Liking the new formations/packages. Just hoping they are more than 6 plays or so deep.
Liking the new formations/packages. Just hoping they are more than 6 plays or so deep.
Even at 6 plays deep these are going to add a tremendous amount of extra looks and support. I really like the concepts of the pressure packs right now!Originally Posted by CLW
It sounds (from the description) that this will be an entirely new formation, so I'm guessing/hoping it will be rather fleshed out.
Sure hope thats the case!
4-2-5 Okie Across Bullets Dbl A – 4-2-5 Okie Across places the five defensive backs in the formation in a loose alignment of about 8 to 10 yards. In addition to the alignment of the defensive backs, the right defensive end aligns in a two point stance similar to that of an outside linebacker. Bullets Dbl A sends both linebackers in the formation on blitzes in each A gap.
Nice! Looks like allot of new/additional blitz packages this year. If coverage is fixed/improved could this be the year of Defense?
God I hope so. I hate the fact that it is nearly impossible to have a defensive battle in the game.
I just can't see these plays working as intended... Unless they make man coverage work as intended, I just don't see these cover 0 plays ever really being used.
I think it is more about pressure getting to the QB like it is intended. Most of these blitzes are designed to fool the o-line and that just doesn't happen on a consistent enough basis.(if ever) If the QB has 3 to 4 seconds to find a receiver with these cover 0 plays, then yes they will rarely get used.(by me at least)
Wait....
I thought last week you were saying man was over powered and works too well???
Im also a bit confused on why some of you refuse to see the positives in new plays as JUST NEW FREAKING PLAYS, even though its the first time this gen that defense has been even touched.
"Zone doesnt work, so it's worthless!" "Man doesnt work so its pointless!" .... "Nobody can use cover 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 or 6, so nobody will play defense cause its hopeless!" We get it dudes... You're wasting your money and EA is wasting their time because nothing works like it does IRL!!!
These are pictures! They are being shown to us for play sake only. Wait till you see something, anything in action. Then you can say specifically WHY you think something wont work with some logistics and in game flaws and we'll all break it down together. Until then idk why you can't enjoy that they have given us new plays and multiple new formations to work with, and solely judge the play from a strategy and playart basis. Even if they end up not working perfectly like they're drawn up, its nice to have new looks.
Last edited by Jayrah; 04-14-2011 at 04:33 PM.
Wow, fix your gasket man cause it's blown.
Man coverage doesn't work like it does in real life (where the corners play on one side of their man based on what the coverage is) but it's definitely FAR too effective right now. But, it's only far too effective right now because the coverage man runs the route before the receiver does most of the time (unless the coverage guy sucks or your receiver is ridiculously talented at route running). Cover 0 is rarely used outside of short yardage situations and goalline.
But, if man coverage worked as intended (in a cover 0 situation, the corner would give up the underneath stuff all day but NEVER let the receiver get past them on deep stuff and would most definitely NEVER bite on a run fake or out 'n up - but none of that is the case with the way man coverage works as of right now) you'd see this play used more often than in short yardage situations. Teams in real life use Cover 0 far more often than just short yardage situations, but, as of how man coverage is circa '11, it's pretty much useless and just asking for a huge play to happen against you.
I am looking at it from a strategy standpoint, but a strategy standpoint based in the context of the game. In the game, that play is unfortunately not as useful as it would be in real life because of how I noted man coverage works/doesn't work when compared to how it should work in real life.
You call Cover 0 at the right time and the right situation, even in NCAA 11 it's useful. We have no idea how man coverage is going to work in 12, so saying it will/won't work is crazy talk at this point.
(Emphasis on could)
Twitter: @3YardsandACloud
I'm sorry, but it's not crazy talk. Crazy talk is acting like, all of a sudden, the guys working on the game actually know football.
Man coverage hasn't been even remotely correct since the PS2 days (and the only reason why it was even close to being correct there was because they actually gave use the ability to decide which side of the man we wanted our coverage to play). Call me cynical, but I just don't see the magical fix coming to fix man coverage (aka, having the setups for every single defensive play in the game actually be correct when it comes to how man coverage should work for that particular play).
Hell, I liked '11. I liked it so much, I bought it twice (once for the 360 and then for the PS3 when I switched over), but it's one thing to enjoy the game for what it is and it's a completely different thing to hope and pray that, sooner or later, it's going to be as good as it was 8 years ago.
You'll have to excuse me if I've given up hope for this generation of the game to ever be anything more than a solid football game that's got flaws that are hard to look past sometimes.
I guess Im just sayin.... You've given up hope.... Oh wait you just said that.
Gasket is not blown, just hissing. I just dont understand why you are still complaining about every play that comes out. We all know you dont think anything is going to work. And we all know there are coverage flaws. We know that. But lord have mercy the plays are well done as far as the variety of concepts go. This thunder cop for example, great implementation that we lacked before. It's so nice to finally have more plays and formations defensively. You dont think they'll work! Great! Wait till you can show us why because of gameplay footage. Thats all Im saying.
