RE: man in motion bug???

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: man in motion bug???

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Sports] >> Maximum-Football 2.0 >> Rules >> RE: man in motion bug???

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: man in motion bug??? - 11/29/2006 2:58:06 AM

Shaggyra

Posts: 608
Joined: 2/10/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: GWsFBAReservUrFBTeam

I still not going to believe it until I either see it on TV or read a E-Mail from The NFL stating it is. Because, I have looked The NFL On-Line rule book does not state it. It is only way for anyone to truly know.

Yeah, I already know about all other positions catching passes.

*-unlike you, I am not even 51% sure, that was true.[/font][/color]

I posted rules above you knucklehead!

< Message edited by Shaggyra -- 11/29/2006 3:02:32 AM >

_____________________________

FBMax for Maximum Football

(in reply to Great White)

Post #: 31

RE: man in motion bug??? - 11/29/2006 3:00:20 AM

Marauders

Posts: 4428
Joined: 3/17/2005
From: Minnesota
Status: offline

quote:

quote:

At the same time, the split end would have to step back, and the flanker would have to step up. This all has to be done prior to having all players in the set for a full second prior to the snap.

Not true, if it was true no audibles would be possible.

How is that? If multiple players are moving at the same time, they must all come to a set for one second before a player can go in motion. What does that have to do with audibles?

Yes, this is a shift. I have already stated that two players may not be in motion at the same time, meaning at the snap. I am well aware of the terminology.

quote:

quote:

After a shift or huddle all players on offensive team must come to an absolute stop for at least one second with no movement of hands, feet, head, or swaying of body.

Does not read that no more shifting or motion can happen. Only when the word 'Set' is said by the QB, there is no more of any movement allowed.

A team may shift, and shift again, and even shift, set and send a man in motion. In all of those circumstances, the players must come to a complete stop for one second prior to either the snap or sending the man in motion.

Blame the Fighting Irish, because it was their Split T shift to Single Wing that caused the rule change from unlimited motion under American rules.

quote:

quote:

The difference is slight but important, a OT can never ever become a receiver, he is a OT made to be classified as a Ineligiable Receiver, by a bad formation.

An OT can be a reciever if he reports to an official before the play, means he is not in an bad formation; thus what I posted needs no corrections and was right, unless what follows is answered yes.

Let's get this straight, a player that normally plays tackle can report to the official to be eligible to catch the ball. He does so because his number makes him ineligible.

If a player who normally plays OT reports and then lines up outside of another tackle, he is then a tight end. If he lines up in the slot, he is a slot back; if he lines up in the backfield behind the tackle box, he is a running back. In all cases, he is no longer a tackle. Tackle eligible means his number is cleared for the play.

quote:

Now, I think about it I wonder if a OLman lined up in a RB position, if he can also catch a ball? Because, I have never heard those OLmen report to an official before the play, to make him a eligiable receivers.

Yes, he must report, and he can catch the ball. Where he lines up is moot as long as he is no longer lined up as one of the five linemen.

- Marauders

< Message edited by Marauders -- 11/29/2006 6:19:58 AM >

(in reply to Great White)

Post #: 32

RE: man in motion bug??? - 11/29/2006 3:31:10 AM

dreamtheatervt

Posts: 483
Joined: 4/22/2006
From: Virginia
Status: offline

To get back to the original topic of the thread, even when I put the motion 10 yards backward then back forward in a V shape, the TE still ran through the OL.� It's a minor issue that doesn't effect gameplay, it's just asthetics.� You did nothing wrong hack, its the game.

< Message edited by dreamtheatervt -- 11/29/2006 6:55:53 AM >

_____________________________

DTVT's Playbooks

(in reply to Marauders)

Post #: 33

RE: man in motion bug??? - 11/29/2006 4:03:22 AM

hack153

Posts: 525
Joined: 11/11/2006
From: New Englander in Northern, Northern California
Status: offline

Dream, thanks for the millionth time...

_____________________________

UPFL is in the off season...
United Premier Football League

(in reply to dreamtheatervt)

Post #: 34

RE: man in motion bug??? - 11/29/2006 4:46:54 AM

Great White

Posts: 318
Joined: 11/7/2006
Status: offline

hack153,

I own the first-version, will not waste my money again. I do not need to waste money on a game, that admites it does not have trading and other features I demand from the FB Games. I am not the company that leaves it at either purchase the game or you cannot try it, while others use Demos.

_____________________________

Thank you. Not racist/favorite animal. Hate Madden/NCAA/Industry is behind. Past-coach/player/sports radio/referee, now-private: teacher/coach/owner-Great White's Sports Association-FootBall/Rugby/Lacrosse, planned-late �2010. Student/industry person? PM

(in reply to hack153)

Post #: 35

RE: man in motion bug??? - 11/29/2006 5:03:25 AM

Great White

Posts: 318
Joined: 11/7/2006
Status: offline

OT can be a reciever if he reports to an official before the play; is different in a important way,�I thought about coming home, from an uncovered OT. OT can be a reciever if he reports to an official before the play, is when a another OT� lines up next to the OT *or I believe possible, never seen) Another player(s) takes the OT (or also the same side OG) place and allowing OT (or also the same side OG) to move to other side of the line and the other side of the lines' OT)*; not when any OT is simply left uncovered. *Then the OT (or also the same side OG) declares to the referee (either before the running of the playor after shifting) that he is a eligiable receiver(s) and catch a pass. Imagine, if The OT is an CFB's ex-TE (like Buffalo Bill's new LOT), then try to stop it.*
�
*-Just theory, since Univ. of Miami and now I have seen a NFL Franchise, move OLmen to one side of�the OC�and other Players replace them at their old OL positions (on the other side of the OC).

< Message edited by GWsFBAReservUrFBTeam -- 11/29/2006 5:56:40 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Great White)

Post #: 36

RE: man in motion bug??? - 11/29/2006 5:23:09 AM

Great White

Posts: 318
Joined: 11/7/2006
Status: offline

Marauders,

quote:

quote:

quote:

At the same time, the split end would have to step back, and the flanker would have to step up. This all has to be done prior to having all players in the set for a full second prior to the snap.

Not true, if it was true no audibles would be possible.

How is that? If multiple players are moving at the same time, they must all come to a set for one second before a player can go in motion. What does that have to do with audibles?

Yes, this is a shift. I have already stated that two players may not be in motion at the same time, meaning at the snap. I am well aware of the terminology.

Below is your first-mention of stopping for a sec. in between shifting or motioning, big surprise when I read it. That was why, I posted that. I can swear I read one of your posts where you did post two=players moving at once.

quote:

quote:

After a shift or huddle all players on offensive team must come to an absolute stop for at least one second with no movement of hands, feet, head, or swaying of body.

Does not read that no more shifting or motion can happen. Only when the word 'Set' is said by the QB, there is no more of any movement allowed.

A team may shift, and shift again, and even shift, set and send a man in motion. In all of those circumstances, the players must come to a complete stop for one second prior to either the snap or sending the man in motion.

Blame the Fighting Irish, because it was thier Split T shift to Single Wing that caused the rule change from unlimited motion under American rules.[/quote]

You just repeated what I posted, but in your own words. Except, must also stop for at least one-sec before shifting, again. What, I am not indicating it is bad or good. It is just a rule USAn FootBall has to go by.

Since, we are just going back and forth on this, I am ignoring everything I read on this from you, until I get proof from The NFL.

_____________________________

Thank you. Not racist/favorite animal. Hate Madden/NCAA/Industry is behind. Past-coach/player/sports radio/referee, now-private: teacher/coach/owner-Great White's Sports Association-FootBall/Rugby/Lacrosse, planned-late �2010. Student/industry person? PM

(in reply to Great White)

Post #: 37

RE: man in motion bug??? - 11/29/2006 6:20:04 AM

Marauders

Posts: 4428
Joined: 3/17/2005
From: Minnesota
Status: offline

Two players can move at one time; that is a shift, but they must come to a complete stop at least for one second prior to the snap or any motion on the snap.

I tired of restating the rule in twenty different ways to make it clear. I am sure everyone else reading this thread understands the rule.

Post #: 38

RE: man in motion bug??? - 11/29/2006 6:34:01 AM

Marauders

Posts: 4428
Joined: 3/17/2005
From: Minnesota
Status: offline

quote:

To get back to the original topic of the thread, even when I put the motion 10 yards backward then back forward in a V shape, the TE still ran through the TE. It's a minor issue that doesn't effect gameplay, it's just asthetics. You did nothing wrong hack, its the game.

The game does not support line shifts of that sort. One can move the players when creating the play, but they will not shift around. One can also flip the play.

(in reply to Marauders)

Post #: 39

RE: man in motion bug??? - 11/29/2006 8:45:17 AM

Jim1010

Posts: 4
Joined: 3/20/2006
Status: offline

Hi all,

I have noticed the Tight End running through the Offensive Linemen occasionally, but not all the time. And as you said it does not effect the game, just looks funny so you're not the only one who has seen it. I am using the plays that have come with the game, I have not made my own (lack of time).

GW,

I do not post here much, I barely have time to play the game as much as I would like (Which I have found to be very fun).
I noticed you said in an above post that you own the First version of the game. If you already paid for the game once then you can download all the patches and you will have the latest release of the game. It does not cost extra to download the latest Beta patch. I can tell you that I have downloaded all the patch releases and the game is really a good Football Simulation.

So If you did already buy the game when it first came out then get the patches and play with the game some.

Ok I will be quiet now.

(in reply to Marauders)

Post #: 40

RE: man in motion bug??? - 11/29/2006 9:01:00 AM

hack153

Posts: 525
Joined: 11/11/2006
From: New Englander in Northern, Northern California
Status: offline

here's to JIM!!!

if you need any playbooks, there are a bunch of us on here than can get you some.

_____________________________

UPFL is in the off season...
United Premier Football League

(in reply to Jim1010)

Post #: 41

RE: man in motion bug??? - 11/29/2006 3:50:29 PM

Great White

Posts: 318
Joined: 11/7/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim1010

Hi all,

I have noticed the Tight End running through the Offensive Linemen occasionally, but not all the time. And as you said it does not effect the game, just looks funny so you're not the only one who has seen it. I am using the plays that have come with the game, I have not made my own (lack of time).

GW,

I do not post here much, I barely have time to play the game as much as I would like�(Which I have found to be very fun).
I noticed you said in an above post that you own the First version of the game. If you already paid for the game once then you can download all the patches and you will have the latest release of the game. It does not cost extra to download the latest Beta patch. I can tell you that I have downloaded all the patch releases and the game is really a good Football Simulation.

So If you did already buy the game when it first came out then get the patches and play with the game some.

Ok I will be quiet now.

quote:

not have trading and other features I demand from the FB Games.
tip of the iceberge Plus, I remove/uninstalled the original download copy, doubt I can still get downloads free; I will try, though. Just do not expect my interest to stay with so much missing, in what FBP '98 had, let alone some of EAS and ESPN.

< Message edited by GWsFBAReservUrFBTeam -- 11/29/2006 4:01:20 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Jim1010)

Post #: 42

RE: man in motion bug??? - 11/29/2006 8:12:46 PM

timtellean1

Posts: 77
Joined: 3/28/2005
Status: offline

GW-Install and run FBPro '98 on your damn computer and GO AWAY!!!!!!!
You offer NOTHING useful!!!!!!!!

(in reply to Great White)

Post #: 43

RE: man in motion bug??? - 11/29/2006 9:00:30 PM

hack153

Posts: 525
Joined: 11/11/2006
From: New Englander in Northern, Northern California
Status: offline

it was Mr. Plum in the Maximum Football Forum, with the keyboard!

here's to you tim!

_____________________________

UPFL is in the off season...
United Premier Football League

(in reply to timtellean1)

Post #: 44

RE: man in motion bug??? - 11/29/2006 11:07:40 PM

DirkGildun

Posts: 52
Joined: 2/7/2006
Status: offline

I wish everyone here for real discussions about MaxFB (and who already own the game) would realize that GW is a troll who claims that:

1) He's been a football coach even though he doesn't seem to know some basic football concepts and rules.
2) He's been a teacher even though he can't type a correct sentence -- spelling-wise, grammar-wise, punctuation-wise, or capitalization-wise.

He's just an agitator stirring the pot.

If everyone here who wants to:

1) Learn how to play MaxFB with all of its nuances,
2) Point out existing bugs to David for their eradications,
3) Make useful suggestions to David on improving the game,
3) Create helpful mods to increase enjoyment of the game,

would just click on the green "Ignore" button under 1 of GW's posts, we could all ignore him, and maybe he would go haunt some other forum.

(in reply to hack153)

Post #: 45

RE: man in motion bug??? - 12/1/2006 4:01:32 PM

Brockleigh

Posts: 418
Joined: 10/25/2005
Status: offline

Wow... all of this just from a simple misunderstanding.

(in reply to Great White)

Post #: 46

RE: man in motion bug??? - 12/1/2006 8:12:28 PM

Great White

Posts: 318
Joined: 11/7/2006
Status: offline

Jim1010,
�
�� What everyone (including Mr. Winter himself) will not address*�is that I very strongly�believe there is no way it�could not eat-up Play-Clock time and as a result ability to multiple audibles as much as needed. Let alone if you have the ball,�are losing and have no times, it would extremely costly.
�
*-Probably hoping it will go away, in enough time for them to fix it, without much negative attention.
�
�� What is The NCAA writing code for MF, now, and is there going to advertisement breakins.�LOL!
�� Inside joke, for fans of CFB Div. 1A, for those that do not get it.�
�� Sorry, as about as good joke funny as I am at using the english language.

< Message edited by GWsFBAReservUrFBTeam -- 12/3/2006 7:14:16 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Brockleigh)

Post #: 47

RE: man in motion bug??? - 12/1/2006 8:51:52 PM

DONMVP

Posts: 1378
Joined: 3/6/2006
From: Husker in california
Status: offline

Man , what a discussion , of course on my screen its one side thats right .Since i have a block on , only see the game owners side. I wish all things were as great as clicking that dot . Maybe one day i`ll design plays or playbooks , for my teams , but now just glad some of you have shared with the rest keep it up and have fun. Also saw TE running into line , no big deal .

(in reply to Great White)

Post #: 48

RE: man in motion bug??? - 12/1/2006 8:59:43 PM

hack153

Posts: 525
Joined: 11/11/2006
From: New Englander in Northern, Northern California
Status: offline

i think past games had the same problem so now that i know it's nothing, i'm not too worried about it. maybe it will get fixed, maybe it won't, not a major issue.

_____________________________

UPFL is in the off season...
United Premier Football League

(in reply to DONMVP)

Post #: 49

RE: man in motion bug??? - 12/2/2006 1:35:44 AM

Great White

Posts: 318
Joined: 11/7/2006
Status: offline

quote:

Since i have a block on, only see�the game owners side.

Just so, no members (that have yet to use the block button-green) become misinformed by this ignorant comment, in DONMVP's post, here it what the Block button does. All the block button does is block the particular user you no longer want to read posts from, receive�PMs from, send PMs to or of course, put on your buddy list. It does not automatically weed out all the members who have not purchased MF and block them.

< Message edited by GWsFBAReservUrFBTeam -- 12/2/2006 1:39:24 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to hack153)

Post #: 50

RE: man in motion bug??? - 12/2/2006 3:16:39 AM

DONMVP

Posts: 1378
Joined: 3/6/2006
From: Husker in california
Status: offline

Glad i decided to click back and read some of your comments to go with this tread . First off my last post , if you thought what i said was ignorant maybe you should look at most of your post on this site . These guys have been trying to have a good conversation over some rules and you blew it out of the water as usual . Did`nt realize how much crap i missed from you attacking people on here . Seems like anytime someone objects to your ramblings you blast them here or in pm`s . Iknow your going take this as an attack so be it , its not meant to be .Iwas just imforming people that clicking that button , i could come to this board and with your comments blocked i could read others comment quicker . Since 99 percent on this board own the game , it enables me and others to chat and help them with stuff on here . keep this from being a flame war of words on here .

(in reply to Great White)

Post #: 51

RE: man in motion bug??? - 12/3/2006 3:29:04 AM

local8h

Posts: 801
Joined: 5/28/2006
From: INDLAND EMPIRE
Status: offline

Anyhow back to the original question about man in motion player running to the otherside , well i use to see that a lot on the old build, but i havent seen that bug appeared on the latest Public Beta Patch.

< Message edited by local8h -- 12/3/2006 3:34:33 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to DONMVP)

Post #: 52

RE: man in motion bug??? - 12/3/2006 7:32:58 AM

Great White

Posts: 318
Joined: 11/7/2006
Status: offline

Well, I guess if it is not in the newest version, not sure I believe it yet-too little buyers playing the game, we will see in a few months-, it would be a non-issue.
�
Also, I read people typing that it is other FB Gaming Games; I never saw it in FB Video Gaming Games (EAS's Madden and NCAA Football and ESPNNFL), I only saw it in FB Computer Gaming Game (FBP '98)*. People typing about how MF is not alone (not arguing that MF is alone, in having such problems), just should�type next time�(and a correction) that�Off. and Def.�FB Players only run into each other or run infront of OLmen�(while�performing presnap movements)�in�FB Computer Gaming Games.
�
*-I am guessing it is consequence to being able to do sophisticated play editing and creations, and FB Gaming Games advances not enough to make players smarter about presnap movements. Unlike FB Video Gaming Games (EAS's Madden and NCAA Football and ESPNNFL), FB Computer Gaming Games (FBP '98 and MF) provide a lot better options in play editing and creating.

< Message edited by GWsFBAReservUrFBTeam -- 12/3/2006 7:12:51 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to local8h)

Post #: 53

RE: man in motion bug??? - 12/3/2006 7:58:14 PM

hack153

Posts: 525
Joined: 11/11/2006
From: New Englander in Northern, Northern California
Status: offline

we hit 3 pages of bickering because i asked a simple question. happy holidays!

_____________________________

UPFL is in the off season...
United Premier Football League

Post #: 54

RE: man in motion bug??? - 12/3/2006 8:23:23 PM

Great White

Posts: 318
Joined: 11/7/2006
Status: offline

Let clearify this.

Post #: 22 �(7-posts to understand the first-post never admiting he was wrong or sorry and incorrectly argue that TEs because the move in another direction/Insult anyone that has ever coached and played USAn FootBall or any one who really understands USAn FootBall, above High School-not most on here-which continued without stop)

RE: man in motion bug??? - 11/28/2006 5:21:30 PM� �

showPicture("11/28/2006 5:21:30 PM",0,0,0,1310654,154)

Marauders

titleAndStar(1690,0,0,false,"","")
Matrix Legion of Merit

Posts: 1690
Joined: 3/17/2005
From: Minnesota
Status: offline

I understand, Hack.� Thanks for posting the picture.

Normally, an end would have to step off the line, come over to the other side, and then reset.� At the same time, the split end would have to step back, and the flanker would have to step up.� This all has to be done prior to having all players in the set for a full second prior to the snap.� Otherwise, it is a penalty for more than one player in motion.�

A player cannot run along the line of scrimmage in motion in any case.

Maximum-Football does not really allow this kind of movement.� It is�easier to just flip the play.

< Message edited by Marauders -- 11/28/2006 5:25:23 PM >

< Message edited by GWsFBAReservUrFBTeam -- 12/3/2006 8:31:03 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Great White)

Post #: 55

RE: man in motion bug??? - 12/4/2006 12:42:46 AM

Marauders

Posts: 4428
Joined: 3/17/2005
From: Minnesota
Status: offline

quote:

Let clearify this.

Post #: 22 (7-posts to understand the first-post never admiting he was wrong or sorry and incorrectly argue that TEs because the move in another direction/Insult anyone that has ever coached and played USAn FootBall or any one who really understands USAn FootBall, above High School-not most on here-which continued without stop)

I was in no way wrong. I was spot on from the start.

Ask anyone reading this forum other than you.

What you quoted from me was correct in every way. Do you need me to break it down for you?

A team must have seven players on the line of scrimmage at the snap.

A team may only have seven players on the line of scrimmage at the snap.

A team must have an end covering the tackle on each side at the snap.

If a player in the tight end right position wants to get to the left tight end position, the team must do the following prior to the snap: the player at the right tight end would have to step off the line, come over to the other side, and then reset. At the same time, the split end (on the left side because he was covering the tackle) would have to step back (the player shifted to tight end on the left, so there can be no split end, thus the receiver had to step off the line at least a yard to become a flanker), and the flanker (on the right side because he could not be a split end) would have to step up (he would have to set on the line to cover the right tackle).

This all has to be done prior to having all players in the set for a full second prior to the snap (because two players cannot be in motion at the snap and more than two players had to move at one time). Otherwise, it is a penalty for more than one player in motion (if they are not set one second prior to the snap, all three players are considered in motion even if all three are not actually moving at the time of the snap).

A player cannot run along the line of scrimmage in motion in any case (only players off the line of scrimmage can be in motion - running along the line of scrimmage is illegal).

Again, what part of that do you not understand?

- Marauders

< Message edited by Marauders -- 12/4/2006 12:49:34 AM >

(in reply to Great White)

Post #: 56

RE: man in motion bug??? - 12/4/2006 3:02:31 AM

Shaggyra

Posts: 608
Joined: 2/10/2006
Status: offline

I'm with you Marauders.

_____________________________

FBMax for Maximum Football

(in reply to Marauders)

Post #: 57

RE: man in motion bug??? - 12/5/2006 7:22:42 AM

Marauders

Posts: 4428
Joined: 3/17/2005
From: Minnesota
Status: offline

A little tidbit has been forwarded to me from Brockleigh: in the CFL, a backfield player in motion at the snap may be within one yard from the line of scrimmage at the snap as long as he crosses the line of scrimmage farther than five yards from the offensive tackle. That would allow a backfield player to being within the one yard buffer as long as they are moving forward at the snap. They would not be able to be in tight coming from the wing, as that would be unfair in blocking on running plays, but it is helpful for flankers and slotbacks doing their downfield routes.

I would like to thank Brockleigh for passing that along to me, as it will help me in play design.

Post #: 58

RE: man in motion bug??? - 12/5/2006 3:35:47 PM

Great White

Posts: 318
Joined: 11/7/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Marauders

A little tidbit has been forwarded to me from Brockleigh: in the CFL, a backfield player in motion at the snap may be within one yard from the line of scrimmage at the snap as long as he crosses the line of scrimmage farther than�five yards from the offensive tackle.� That would allow a backfield player to being within the one yard buffer as long as they are moving forward at the snap.� They would not be able to be in tight coming from the wing, as that would be unfair in blocking on running plays, but it is helpful for flankers and slotbacks doing their downfield routes.

I would like to thank Brockleigh for passing that along to me, as it will help me in play design.

_____________________________

(in reply to Marauders)

Post #: 59

RE: man in motion bug??? - 12/5/2006 4:13:37 PM

Marauders

Posts: 4428
Joined: 3/17/2005
From: Minnesota
Status: offline

Yes, in the CFL. What is your point?

I have already gone through the rules in American (as in United States and not North American as a whole). This is an exception that is in Canadian rules that was worth going over for community members who may be designing plays for the Canadian ruleset.

- Marauders

(in reply to Great White)

Post #: 60