I would add WR blocking to this list. It's very frustrating to watch my receiver run downfield without blocking the corner guarding him, or the safety further downfield, while my bubble screen or outside run gets blown up in the backfield.Originally Posted by baseballplyrmvp
wr's and te's lined up out wide dont have the assignment based blocking that o-linemen have. if they did, the blocking for bubble screens and outside run plays would be much better.
*Weight and Momentum Matter
*Improved Fatigue (Would love to have a team that swaps in and out but can't because fatigue never really happens)
*Receivers that fight for the ball
*Better Blocking
*Better CPU Offensive Play Calling
*Improved Human Reaction to Running QBs
*Better way of doing difficulty (No more make human controlled players slow and dumb and boosting cpu player abilities)
*Remove DBs reacting to balls they can't see (There is no way a DB chasing a wide open receiver will react to a ball thrown underneath)
*Better Special Teams Blocking
*Animations ALWAYS play out at the same speed (ABSOLUTELY does not happen in real life)
*CPU DB NEVER run with a WR if a run play is called. No matter how much they are getting torched thru the air.
*Remove "up to speed" animation the option player has to go through and have the acceleration stat dictate how fast it happens
*Different throwing animations for QB
*player tendencies
*CPU QB that run and look to throw
*A Improved read option system (To hand you push A, to run as QB you must push turbo, but this allows you to move the mesh to get a better read i.e. QB moving a couple steps with the RB)
*The ability to select a defensive play THEN select the DL action (i.e stunt, rush left, rush right or make this a pre-play adjustment)
*Remove any and every uninterruptible animation and replace with one that can be (i.e. Sideline catch, push out of bounds)
*Bring back High/Low Hit Stick
*Remove any and all forced movement
Last edited by blkkrptnt819; 11-01-2012 at 07:43 AM. Reason: Adding To
Do something with the read option. I am fine with the DE crashing sometimes, but they crash almost every time and if I have a OLB blitzing to that side he follows the DE most times causing a big play when I had it played perfectly. It is just way over exaggerated to get it to work and it is somewhat frustrating when 2 or 3 guys run right by the QB with the ball to get the HB.
Also, I wish they would go with what Madden has online when playing defense. You do not know who the other person is using on defense until the ball is snapped. Will help in covering up blitzes if I want to bring a corner or LB and they do not know who I am controlling.
Last edited by ryby6969; 10-19-2012 at 04:18 PM.
That's a good idea!!!
change the gameplanning feature from an every play accessibility to just a pregame and halftime adjustment, as well as making changes during timeouts. this makes it more of a risk with strategy, in that you're forced to live with your gameplanning until a quarter/half/timeout occurs.
additionally, way more options should be available; several for each position group could be created, as well as global changes to offense/defense, like what we have now.
If they made it a pregame/halftime adjustment (which I wouldn't mind), I think they'd have to completely overhaul the system (which I also wouldn't mind). The current system wouldn't work well as a half-long system.
Twitter: @3YardsandACloud
completely agree.
the positional group gameplanning would bring more of a philosophical approach to the game, rather than a play by play basis; and would also change how your players play accordingly.
ie: i would change the d-line aggressive/conservative approach to a speed rush vs bull rush vs contain vs balanced (gasp! more options). speed rushing would see your d-line rush straight up field and run around the tackles at the risk of opening up bigger running lanes inside and having a bigger pocket for the opposing qb. they'd also tend to favor finesse moves over power moves in line battles. bull rushing would have your d-line try to collapse the pocket by rushing in the direction of the qb, at the risk of allowing the outside run. they'd tend to favor power moves over finesse moves. containing, would feature your linemen locking up with an o-linemen, not really attempting to rush the qb. this would give the qb slightly more time to throw, but the linemen would also be slightly more successful in shedding their blocks (regarding scrambles and the run game). balanced would be a combination of all 3.
thats just a rough example of one position group, and what it could be like. it needs some work, but it'd be better than the current options.
how bout a new way to change up the zone defense bubbles that would be entirely based on your players' ratings?
the game has used the same plays, same looks, and same size of zone bubbles for almost 10 years now. i think they should change this, so that the size and shape of the zone bubble would be dependant on your players' speed, acceleration, and agility. the speed would affect the size globally, acceleration would affect the shape vertically, and agility would affect it horizontally.
this would be a great way of updating zone defenses as now every team would play zones differently. you'd be forced to know more about your team's abilities and also where the holes in your zone defenses would be. i think the greatest argument for this, would be that you're now making every team's defensive play art unique.
