Home
Madden NFL 13 News Post

First I want to lay out some basic principles of blitzing by Leo Hand and John Rice that I think can be applicable to video games. I chose Hand and Rice because they are explicit in their descriptions. What they say explicitly are implied by others such as Ted Amorisi, Mike McDaniels, Bill Arnsparger. These names are important as they have coached and continue to coach defensive football. Hand has written several books on 101 Stunts for a host of defenses (3-4; 46 Bear; Weak Eagle; Fire Zone ect). Rice also has written several texts on Nickel and Dime defenses (Coaching Nickel and Dime Defenses; Defending the Spread Offense). Second, I want to highlight what I see as problems in Madden/NCAA with respect to blitzing and the use of Show Blitz in relationship to the principles that Hand and Rice outline and what is implied by the other coaches mentioned above. Finally, I want to talk possible solutions. Coffee please!!!

First I want to begin by showcasing some real life blitzes. This will provide a frame of reference for us. Then I look to look at what Leo Hand and John Rice outline in their respective books on Stunts and Nickel and Dime defenses as principles of blitzing and rushing the passer.


Leo Hand on Blitzing Principles

Leo Hand highlights twenty principles for blitzing, all of which I will not elaborate on here. They cannot program the mental side, such as film study on a blocker to discover what techniques he likes to use. There are some things that I think they can program such as the following, all of which are showcased in the above video:

1) Blitzers should be moving, attacking and penetrating the line of scrimmage on the snap of the football. The only exceptions are delayed blitzes. Going back to every slice of footage in the video, you will notice that there was movement prior to and on the snap.

2) Feet must always be moving even when engaged with blockers. This is why I like that animation by the DE's in the NCAA video. It actually looks good. Never stop your feet.

3) Pass Rush moves should be predetermined and a secondary move should also be a part of the plan in the event the rushers primary move is a "failure." This is important right here. In Madden/NCAA there are no secondary moves because once the rusher "loses" that's the end of the interaction. I think the short branching animations may be a problem in this regard. Maybe they would need to branch more win/lose interactions together for the secondary move.

4) If it is a run the blitzer still has to read keys and pressure the blocks. He cannot just run to the B gap just because the blitz is designed there when the run is going the other way. He might start by charging the B gap, but if it is run he has to be able to change course and trail the football.

John Rice on Pass Rushers primarily defensive ends and edge rushers

1) Explode on the snap
2) Maintain a good forward lean. Big problem in most football games as they tend to stand straight up and run after the snap. This forward lean should be maintained until there is contact with a blocker.
3) What technique will be used? Slap and rip? Slap the blockers hands down and then rip underneath. Butt and Bull? Bow the neck/head while simultaneously grabbing the blockers jersey and driving him back into the QB.
4) OL need to be graded as quick set up guys or give ground guys. The former are more susceptible to finesse moves while the latter or more susceptible to power moves.

Ok now that a frame of reference has been established let's look at NCAA 13 and identify some issues with respect to blitzing and the use of Show Blitz.


Let's take a basic zone blitz like Nickel 33, 3 Overload Fire.


1) Nobody is attacking the line prior to the snap. It's blitz from this spot.
2) There is no noticeable explosion on the snap and no body lean until contact by the defenders.
3) Barring that one animation feet do not move enough.

What I did not show in the video was the use of Show Blitz. All it did was move guys in worse position, especially the MLB. As I ask at the end, why are we having to set up blitzes for them to be effective? Blitzing is about timing and attacking the line at the snap. Why is that backside Offensive Tackle still running to the other side to pick up a blitzer? I will correct myself, overloads CAN work, you just have to move a lot of guys around. Kinda mehhh IMO.

Ultimately, blitzing is missing its primary elements, timing and attacking prior to the snap. Because there is not much movement pre-snap, the rushers casually move out of their stance with no urgency. Defenders are not running with a lean. Just about everything from Hand and Rice is absent here.

Possible solutions:

1) Blitzes need to have built in pre-snap movement that is concerned with attacking and not just lining up in a different spot.

2) Pre-snap movement by all rushers can be placed in the users hand by changing how Show Blitz works. Show blitz would only cause the players that are blitzing to begin to move. So when look at a blitz like 3 Overload Fire I could shift the linebackers to the right and then later show blitz and the only players that should move are the ROLB, MLB and the NB. The NB has to creep off the slot and attack the edge.

In the end, I don't think the user should be setting up blitzes in order for them to be effective. Yeah, it goes against the grain of how competitive guys have been playing Madden for a very long time. I just don't think it is something the user should be doing. At best the user should be responsible for timing and causing the blitzing defenders to move in unison.

What sayeth thee?

Game: Madden NFL 13Reader Score: 6/10 - Vote Now
Platform: PS3 / Wii U / Xbox 360Votes for game: 76 - View All
Madden NFL 13 Videos
Member Comments
# 1 baller7345 @ 06/22/12 01:14 AM
Completely agree with everything you said but I think there is something else that needs to be addressed before we worry about pre-snap movement during blitzes.

The way the blocking a.i. reacts to a blitz needs to be completely reworked. The system currently has a slight psychic tendency stopping you from creating some of the more common blitz concepts such as Cross Fire or any Overload stunt and get any type of free rusher ever. So before we work on the pre-snap movement and execution of blitzes (which admittedly needs work....lots of work) they need to rewrite the line a.i. so that either awareness or play recognition determines how the line reacts to a blitz. Unchain the defense and allow blitz schemes criss cross the protections from time to time.

Ok back to your original points, there are a few blitzes that have some presnap movement however it is simply a couple of players moving into place and never moving after that. I'm sure its not easy to program the a.i. to react more realisticly with its player movement before the snap but I'd think they could do a little better than what they have since after they get to their spots they tend to set flatfooted until the snap.

Show blitz definitely needs to be reworked, it basically puts the MLB's on the line either in the A gap or the B gap while it switches man coverages at times and screws up a 2 deep look. I would love to see some sort of show blitz that actually takes into account the blitz that is being called. They could even allow it to be used to set up bluffs by randomly picking a blitz out of the formation you are in and using that movement if you do it on a non blitz play. Now that may be beyond what they can do with the pre-snap movement but it would be a neat addition because other than a few blitz bluffs such as Sugar 3 Bluff, Okie Roll 3, or Cover 2 Bluff there simply isn't anyway to bluff a blitz without manually moving guys or hoping that the person you are playing isn't smart enough to realize what the current show blitz looks like.
 
# 2 Skyboxer @ 06/22/12 03:05 AM
Talking about all this just reminds me I wish Madden would bring the hot route funtion 2K had.
Loved how quick you could set hot routes for individuals. Mainly due to not having to be on them to do it.
 
# 3 LBzrule @ 06/22/12 07:06 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CRMosier_LM
If nfl teams didn't show blitz in order to confuse the offense then I would agree. But many teams run guys up to the LOS on nearly every play. Whether that be in the gap or outside. Rarely do your top nfl defenses line up base and stand still. It does happen as another element of confusion though. 3-4 defense is predicated off of the fake "show blitz".

Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk 2
That's what I'm talking about and that's what the live NFL game video shows. My argument is that show blitz should do exactly like the live games ONLY move the guys that will be blitzing rather than bringing everyone in the box. The reason I don't like it bringing everyone in the box is because then Quarters, Dollar become great run defenses against anything. Secondly as far as the blitzing personnel on many plays it moves them out of position and away from the area the play has them attacking and then game does not have smooth turn animations to get them back to those spots. Thus the movement should not be general like it is now, it should be movement that gets them in position to attack the area they should be attacking.

Methinks you misunderstood my post.
 
# 4 LBzrule @ 06/22/12 07:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by baller7345
Completely agree with everything you said but I think there is something else that needs to be addressed before we worry about pre-snap movement during blitzes.
Completely agree here. That was one of the points I hinted at in the NCAA video, where the tackle came all the way across to make that block.

The way the blocking a.i. reacts to a blitz needs to be completely reworked. The system currently has a slight psychic tendency stopping you from creating some of the more common blitz concepts such as Cross Fire or any Overload stunt and get any type of free rusher ever. So before we work on the pre-snap movement and execution of blitzes (which admittedly needs work....lots of work) they need to rewrite the line a.i. so that either awareness or play recognition determines how the line reacts to a blitz. Unchain the defense and allow blitz schemes criss cross the protections from time to time.
Yeah. This is the biggest fear and challenge. I'm afraid it's just something that will be too large of a rewrite that they will not invest in it this generation. They probably have people working hard on designs for next generation at this point and it will be unveiled then.

