Gameplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffHCross

Well, I've both been able to answer my question and not answer my question. The simple answer is that 4-2-5 vs Trips -- real coaches don't call man, they adjust to "Solo" coverage (which appears to be a Cover 2 to the Trips Side, with backside Man, if I'm reading it right). So still nothing on straight man coverage versus Trips ... maybe because it doesn't get called.

---

My understanding (assuming we're looking at the same thing) is that they do essentially play man to man, but it's a modified scheme such that they have a combo coverage working on the inner-most receiver, where the WS covers any vertical routes while a LB picks him up if he runs an inside breaking route (I presume that the FS is responsible for covering any short out-breaking routes).

Rather than having SS2 come across the formation, they essentially rotate the FS down and have SS2 rotate back and replace him as the new deep zone player.

Quote:

---

Versus trips the alignment is simple. The backers should now slide toward the trips side. The base coverage adjustment to trips is to play SOLO coverage. Solo allows the read side to play cover 2 on the #1 and #2 WR The read backer and WS will be responsible for covering the #3 WR.

The backers slide to create a 4 on 3 advantage. The read-side backer is responsible for the short wall of the #3 WR. What this means is he cannot let #3 run a short crossing route. If he lets #3 get across the formation there is going to be a problem, because there is no one on that side to pick him up. The away backer and away corner are both in man coverage, and are not guaranteed to be there. The WS is responsible for covering the deep vertical and post routes by the #3 WR.

---

Yep, we're looking at the same thing. But look at that first paragraph in your quote. Unless I'm being stupid (always possible), that doesn't sound like straight man.

Here's a second blog post, from the same guy, where he goes into greater detail about Trips. That second blog bears out what I was thinking. He's talking Cover 2 to the play side, with combo coverage from the Sam Backer. Wowza.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_G-sNr8qNG4...e-vs-trips.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffHCross

Sometimes a case like that, in my opinion, is kind of a damned-if-you-do situation. If I'm reading your example right, though, wouldn't flipping the play put the nickelback directly over the #2 receiver on the Trips side, and then the SS over the #3? That seems right to me, unless I'm misreading your example. Just tried it, and it does exactly that. It's not pretty, because the nickelback shuffles over, but it's there.

However, going back to what I think you were trying to say in your example ... that the FS should move over and stand heads-up against the #3. Maybe. I don't have any real-world coaching experience, but I would be very surprised if a coach would so blatantly give away his coverage that there would be no safeties on the entire left half of the field.

As it stands now, without any adjustments, the FS lines up as a Single High for Nickel Normal Over Strong Brave vs 5 WR. If a coach hops on here and disagrees, I'll defer to them, but that seems like the best look you could ask for in that situation.

---

Actually, I gave a poor example. I was really thinking of NB Blitz from Nickel Strong, which is no longer in the game (as best as I can tell from the demo). In that instance flipping the play doesn't work because it then changes where the blitz comes from. So in that situation, the sheer numbers dictated that you needed the FS to move over. Also, if you think about a quads formation with Cover 0, it's the same principle.

As to whether teams would show that as blatantly in real life, I cannot say for certain, but I seem to recall several times sitting in the stands where I have noticed OU lining up in the way that you would see with the old PS2 adjustment. Often times the defense is designed such that certain positions/players are almost never designed to play man coverage, and so that means that they can't just flip the play and then swap assignments.

But it the very least seems like the kind of thing that the user ought to have the ability to audible into. On PS2 there were essentially 3 "modes" for man align. There was the "off" mode, a "middle mode' (which is essentially what the default is now), and a third mode which amounted to an "over-ride" mode.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeffHCross

Yep, we're looking at the same thing. But look at that first paragraph in your quote. Unless I'm being stupid (always possible), that doesn't sound like straight man.

Here's a second blog post, from the same guy, where he goes into greater detail about Trips. That second blog bears out what I was thinking. He's talking Cover 2 to the play side, with combo coverage from the Sam Backer. Wowza.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_G-sNr8qNG4...e-vs-trips.jpg

---

Yeah, but to me that strikes me as a modified man to man scheme, with some zone principles one one side. I say that because after the route distribution, it essentially becomes like a man to man defense, but they have contingencies built in that are designed to deal with certain route combinations that are problematic for man coverage. You're right that it's not a straight up man to man defense, but it's certainly not like the Cover 2 zone (or any zone for that matter) that's in the game.

we run lock call (base out of 3-4) vs trips and roll WS to hash and has help if needed to single side WR... in the game if i was going to do that i would prob put the backer away from trips in man vs back... i dont know, maybe you guys can play with some stuff like this in the retail and let us know how it works... especially when you can play online and lab this kind of stuff

PS... G's video of the catch on the sidelines that gets knocked out with a pic to show it off is hilarious... thats an auto first down in NCAA 11

"E"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rhombic21

In the demo I am seeing some major issues where man to man blitz plays end up with a defender being left with no assignment and a receiver being left uncovered. Can you see if these exist in the retail version?

For instance, run Dime Normal DB Blitz (two slot CBs blitz, everybody else in man to man) against SG 5 Wide. The FS ends up not guarding anybody and L1 is left completely uncovered. Similarly if you run DB blitz against SG flex then the FS does not guard anybody and X is left uncovered.