I like this idea though I believe zone rating should play some part. Could you imagine looking at a freshman's zone bubble in your play art? You would have to find all kinds of ways to cover that up. It would dictate scheme and I like it.
ya i was trying to think of a way to include the zone coverage rating, last night, but couldnt think of anything "good". the only thing that i could come up with would be a two color shaded system, where the base color (lighter shade) would signify the player's range, and the second color (darker shade) would go over top of it and signify the player's ability to make a play on the ball. it'd be like simply getting to an area is one thing, but being able to get your body into a position to make a play on the ball is another.
This is an area where we used to have control until they took away the knockdown slider. NCAA 09 was the last game to have this. Awareness/coverage dictated how tight the actual coverage was and the Knockdown slider determined how well they could play the ball. Raise the knockdown slider and they could swat 10 foot passes away. Drop it to 0 and they barely made any plays. It was great. On the PS2 versions you had to crank it to the max. In NCAA 06 you could throw too easily into coverage so you had to raise it to make it better. It was the exact opposite on the PS3 due to the super leaping LBs. So I would drop it to 0 to fix that issue.
Both EA football games could really benefit by adding some key sliders and even attribute sliders to tweak things. If they refuse to use their tuning files then give us those tools to fix some things. Sliders for QB awareness (cpu QBs on lower levels are idiots), Man vs Zone coverage, Knockdown/Play the Ball slider, kick return blocking, fatigue, fumbles and injuries are greatly needed imo. If we could get attribute sliders to adjust things like agility, acceleration, RB special moves like stiff arm or truck, that would be fantastic as well.
Of course making the sliders so they actually work would be nice. The Madden team's pass reaction slider is useless. Other sliders don't have enough power either.
Last edited by Rudy; 10-24-2012 at 10:46 AM.
I think the intention of locomotion and similar systems is to make ratings important to whether or not your defender can actually make a play. So are you talking about the actual appearance of the zones (like on a coach cam) should change based on ratings, or just that Joe Average can't cover the same size zone that the Honey Badger can? Because I'm pretty sure the latter is already true, though not as readily apparent as it is in real life.
Twitter: @3YardsandACloud
both. obivously the average joe cant cover the same ground that a troy polamalu can.....however, it'd be extremely nice if the play art updated accordingly to reflect how much space a player can actually cover (on coach cam). i know that average joe isnt capable of covering the current zone assigned to the FS on a cover 2 play, but it'd be nice to know what he's capable of....which will alter my playcalling, as i'd be more aware of what he can and cant do.
Yeah, I agree, it'd be nice. Trying to wrap my head around (potentially) how complicated the code might be though, unless they kept it incredibly simple (which would probably suffice).
Twitter: @3YardsandACloud
ya, it could be really complicated. i think the easiest way to go though, would be to take the current zone bubble sizes and set them equal to a certain speed/accel/agility model. then every increase/decrease in speed/accel/agility from that model affects the size and shape of the zone, accordingly. still, thats easier said than done. lol
i just look at your basic cover 1 play in a 425 defense for example, and see such a tiny zone that the FS is assigned to. its the same size for every safety in the game, regardless of physical skills.
Yeah, but that's much, much easier than my head began to think of.
Only problem I see is that the current mechanism displays Cover 4 zones are "smaller" versions of Cover 2 zones. So you'd have to come up with some way to differentiate assignment versus ability. Or range of coverage ability versus range of responsibility. You could possibly do it with some combination of opacity and overlap, but it could get overly difficult for Joe Average to be able to understand it on Coach Cam.
Certainly a good idea though. Wish I'd thought of it
Twitter: @3YardsandACloud
right.....something to think about for the future i guess.
its just funny though, because it doesnt affect the gameplay at all.....merely just a dynamic defensive play art. but the difference it could possibly make are substantial, especially when a play/formation editor gets involved.
Yep. Plus it might help with all of those "my safety can't make a play on this route, it's a money play" discussions. Sometimes it's the game, sometimes it's your team.
Twitter: @3YardsandACloud
They had something similar for the QB's with the vision cone. It was larger or smaller based on their awareness so I am sure it is doable.
Bookmarks