Ok back to your original points, there are a few blitzes that have some presnap movement however it is simply a couple of players moving into place and never moving after that. I'm sure its not easy to program the a.i. to react more realisticly with its player movement before the snap but I'd think they could do a little better than what they have since after they get to their spots they tend to set flatfooted until the snap.

Show blitz definitely needs to be reworked, it basically puts the MLB's on the line either in the A gap or the B gap while it switches man coverages at times and screws up a 2 deep look. I would love to see some sort of show blitz that actually takes into account the blitz that is being called. They could even allow it to be used to set up bluffs by randomly picking a blitz out of the formation you are in and using that movement if you do it on a non blitz play. Now that may be beyond what they can do with the pre-snap movement but it would be a neat addition because other than a few blitz bluffs such as Sugar 3 Bluff, Okie Roll 3, or Cover 2 Bluff there simply isn't anyway to bluff a blitz without manually moving guys or hoping that the person you are playing isn't smart enough to realize what the current show blitz looks like.
Yeah, I was trying to think of how to account for bluffs. Wasn't sure how to do that if Show Blitz itself would only govern the players that are rushing. But I think they may have enough on the interface to add another mechanic called bluff.
 
# 5 LBzrule @ 06/22/12 07:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skyboxer
Talking about all this just reminds me I wish Madden would bring the bot route funtion 2K had.
Loved how quick you could set hot routes for individuals. Mainly due to not having to be on them to do it.
Are you referring to


 
# 6 Phobia @ 06/22/12 09:05 AM
Adding this if you don't mind LB to the replicating real life thread
 
# 7 brza37 @ 06/22/12 09:25 AM
I think there needs to be more options than just "Show Blitz". You should have the option to bluff an all out blitz like it is now (I think what CR is saying.) You should also have the option to creep the actual blitzers so that they are moving at the snap but not just standing in the holes motionless (like what LB is saying). Then you should also have the option to bluff just a few blitzers so that its not an obvious giveaway when you creep fewer blitzers than in the normal "Show Blitz" look.

The user should be able to choose whether the players who creep in this 3rd option are just random for those that want to set up the look quickly or to choose who should creep on an individual basis so you can actually give the same look as some of your real blitzes.

EDIT: Sorry I should read the full posts before posting myself and not just skimming through things. I guess baller already suggested this, lol.
 
# 8 Big FN Deal @ 06/22/12 12:22 PM
I definitely agree with the concept of each player having predetermined primary and secondary AI moves, which could seemingly be achieved by adding tons of pass rush technique animations and giving each player access to various sets based on ratings. Also, having tiered versions of each technique so they fit players according to ratings. For example, four different levels of swim moves animations, poor, average, good, great.

Also, not just for the blitz but for pass rush and even receivers coming off the LOS, they all need to "explode off the snap". The more I actually focus on the game play in Madden, CPU/AI controlled players do not hustle and the only way to get them to is by User sprint, which may cause some CPU/AI players to speed up in pursuit. I just can;t understand with all the hoopla about SPD being the dominant rating, why CPU/AI players don't utilize it off the ball.

I reference to show blitz, like with audibles and no huddle/hurry up, the premise in Madden of all personnel accomplishing it uniform, has got to go. There needs to be more accounting for how well the particular personnel on the field perform these actions. Not every player should have the same capability, for example, to run up towards the LOS, then back out at the last minute and get back in proper position. Also, similar to what LBz was saying, not every defender should be moving around and there should not be the capability of free lancing "show blitz" on every defensive play. Imo, there should be actual plays in the defensive playbooks that have "show blitz" drawn up. Meaning, in a defensive playbooks, every or some plays have modified versions of the same play with show blitz, disguise coverage, etc predesigned, like tiered play calling but for entire plays instead of individual layers. That way this stuff it represented as being practiced and calling these things would be handled on the sideline, instead of at the LOS.
 
# 9 LBzrule @ 06/22/12 12:46 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big FN Deal
I definitely agree with the concept of each player having predetermined primary and secondary AI moves, which could seemingly be achieved by adding tons of pass rush technique animations and giving each player access to various sets based on ratings. Also, having tiered versions of each technique so they fit players according to ratings. For example, four different levels of swim moves animations, poor, average, good, great.

Also, not just for the blitz but for pass rush and even receivers coming off the LOS, they all need to "explode off the snap". The more I actually focus on the game play in Madden, CPU/AI controlled players do not hustle and the only way to get them to is by User sprint, which may cause some CPU/AI players to speed up in pursuit. I just can;t understand with all the hoopla about SPD being the dominant rating, why CPU/AI players don't utilize it off the ball.

I reference to show blitz, like with audibles and no huddle/hurry up, the premise in Madden of all personnel accomplishing it uniform, has got to go. There needs to be more accounting for how well the particular personnel on the field perform these actions. Not every player should have the same capability, for example, to run up towards the LOS, then back out at the last minute and get back in proper position. Also, similar to what LBz was saying, not every defender should be moving around and there should not be the capability of free lancing "show blitz" on every defensive play. Imo, there should be actual plays in the defensive playbooks that have "show blitz" drawn up. Meaning, in a defensive playbooks, every or some plays have modified versions of the same play with show blitz, disguise coverage, etc predesigned, like tiered play calling but for entire plays instead of individual layers. That way this stuff it represented as being practiced and calling these things would be handled on the sideline, instead of at the LOS.
Big, I was having a discussion with guys the other night and we were talking about the decision to go with short branching animations and the whole one sequence win/loss thing. With my argument for having a primary and secondary pass rush move and the short branching system do you think they would do best to chain together one or more win/loss branch points? That's what might screw this up. In 2k8 it was easier to do this because of the long animations. It is still a win/loss in 2k8 but because of the long animations it is easy for a guy to switch to the secondary pass rush move and it look fluid as hell.

I also agree about the drawn up plays that have defenders bluffing. The playbook should be the tool that provides the framework for everything. Just thinking about the current playbooks where we have plays like



This type of play should serve as a basis for the rest. This has the linebackers already lined up in the A gaps and that's fine. We should also have plays where they "SHOW IT." To me a play like Sugar Cover 3 Bluff is what in defensive football is called "Showing Blitz." Several Madden plays already have this: Sugar 3 Seam, Sugar Blitz. Those three plays all SHOW Blitz and that's fine. There are some blitzes that should be that way. What we do not have and what we need are TIMED Blitzes. Plays like Nickel 335 3 Overload Fire should be timed; 245 Overload 3 seam ect all should be timed blitzes.
 
# 10 Big FN Deal @ 06/22/12 01:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LBzrule
Big, I was having a discussion with guys the other night and we were talking about the decision to go with short branching animations and the whole one sequence win/loss thing. With my argument for having a primary and secondary pass rush move and the short branching system do you think they would do best to chain together one or more win/loss branch points? That's what might screw this up. In 2k8 it was easier to do this because of the long animations. It is still a win/loss in 2k8 but because of the long animations it is easy for a guy to switch to the secondary pass rush move and it look fluid as hell.

I also agree about the drawn up plays that have defenders bluffing. The playbook should be the tool that provides the framework for everything. Just thinking about the current playbooks where we have plays like



This type of play should serve as a basis for the rest. This has the linebackers already lined up in the A gaps and that's fine. We should also have plays where they "SHOW IT." To me a play like Sugar Cover 3 Bluff is what in defensive football is called "Showing Blitz." Several Madden plays already have this: Sugar 3 Seam, Sugar Blitz. Those three plays all SHOW Blitz and that's fine. There are some blitzes that should be that way. What we do not have and what we need are TIMED Blitzes. Plays like Nickel 335 3 Overload Fire should be timed; 245 Overload 3 seam ect all should be timed blitzes.
As far as animations, it seems to me the key would be having a "gather" or reset animation that serves as a universal transition to the secondary move. Like with branching from a spin move to a juke, there still is that transitional bridge or at least there should be, to make it look reasonably realistic. They either need an individual transitional animation to branch into before branching to the secondary move or have all these moves animated in such a way that branching from anyone to another is reasonably seamless, no matter the combination.

Matter of fact, have a "stone walled" type animation as the beginning point for every secondary move. So those people mo' capping each move would do a second version, starting from a stoned walled position. That way every move is capable of being the primary or secondary move, with a seamless transition. I hope I explained that so it makes sense. lol

Also, thanks for posting that play and that's exactly what I was referring to, basically having different defense "looks" for each play, in the playbooks. The difficulty with timed blitzes in Madden is that would have to be AI based, using individual defenders AWR or something, right? It's highly possible I don't completely understand timed blitzes but I thought the concept applied to all blitzes, in the sense of how well a defender synchronizes their blitz with the snap.
 
# 11 shttymcgee @ 06/22/12 02:06 PM
I agree that it would be nice to have certain defenders move pre-snap to try to time up the blitz. I do also think that you should have the option to show an all-out blitz similar to the one that is currently implemented, but not aligning defenders in completely unsound positions when their specific assignments conflict with the show blitz option.

All in all, the pass protection logic is very screwed up and has been for quite some time (I really can't remember a time when it wasn't). Most of the time, 5 man pressures should be able to be blocked by 6 man protections (your video showed only 5 man pro's), overloads or not, but not by sliding the un-rushed tackle across the formation. Those OL should all move together towards the outside rusher.

On a side note, I really hope that the NCAA demo is not too much of a prognosticator for what Madden is going to be (NCAA too, for that matter). I played about 3 quarters of one game before I had seen all I could handle. When I was on offense, I could pretty much shred the defense just running 4 vert variations with no hot-routing/assignment changes. Two consecutive plays when I was on defense broke the camels back: the AI QB through a ball into double coverage down the sideline, my safety (AI controlled) took a path that would have been good if the ball would have literally been overthrown by 30 yards. Then the CPU ran an option play in which the pitch man came to a complete stop and then reversed his field on the pitch, losing about 10 yards. There's no place for things like this...
 
# 12 LBzrule @ 06/22/12 02:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big FN Deal
As far as animations, it seems to me the key would be having a "gather" or reset animation that serves as a universal transition to the secondary move. Like with branching from a spin move to a juke, there still is that transitional bridge or at least there should be, to make it look reasonably realistic. They either need an individual transitional animation to branch into before branching to the secondary move or have all these moves animated in such a way that branching from anyone to another is reasonably seamless, no matter the combination.

Matter of fact, have a "stone walled" type animation as the beginning point for every secondary move. So those people mo' capping each move would do a second version, starting from a stoned walled position. That way every move is capable of being the primary or secondary move, with a seamless transition. I hope I explained that so it makes sense. lol

Also, thanks for posting that play and that's exactly what I was referring to, basically having different defense "looks" for each play, in the playbooks. The difficulty with timed blitzes in Madden is that would have to be AI based, using individual defenders AWR or something, right? It's highly possible I don't completely understand timed blitzes but I thought the concept applied to all blitzes, in the sense of how well a defender synchronizes their blitz with the snap.
Big to the second point, the "stone walled" animation, I think that's where that bounce could come in. Rather than the bounce serving as the means to initial contact, that could be the transition to the secondary pass rush move.

With the timed blitzes, that's why I advocated show blitz the way I did. Rather than the timing strictly be A.I controlled, it comes under user control. I tell them when to move.
 
# 13 LBzrule @ 06/22/12 02:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by shttymcgee
I agree that it would be nice to have certain defenders move pre-snap to try to time up the blitz. I do also think that you should have the option to show an all-out blitz similar to the one that is currently implemented, but not aligning defenders in completely unsound positions when their specific assignments conflict with the show blitz option.

All in all, the pass protection logic is very screwed up and has been for quite some time (I really can't remember a time when it wasn't). Most of the time, 5 man pressures should be able to be blocked by 6 man protections (your video showed only 5 man pro's), overloads or not, but not by sliding the un-rushed tackle across the formation. Those OL should all move together towards the outside rusher.