It's not just that play either. Run Nickel 2-4-5 Silver Shoot Pinch against a formation with trips to the left. The SS ends up not guarding anybody and triangle is left with nobody assigned to him. Overload Blitz from Nickel Normal has the same problem. So does Zero Blitz from Dime 3-2-6.

It appears that there's something going on with man blitzes that send a slot DB which is causing confusion.

---

Is this against any Shotgun 5WR formation or specifically Shotgun - 5WR?

I tested it against Shotgun - 5WR Flex and the problem appears to be corrected, though so far I only tested against Dime Normal DB Blitz because I wanted clarification... I looked at the demo team playbooks to see which Shotgun formation you might be looking at but didn't see any that have specfically Shotgun - 5WR.

Let me know any more specifics or if you think that covers your scenario.

I was seeing the issue against multiple formations. But the 5 wide formation I referenced was whatever SG Empty formation is in FSU's playbook.

You might just go into practice mode and pay special attention to the blitzes I outlined above against a variety of trips type formations. Essentially it seemed like that was where the problem was coming from. It sounds like the issue may have been corrected.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gschwendt

I'm not sure I've adjusted those but I'll check now for you...

Auto Passing - Off
Auto Sprint - On
Auto Strafe - On
Off Play Call Style - Formation
Def Play Call Style - Formation
Show Play Art - On
Coaching Tips - On

In the past I've played with the auto strafe off as it bugged me but so far this year it hasn't been a hindrance... may turn it off to see how it plays. I'll also turn off Coaching Tips while I'm looking at that now.

---

From the demo I am really like auto sprint on. Never played that way before but it just seems more natural.

I know it's been brought up before but I will say it again... PLAY ACTION (in the demo) is still seriously flawed. I just played as Oregon and for ALL offensive plays I used play action. It was ugly. The Game Track kicked in and talked about Texas D having six sacks. If play action continues to be this poor on the retail it will really impact my enjoymanet of the game.

could you imagine if the dev team could capture the cuts, jukes and darts that D. Robinson made in that video?????? maaaaan. Talk about dangerous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaymo76

I know it's been brought up before but I will say it again... PLAY ACTION (in the demo) is still seriously flawed. I just played as Oregon and for ALL offensive plays I used play action. It was ugly. The Game Track kicked in and talked about Texas D having six sacks. If play action continues to be this poor on the retail it will really impact my enjoymanet of the game.

---

Wait, so you ran nothing but play action and want to know why you kept getting sacked?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaymo76

I know it's been brought up before but I will say it again... PLAY ACTION (in the demo) is still seriously flawed. I just played as Oregon and for ALL offensive plays I used play action. It was ugly. The Game Track kicked in and talked about Texas D having six sacks. If play action continues to be this poor on the retail it will really impact my enjoymanet of the game.

---

Isn't play action used to fool defenses to go along with an productive running game? I don't know the circumstances of the sacks, but why would a defense respect the play action if you didn't run the ball at all?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rhombic21

I was seeing the issue against multiple formations. But the 5 wide formation I referenced was whatever SG Empty formation is in FSU's playbook.

You might just go into practice mode and pay special attention to the blitzes I outlined above against a variety of trips type formations. Essentially it seemed like that was where the problem was coming from. It sounds like the issue may have been corrected.

---

Just tested those plays against FSU's 5WR Flex (both standard & flipped) and everything appears to play as normal. The only "issue" I found was in the Dime 326 Zero Blitz with the offensive play flipped. It left the FS covering the inside slot and he covered him, but he obviously had to get over there right after the snap of the ball... flipping the defensive play fixes that though so it's not really a bug so long as you pay half a bit of attention.

Thanks for checking. Glad to hear that it was resolved before retail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jaymo76

I know it's been brought up before but I will say it again... PLAY ACTION (in the demo) is still seriously flawed. I just played as Oregon and for ALL offensive plays I used play action. It was ugly. The Game Track kicked in and talked about Texas D having six sacks. If play action continues to be this poor on the retail it will really impact my enjoymanet of the game.

---

and i was just playing and very excited because i ran a playaction on a 3rd down and didn't get blasted in .00003 seconds like i did every time last year

After an interception, it seems like the wide receiver immediately tackles the defensive back if they are close to each other during the INT. The receiver shouldn't be able to react as fast as they do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xMrHitStickx904

could you imagine if the dev team could capture the cuts, jukes and darts that D. Robinson made in that video?????? maaaaan. Talk about dangerous.

---

They should be able to. With the video capture tech we have nowadays, anything is possible. But I must say if I see the cpu QB run lke D. Robinson did in that highlight youtbe video, I would probably faint from over excitement.

Taking a break right now but let me know another matchup you guys want to see... Should be able to get at least one more full video uploaded tonight. Just a heads up, it will start in third quarter and show full presentation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gschwendt

Taking a break right now but let me know another matchup you guys want to see... Should be able to get at least one more full video uploaded tonight. Just a heads up, it will start in third quarter and show full presentation.

---

How about the Cy-hawk game, Iowa @ Iowa State? A lot of my friends (and of course myself) would appreciate this one! Plus, we can see if there is any special end of game presentation elements for a rivalry game with a trophy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gschwendt

Taking a break right now but let me know another matchup you guys want to see... Should be able to get at least one more full video uploaded tonight. Just a heads up, it will start in third quarter and show full presentation.

---

Well, after my Southern Miss intro disappointment, I'm very anti-big schools right now (LOL!), so pick 2 mid-majors of your choice in whatever situation you choose. The little guys need some love.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk