worthy to be added in the distant future.
NP. Not all ideas are bad... just the timing of them. I'd say this is one of those.
Thanks, everyone else who sees that this might be an idea worthy to be added in the distant future.
NP. Not all ideas are bad... just the timing of them. I'd say this is one of those.
weren't penalties declared "NGTH"? I wish we had them along with injuries however
SG✬21
offline
offline
Originally posted by dusk883
weren't penalties declared "NGTH"? I wish we had them along with injuries however
wtf injuries? your starting to creep up on yello status when posting in the suggestions forum.
Why anyone would pay the amount of money they do to build their player, to then watch them get injured is stupid.
weren't penalties declared "NGTH"? I wish we had them along with injuries however
wtf injuries? your starting to creep up on yello status when posting in the suggestions forum.
Why anyone would pay the amount of money they do to build their player, to then watch them get injured is stupid.
Originally posted by SG✬21
wtf injuries? your starting to creep up on yello status when posting in the suggestions forum.
Why anyone would pay the amount of money they do to build their player, to then watch them get injured is stupid.
What would eventually happen (and I would HATE THIS!!!) would be a new "skill" (or, perhaps, a SA or VA) would be added to put SP's into that countered injuries (if ever added... which I kinda hope they don't. I understand the 'realistic' point of view but agree with SG21 here that peeps who pay don't wanna do this). Anyone caught taking this idea and running with it shall be focred to run downstairs... at full speed... with scissors.
wtf injuries? your starting to creep up on yello status when posting in the suggestions forum.
Why anyone would pay the amount of money they do to build their player, to then watch them get injured is stupid.
What would eventually happen (and I would HATE THIS!!!) would be a new "skill" (or, perhaps, a SA or VA) would be added to put SP's into that countered injuries (if ever added... which I kinda hope they don't. I understand the 'realistic' point of view but agree with SG21 here that peeps who pay don't wanna do this). Anyone caught taking this idea and running with it shall be focred to run downstairs... at full speed... with scissors.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