On a side note, I really hope that the NCAA demo is not too much of a prognosticator for what Madden is going to be (NCAA too, for that matter). I played about 3 quarters of one game before I had seen all I could handle. When I was on offense, I could pretty much shred the defense just running 4 vert variations with no hot-routing/assignment changes. Two consecutive plays when I was on defense broke the camels back: the AI QB through a ball into double coverage down the sideline, my safety (AI controlled) took a path that would have been good if the ball would have literally been overthrown by 30 yards. Then the CPU ran an option play in which the pitch man came to a complete stop and then reversed his field on the pitch, losing about 10 yards. There's no place for things like this...
shtty, my fear is A.I wise Madden is going to be very similar. The thing that will be different is physics. That's not a small difference I don't think. Just going off of what I read on some updates with guys at Tiburon now, I see how those outside runs in many of the videos happen. One of them reported that you cannot attack the gaps per usual with linebackers because with the physics, guys can trip and fall. I'm wondering if all the outside runs in the E3 videos were due to the OLB tripping and falling due to physics. I'm not sure.

On the five man pressures vs six blockers well the sad news from the NCAA demo is that the last set up for the 3 Overload Fire I showed, namely the outlawed version because of the Spy, with that one you can have seven man protection and the linebacker can still come up the middle untouched This is why I said a while back if they do not catch this stuff online for NCAA is going to be very BAD.
 
# 14 Big FN Deal @ 06/22/12 02:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LBzrule
Big to the second point, the "stone walled" animation, I think that's where that bounce could come in. Rather than the bounce serving as the means to initial contact, that could be the transition to the secondary pass rush move.

With the timed blitzes, that's why I advocated show blitz the way I did. Rather than the timing strictly be A.I controlled, it comes under user control. I tell them when to move.
I think that's where I disagree because I don't like the idea of the User being able to dictate control of CPU defenders on the field, just their responsibilities when on playcalling/sideline. Timing is an inherent risk/reward to blitzing, imo, so the only defender's timing I feel the User should have control over is one being manually controlled.
 
# 15 LBzrule @ 06/22/12 02:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big FN Deal
I think that's where I disagree because I don't like the idea of the User being able to dictate control of CPU defenders on the field, just their responsibilities when on playcalling/sideline. Timing is an inherent risk/reward to blitzing, imo, so the only defender's timing I feel the User should have control over is one being manually controlled.
I can agree with that. Here is why I hesitate to though. My concern is other than play clock what would tip your A.I defenders off to move/time the blitz? I'm thinking in terms for two player head to head games. Would you opt for offensive play button sensitivity? What's going tip them off to move other than the play clock. Otherwise the movement isn't going to sync up. It'll be just like it is now IMO. Let's say we are playing each other and your offense is at the line with 20 seconds left on the play clock. You've made the adjustments you want to make we got 20 secs left on the play clock. What triggers my A.I players to move. What if you just want to wait for ten seconds? The A.I doesn't know when to time it. I think I would do a better job of guessing.

If we go back to the real life clips for a moment there are a few keys:

1) Play Clock
2) Motion
3) Cadence/Snap Count

Hidden variables we cannot see:
Reading eyes.

Also there are some "auto-motion" blitzes in the game now that are supposed to mimic what is being advocated here. They don't time up very well at all. So we gotta have some keys or something to get the AI defenders to tee off if we want to just leave it in the hands of the A.I. else it will be severely mistimed. We can look at several plays from the Packers Nickel Psycho or even 2-4-5 Corner Fire 2 Roll



When you call this play the CB's show it way to quickly resulting in their movement coming to a complete halt prior to the ball being snapped. Ideally you want these guys on the run because they are blitzing from wide space. They need to be on the run or else they will never get there in time.
 
# 16 Big FN Deal @ 06/22/12 02:51 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LBzrule
I can agree with that. Here is why I hesitate to though. My concern is other than play clock what would tip your A.I defenders off to move/time the blitz? I'm thinking in terms for two player head to head games. Would you opt for offensive play button sensitivity? What's going tip them off to move other than the play clock. Otherwise the movement isn't going to sync up. It'll be just like it is now IMO. Let's say we are playing each other and your offense is at the line with 20 seconds left on the play clock. You've made the adjustments you want to make we got 20 secs left on the play clock. What triggers my A.I players to move. What if you just want to wait for ten seconds? The A.I doesn't know when to time it. I think I would do a better job of guessing.
Well here we go down this fundamental football rabbit hole but what the heck, lol. I started to mention this in an earlier reply but decided not to, maybe they need to add snap counts. Right now, we can snap the ball whenever, another ad lib that probably should not be there. So at least adding predetermined snap counts as another selection step necessary in the playcall screen/sideline, might allow for actually timing on blitzes. Or just have the snap count automated with an option to change it up if we want to but the point being to have a set number of snap count combinations to choose from. Then, going back to the premise of the "smart" weapon from M08, defenders have varying capabilities of timing the snaps based on AWR and PRC.

