Uncovered WR's

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Uncovered WR's

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 >> Uncovered WR's

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Uncovered WR's - 2/24/2010 7:50:15 PM

SJ9R

Posts: 27
Joined: 11/23/2007
Status: offline

I know this has been discussed once before but I don't remember the final word....

Was there a final fix for DB's occassionaly leaving a WR uncovered? I was playing last night, in the conference championship, and my team gave up 3 bombs for TD's. In 2 of the plays the DB's failed to cover one of the WR's. I seem to remember that we need to make sure there are not WR's with the same speed. Is this still the case?

Also, I am not using Hacks latest version as I wanted to finish the season before I switched. I will be updating in the next season however. Having said that, my team (the one I control) does not use Hacks Defenses. I use the base defenses that came with the game.

Have I missed something regarding the fix for this? It's realy frustrating!!

Post #: 1

RE: Uncovered WR's - 2/25/2010 2:11:47 AM

mudrick

Posts: 162
Joined: 4/4/2005
Status: offline

I found this to be very hard to prevent with a plan full of zones, blitzes, and 5 or 6 down lineman defenses. I end up seeing guys break free now and then and scores are always high.

What I did was take the playbook "Defense 43 1.3" playbook and remove all of the plays that had 5 or 6 down lineman. I also removed some ridiculous blitzes and stupid zones. Then I added many of hacks D's. But only the m2m D's. Either 3 down lineman or 4 down.

So what I have left are a bunch of m2m, m2m blitzes, and most of the zones in the original D I started with. I do have some blitzes that are zones, but they are good enough that the QB doesn't get too much time in the pocket. I also have one play that has 5 down lineman, but I made sure that all 5 eligible are covered in m2m.

As a result i rarely if ever see guys breaking free uncovered. But beware.....sometimes the Cornerback will fall and the WR will run uncovered.

(in reply to SJ9R)

Post #: 2

RE: Uncovered WR's - 2/25/2010 2:56:52 PM

SJ9R

Posts: 27
Joined: 11/23/2007
Status: offline

I'm ok with a DB falling down- that happens on occasion. In fact there was a play where I blitzed and the opposing team hand the perfect call- a quick slant with a LB in coverage. It went for 6. Again, I'm good with this. What I can't stand is a totally uncovered WR. There were at least 2 times this happened, both for TD's. In addition, I run a 4-2-5 base defense. So it's not like I don't have DB's in coverage.

I have done the following to try and fix the long ball issue-
Decresed the coverage distance between DB's and receivers-
Increased the DB's base reaction time
Increased the DB's pass coverage for each individual player (increased by 5 points)
Changed the speed of WR's so no two have the same for each team (however, if this changes from game to game or changes during the game then I'm in trouble as I don't change before every game)

This has helped overall, but it does not help when a reicever is left uncovered running down the field.

(in reply to mudrick)

Post #: 3

RE: Uncovered WR's - 2/25/2010 3:51:40 PM

Mykal

Posts: 1777
Joined: 4/3/2008
Status: offline

it needs to be changed in the playbooks
change your m2m coverage settings
each DB in m2m should have the "either" prefix

I arn't saying you wont ever see an uncovered reciever again
but it will be almost eliminated

< Message edited by Mykal -- 2/25/2010 3:52:50 PM >

_____________________________

http://maxmykal-forum.forumotion.com/forum.htm

(in reply to SJ9R)

Post #: 4

RE: Uncovered WR's - 2/25/2010 4:52:06 PM

mudrick

Posts: 162
Joined: 4/4/2005
Status: offline

Look, I did not do a single thing you have listed. You can either do what Mykal says, or use m2m D's by Hack. And like Mykal says, it will still happen from time to time but almost be eliminated.

(in reply to Mykal)

Post #: 5

RE: Uncovered WR's - 2/25/2010 7:36:32 PM

SJ9R

Posts: 27
Joined: 11/23/2007
Status: offline

Thanks guys, I will do as both of you instruct. I like the defenses I am using for my team so I will go in and edit those as Mykal suggests. As far as using Hack's plays, I use all of those for the computer teams anyway- and am upgrading to version 5.2 for next season.

Another reason I made the above changes is because I have been tweaking the constants to find the mix I want. I have added more of a defensive rush on pass plays, made passing itself more acurate (to increase pass percentage), wanted to see some broken tackles, etc. So the changes benefited other areas as well.

(in reply to mudrick)

Post #: 6

RE: Uncovered WR's - 2/26/2010 4:45:57 PM

mudrick

Posts: 162
Joined: 4/4/2005
Status: offline

Also remember. Depending on the overall talent in your league, and the plays you use, the "mix" tends to change. But it's like an ebb and flow. I take the route of "gameplan" and making sure my league's overall talent stays somewhat neutral through a lot of retirements. Now that the new retirement program has come out it is so much easier.

BTW, I notice a lot of broken tackles as is. But that's just my league.

(in reply to SJ9R)

Post #: 7

RE: Uncovered WR's - 2/26/2010 5:16:27 PM

SJ9R

Posts: 27
Joined: 11/23/2007
Status: offline

I'm playing a college league and didn't see very many missed tackles. Definitely didn't see completed passes. Thats why I have heavily tweaked the constants. Also, I am using more variations on offense and that needed some tweaking too- Nebraska is running the wishbone, Arkansas State the wing T, just added Houston running the pistol, and Missouri State is running a spread.

By increasing pass completions- at least to get it at a realistic level I noticed the running offenses were at a disadvantage. So increasing the amount of missed tackles helped them be more competitive. Now if I could just get some sacks and interceptions in games that are played (I see them in simmed games)...

Also, I was averaging 4 or 5 fumbles a game so I heavily tweaked the RB's hands.

I'm really looking forward to see how this season goes because this is season 3 and I think I might finally have it were it needs to be, especially if the uncovered WR issue is taken care of...

(in reply to mudrick)

Post #: 8

RE: Uncovered WR's - 2/26/2010 10:37:04 PM

mudrick

Posts: 162
Joined: 4/4/2005
Status: offline

I have a solo pro league. Normal amount of sacks, INTs, fumbles and broken tackles. Kick and Punt returns as well. Completions vary from 45% - as high as 70%. Mostly between 50-60

But a lot has to do with your settings and plays. The type of league you have and so on. I notice as the years go on in my league the above changes due to overall league talent. This is why retirements are important for my league. But sometimes you just have to let them play out a season. I have seen very low scores one week, then the next week it seems like half the league is scoring 30-40 points. Don't go by one or two games.

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Ints are directly related to the DB's "catching" rating.

(in reply to SJ9R)

Post #: 9

RE: Uncovered WR's - 6/30/2010 1:13:26 PM

Marauders

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: SJ9R

I know this has been discussed once before but I don't remember the final word....

Was there a final fix for DB's occassionaly leaving a WR uncovered? I was playing last night, in the conference championship, and my team gave up 3 bombs for TD's. In 2 of the plays the DB's failed to cover one of the WR's. I seem to remember that we need to make sure there are not WR's with the same speed. Is this still the case?

Also, I am not using Hacks latest version as I wanted to finish the season before I switched. I will be updating in the next season however. Having said that, my team (the one I control) does not use Hacks Defenses. I use the base defenses that came with the game.

Have I missed something regarding the fix for this? It's realy frustrating!!

Many of the base defenses in the basic playbooks were created before the game had modified zones or detailed M2M coverages. Before that, the number of receivers were limited as well. Because of this, the defensive plays are not adequate for updated offenses.

As I recall, there was a bug that included the QB speed into some coverages, so a receiver was free, but that should have been fixed long ago. I did not have problems with receivers being the same speed in testing.

If one goes strict M2M, then cover with EITHER to make sure all offensive players are checked off. If one uses combination defenses, then make sure the safeties cover deep like a Cover 2 or Cover 3 would do in the real game. If one is blitzing, the safeties can gameble and come up, but that can be dangerous if the QB rolls or is max protected. Just as in the real game, there are risk/rewards for any action or scheme.

(in reply to SJ9R)

Post #: 10