Warrior General Games

Because of limitations in the current pathing that makes blitzers run into blockers in the middle of the line rather than meeting rushers who are moving to a gap elsewhere or going outside.

New DAI setting, Containment which is meant to Hold The Line.

In addition to Blitz and coverage, Containent would be an option where the defender would rush to the line directly to his front with the intent being to stop a runner from gaining yardage.

Once the Defender detects a runner, it also controls his pursuit path such that rather than directly rushing into the player the defender estimates where the runner will cross the line of scrimmage and try to beat him to that location to stop him from gaining yardage.

The plus is the defender sticks to his lane on D and once a runner is detected he avoids blockers.

The negative is that the defender is unlikely to get a tackle for a loss unless he beats the runner to the LOS, at which point his pursuit logic turns to normal tackler pursuit.

what would this defender do if set to "containment" if there was not a run play called? Stand there and do nothing like a defender set to QB spy?

Would it limit his starting position like LB's set to blitz?

Would it be a first and only defensive assignment, or could he be set to (for example) cover man w/out move HB Strong -or- contain . ?

Originally posted by Bane
what would this defender do if set to "containment" if there was not a run play called? Stand there and do nothing like a defender set to QB spy?

Would it limit his starting position like LB's set to blitz?

Would it be a first and only defensive assignment, or could he be set to (for example) cover man w/out move HB Strong -or- contain . ?

Open to debate and discussion I would say. But yes, I was thinking of it as being along the lines of a combination of Spy and Blitz. So yes it would make sense to have the same limitations of those two choices.

That said, it would hardly be mandatory to the concept. It could be that if a vision check says its not a run play that he could move to a secondary. But given the state of the sim where the dot always moves to his secondary for a second or two before seeing the run, that would defeat the purpose IMO. But you could have the choice I suppose.

As to positioning, it would probably be deemed to need that for the same reason Blitzes were confined to it, to avoid exploits that the O pathing could not handle.

The notion is to fill the gaps in the line, rather than having everyone try to dog pile on the QB or the HB at the point of the snap and being dogged by a counter or an evasive route running choice, and to have an inside defender not dive into the OT or TE at the start of a sweep but instead move parallel to the line of scrimmage so that he can actually get a shot at the runner though at the cost of missing out on a possible TFL earlier in the play if no blocker was there or could have been beaten.

Originally posted by yello1
Open to debate and discussion I would say. But yes, I was thinking of it as being along the lines of a combination of Spy and Blitz. So yes it would make sense to have the same limitations of those two choices.



well Spy setting does not allow anything else but Spy as an assignment. So you suggesting that a defender just acts like a Spy...but for a certain spot and not actually watching for a specific player?

Maybe instead of what you are suggesting, change the Spy setting to allow different position to be
'spied"

like instead of automatically being set to QB Spy, allow a HB Spy or a FB Spy ? actually that wouldn't be much different than what happens now , which is :
Originally posted by yello1
having everyone try to dog pile on the QB or the HB at the point of the snap
so that isn't good either.

I know where you are coming from , and I am all about the D working better. Just trying to figure out how to make it be effective and at the same time not OP'd or an exploit.

-1

Originally posted by Bane
so that isn't good either.

I know where you are coming from , and I am all about the D working better. Just trying to figure out how to make it be effective and at the same time not OP'd or an exploit.



The way I am trying to make it work is two fold.

One - Gap Protection. If I want the MLB to fill the gap between the DT and DE and park him there, I want him to move to the LOS there without being distracted by the handoff the second the HB touches the ball (which is odd, coverage guys will run to a secondary coverage or zone long after the snap, LBs pivot to the QB/HB the moment the snap begins it seems, both suck).

Two - Lateral Pursuit. Once a run is detected and its not coming to the cover gap, I want the LB or whoever to move laterally to meet the runner rather than trying to run through the offensive line.

These are things that I believe happen in football, but which generally do not happen in GLB unless your defender is set very far back of the LOS, which should not be required to do this.

Originally posted by merenoise
-1

I should make this my sig, so you can avoid having to post it all the time.

-1

Originally posted by yello1
Originally posted by merenoise

-1

I should make this my sig, so you can avoid having to post it all the time.

I learned a long time ago that actually explaining to you why your suggestion is bad does nothing but result in you defending it no matter how flawed and futile it might be. Much easier to just -1 so that you aren't needlessly bumping it and knocking other more well thought out suggestions off of the first page. If everyone followed my lead your terrible suggestions would die that much quicker.

Please prove me right with a long wall of text explaining why you disagree with my assessment.

Also, my user name is pretty close to your current signature already...

Originally posted by merenoise
I learned a long time ago that actually explaining to you why your suggestion is bad does nothing but result in you defending it no matter how flawed and futile it might be. Much easier to just -1 so that you aren't needlessly bumping it and knocking other more well thought out suggestions off of the first page. If everyone followed my lead your terrible suggestions would die that much quicker.

Please prove me right with a long wall of text explaining why you disagree with my assessment.

Also, my user name is pretty close to your current signature already...

Ohhh Mere Noise..lol.. I was always pronouncing it Meranoise.

Originally posted by merenoise


Also, my user name is pretty close to your current signature already...

best thing ive read all day

usually in reality the person for containment will blitz to a spot (usually it's a spot that varies based on his speed and starting position. It's the spot where even if the play is completely commited to that side, he will arrive to that spot ahead of the blockers / rusher and force the play inside). When he's getting near that spot, if the play is not in that direction, he can either cover that area, or continue the blitz (aka "follow the play")

I could see that as an option by simply adding the following:

contain zone weak
contain zone strong
contain blitz weak
contain blitz strong

where the zone would be roughly a flat zone on that side.

-1

-1

-1