What do you think? lol
 
# 17 LBzrule @ 06/22/12 03:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big FN Deal
Well here we go down this fundamental football rabbit hole but what the heck, lol. I started to mention this in an earlier reply but decided not to, maybe they need to add snap counts. Right now, we can snap the ball whenever, another ad lib that probably should not be there. So at least adding predetermined snap counts as another selection step necessary in the playcall screen/sideline, might allow for actually timing on blitzes. Or just have the snap count automated with an option to change it up if we want to but the point being to have a set number of snap count combinations to choose from. Then, going back to the premise of the "smart" weapon from M08, defenders have varying capabilities of timing the snaps based on AWR and PRC.

What do you think? lol
About the snap counts. I can already hear it. "They are taking away too much user control." Secondly, because snap the football has worked virtually the same in every football game ever made, I think, the idea would be fighting a losing battle.

When you say "varying capabilities of timing the snaps based on AWR and PRC," why is that included here? Other than guys that jump off sides, blitzes have been walked through and it doesn't take a smart guy to figure out what he needs to do. Now the AWR and PRC I think would be good for a guy that once he realizes it is not pass, he can switch and press the gaps in the run game, but for mere timing outside of jumping off sides, not sure why they would be needed.
 
# 18 Big FN Deal @ 06/22/12 03:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LBzrule
About the snap counts. I can already hear it. "They are taking away too much user control." Secondly, because snap the football has worked virtually the same in every football game ever made, I think, the idea would be fighting a losing battle.

When you say "varying capabilities of timing the snaps based on AWR and PRC," why is that included here? Other than guys that jump off sides, blitzes have been walked through and it doesn't take a smart guy to figure out what he needs to do. Now the AWR and PRC I think would be good for a guy that once he realizes it is not pass, he can switch and press the gaps in the run game, but for mere timing outside of jumping off sides, not sure why they would be needed.
You are probably right about the losing battle and in that quote, I was referring to keying in on the snap count, allowing certain players, to get a jump on the snap if the offenses in Madden didn't change it up.

I really can't think of how timed blitzes can be reasonably represented realistically as long as the User can snap the ball whenever. Is there something I am missing though?
 
# 19 LBzrule @ 06/22/12 04:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big FN Deal
You are probably right about the losing battle and in that quote, I was referring to keying in on the snap count, allowing certain players, to get a jump on the snap if the offenses in Madden didn't change it up.

I really can't think of how timed blitzes can be reasonably represented realistically as long as the User can snap the ball whenever. Is there something I am missing though?
Big, that's why I advocated the user on defense being able to do it. But should be limited to one time. If it is shown to early, reset the play and do it again, that way it can't be used like shake blitz. As a user on defense I can pick up on motion, play clock, what the person likes to do out of each formation ect.
 
# 20 Big FN Deal @ 06/22/12 04:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LBzrule
Big, that's why I advocated the user on defense being able to do it. But should be limited to one time. If it is shown to early, reset the play and do it again, that way it can't be used like shake blitz. As a user on defense I can pick up on motion, play clock, what the person likes to do out of each formation ect.
I think I get what you are suggesting but I keep picturing it as every blitzer being synchronized headed towards the LOS, if that makes sense. It seems to be in that ilk of what I mention before about things happening far too uniform.

What about if it was a User mechanic, like you suggest but each defender approached/attacked the LOS differently paced? That way, depending on the number of blitzers, some would inherently have better timing then others and the User mechanic is more ranged control then direct pinpoint control. Something to avoid every blitzer hitting the LOS at the same time, making it playout more organic.
 

« Previous123Next »

Post A Comment
Only OS members can post comments
Please login or register to post a comment.