So I have a couple questions for you mors. Obviously we all hope that the new formations give us a plethora of new plays from those formations and are fleshed out and all that, so that is a given hope.
1. What do you want to see from the defensive playbooks that you haven't seen yet? Regardless of gameplay, it could be a particular missing formation, or a play style or a specific play type. For me I know blitzes are going to make the games "show me" list, cause we all want to know what the pressure packages look like. But I want to see some stand up blitz packs (gosh dang it can't remember what it's called now, but it's out of dime and dime 3-2-6) that include bluff blitzes. Currently if the D-ends are standing you know some sort of overload blitz is coming and all you have to do is check out. I want either a 3 or 4 man rush option defensively (well, multiple looks obviously). That would be really nice and effective without me having to hot route 2 defenders.
2. In cover 0, ignoring the gameplay issues, defensively what is the spot on the field you would use this concept? Your particular complaint about the way man is construed leads me to believe you would use this at any point on the field, but I don't necessarily agree that it is a good play for anywhere. What would be the situation for you?
Note that I said "saying it will/won't work". Either one is crazy talk because we have no idea what the team's been focusing on. Especially since they announced earlier in the year that Defense was the major focus for the year, I have to imagine that something will be different this year.
Deciding that anything will or won't work in NCAA 12, based on no evidence what-so-ever, is crazy talk.
Twitter: @3YardsandACloud
I think the problem is translating football knowledge from the chalkboard to coding isn't an easy job. Osborne, Paterno, Bowden, and the ghost of Bear Bryant could get employed by EA, 2K, or 505 tomorrow and while that'd give that staff the greatest football knowledge in history, it would do nothing to help with coding and/or game design.
As for opinions on plays & the game, it is their $60 that has to get spent on it so if anyone is unsure or unpleased then I don't blame them. Those not satisfied should definitely give the demo a big run and/or rent the game before a purchase. I'm optimistic that they wouldn't be showing some of these plays if they didn't put some serious work in on particular aspects.
From the defensive playbooks, I'm pretty much seeing what I'd like to see already, somewhat. I'm a 3-4 defense guy all the way. Rarely, if ever, use anything else. You won't ever see nickle formation from me against 3 WR sets. That's giving the offense exactly what they want (less men in the box to therefore have a better chance of running the ball against you). I hate having to us the Dime 3-2-6 formation, but I will.
So, long story short, I want a full 16-20 plays from the 3-4 Predator look where some of the blitzes and coverage match up (like they showed for the with the two Nickle 2-4-5 plays) and for that to carry throughout the other formations of the 3-4. That would be quite nice.
Cover 0 isn't an anywhere play, but it's definitely not a short yardage only situation. It depends on matchups though to determine it's true usefulness (something else, sadly, that isn't as much of a factor as it should be in NCAA).
If I can (be that, my corners are talented or up against not so talented receivers), I have no problem putting them on an island to get extra pressure early (usually on 1st down towards their side of the field). But, I'd only do that if I was able to make sure that my corners played inside and loose (aka, giving up the sidelines but not the deep route).
My main issue with the play in question is the type of blitz that it is with Cover 0 behind it. Based on the play art (and scheme), that's a delayed blitz up the middle to get the extra man free. With Cover 0 behind it, a delayed blitz is definitely the last thing you want to do. That type of blitz is better used for zone coverage (usually some type of exotic look that's a combination of Cover 2 and Cover 3) where you have the extra time to get to the QB.
Hey man, I really do hope something is different this year with defense. Unfortunately, I have a feeling that the only thing that's going to be different is zone defense is going to be "better". I say "better" because I'm positive it still won't work how it should. Why do I think that? Because zone defense has never worked how it should. Not even in the PS2 days has it worked as it should.
In the end, I'm basing my feelings on how the core gameplay has progressed in just the last 3-4 years of the game (since this team has been working on it). We've gotten a lot of presentation and graphics additions. The game is definitely prettier than it has ever been and it's definitely got the presentation looking very nice (making it feel more like watching a game on TV than ever before on the next gen console).
But, gameplay wise, it hasn't changed much since '09. Defense has been terrible since jumping to next gen. Offense still don't have fundamental blocking schemes down (like actual pass protection). Zone blocking is still not where it should be because of the lack of cut blocking and crack-back blocking.
I'd actually have to disagree with that. I think their entire problem is not enough football knowledge. I think what could benefit them more than anything is getting guys that have actual input on the game to go to coaching seminars. There's plenty of them out there during the winter-spring period and that alone would increase their knowledge of the game by quite a bit.
I hope so Chris. I really do. But, I won't find out because I'm not buying the game this year (unless I decide to get my 360 fixed for the third freakin' time).
If I read and heard correctly, it was announced the Madden team will be doubling in the future. Indirectly, that should assume more people added to the Central Gameplay team which would only help both Madden NFL and NCAA Football.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks