Beta update release | MyFootballNow

Beta update release

Beta Chat

NOTICE: This league is using the BLEEDING EDGE game engine. For more information, click here.

Re: Beta update release by raymattison21 @ 4/11/2018 8:52 am setherick wrote: raymattison21 wrote: https://beta87.myfootballnow.com/watch/1659#302867 A slight difference in route vs man ends up a ten yard blown coverage . Way too sensitive Just skimming the log. That play doesn't bother me as much as this one: https://beta87.myfootballnow.com/watch/1659#302826 The one Ray posted is bad because the MLB blows the coverage so bad he doesn't know if he's supposed to cover the TE or the RB (the WR4 vs the WR5). That seems like a straight up bug. The one I'm posting is a broken interaction between stutter and M2M still. The stutter ends the route, so the DB stops covering. The WR then starts running the same route again, but since the DB stops covering, the DB has to locate a man to cover and then try to catch up, but it's too late. Why do DB's leave their man at all when the route ends? This was, and still is, awful in 0.4.x. It's worse in 0.4.3. I had another one but it's too time consuming to go through the log and not all of them. I get one copy and paste each game.m This code has been bugged with stuff like this dozens of times each game for seasons . There was another where two points of route separated a wr and cb 15 yards.... Another where the CB had higher route by ten but was lost in the dust 10 yards.... Another two blow coverage with that same crappy TE (ex fb)and LBs...... A handful of dump offs where 60 and 80 man coverage lbs couldn't handle it at all. .... That mysterious wobbly ball was seen a few times on the blitz call with defenders over five yards away..... Two wide open drops....(that would have been deep tds) Ad 12 run defense DT with 94 strength standing up a 88 strength center with 92 run block and shedding the block to stuff the RB for a loss . ...... Not to mention infinity ran out of the 113 all game cause I don't use rules to put up a base defense vs. It and his team ran 6 times more efficiently cause LBS don't fill gaps properly . ...hey just sit and wait for lineman . ...we get lucky by blitzes and the lb happens to fill the right gap. IRL it the lbs responsibility to fill that gap on any run play and the other backer comes over to make an attempt on the play. Putting a base defense is a hack for an exploit. That fade might be an exploit but at least wr is marginally better. Not saying I should win or anything . Heck I'd don't scout gameplan or prepare in aNY sort of way for any game, but to think big games don't come down to exploits would be an under statement . Essentially that is what you are game planning for....limit the exploits . Really we are a zone defense rated team but we are better at playing man defense only cause there are even less exploits there.
Re: Beta update release by raymattison21 @ 4/11/2018 12:48 pm Really we should be driving away from 90 % man coverage defenses and 70 % blitzes on most downs to sub 50% man coverage and 30 % blitz .
Re: Beta update release by setherick @ 4/11/2018 2:52 pm raymattison21 wrote: Really we should be driving away from 90 % man coverage defenses and 70 % blitzes on most downs to sub 50% man coverage and 30 % blitz . M2M should be the easier of the two to get right. I'd rather get it right and then worry about zone in 0.5.0. Liked by raymattison21
Re: Beta update release by raymattison21 @ 4/11/2018 3:29 pm setherick wrote: raymattison21 wrote: Really we should be driving away from 90 % man coverage defenses and 70 % blitzes on most downs to sub 50% man coverage and 30 % blitz . M2M should be the easier of the two to get right. I'd rather get it right and then worry about zone in 0.5.0. I run a strict man defense (all leagues) for cbs and it's pretty good if you have elite players. When I run a zone heavy defense it gets shredded in all the wrong ways. Better zone would open different stuff up . You shouldnot have to rely on great man coverage to compete . Man is like an 7 or 8 out of 10 where zone is a 4 at best. Vs. Graded fornthe Run and pass. I am just ready to move on already . Like users we lose are due to the release of a new code? So many good users have left formone reason or anothrr. A new guy comes in and is used to that code a new code is released and the same type of user leaves....the ones who dislike change. I with beer (I think it was that suggested this) to split the release up. Leave all the man to man stuff out. Or its good enough . ...besides that roll man vs. Route. It's too valueable . Defenders look baffled.
Re: Beta update release by jdavidbakr (Site Admin) @ 4/11/2018 3:58 pm raymattison21 wrote: setherick wrote: raymattison21 wrote: Really we should be driving away from 90 % man coverage defenses and 70 % blitzes on most downs to sub 50% man coverage and 30 % blitz . M2M should be the easier of the two to get right. I'd rather get it right and then worry about zone in 0.5.0. I run a strict man defense (all leagues) for cbs and it's pretty good if you have elite players. When I run a zone heavy defense it gets shredded in all the wrong ways. Better zone would open different stuff up . You shouldnot have to rely on great man coverage to compete . Man is like an 7 or 8 out of 10 where zone is a 4 at best. Vs. Graded fornthe Run and pass. I am just ready to move on already . Like users we lose are due to the release of a new code? So many good users have left formone reason or anothrr. A new guy comes in and is used to that code a new code is released and the same type of user leaves....the ones who dislike change. I with beer (I think it was that suggested this) to split the release up. Leave all the man to man stuff out. Or its good enough . ...besides that roll man vs. Route. It's too valueable . Defenders look baffled. Either Zone or Run Game will be the focus of the next release. The problem with splitting the release up is that the new QB code shreds the old code DBs. M2M/M&R was not part of the scope of this release, but entered the scope when the defense needed improvements to balance the improved QB play. Liked by raymattison21
Re: Beta update release by setherick @ 4/11/2018 5:42 pm jdavidbakr wrote: The problem with splitting the release up is that the new QB code shreds the old code DBs. MM/M&R was not part of the scope of this release, but entered the scope when the defense needed improvements to balance the improved QB play. And, by and large, all of the defensive changes have been successful. The one that needs to be address is how stutter breaks coverage by "ending" the route. If that piece can be worked, out, M2M coverage will be much improved. (I'm just not throwing my hat in to test it...) Liked by Ragnulf-le-maudit, raymattison21
Re: Beta update release by setherick @ 4/12/2018 7:58 am Just skimming through Ray's film because it's still more enjoyable than playing the beta code. There is no point at look at M2M of the DBs in any of these plays since they stop using it as soon as a WR stutters. It's also worth noting that the stutter doesn't appear in the game logs for any of these plays, but it is without a doubt what is causing this broken behavior. 1) https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/7984#1448477 a) Stutter ends the route. DB stops covering. TD! 2) https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/7984#1448491 a) Same. 3) https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/7984#1448524 a) Same. 4) https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/7984#1448543 a) Guess what? Same. Liked by raymattison21
Re: Beta update release by raymattison21 @ 4/12/2018 9:23 am setherick wrote: Just skimming through Ray's film because it's still more enjoyable than playing the beta code. There is no point at look at M2M of the DBs in any of these plays since they stop using it as soon as a WR stutters. It's also worth noting that the stutter doesn't appear in the game logs for any of these plays, but it is without a doubt what is causing this broken behavior. 1) https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/7984#1448477 a) Stutter ends the route. DB stops covering. TD! 2) https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/7984#1448491 a) Same. 3) https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/7984#1448524 a) Same. 4) https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/7984#1448543 a) Guess what? Same. It is like there something you know that do not,.... 1)the stutter happens at :37 , db is still has a two yard cushion , ten yards later at :35 the db just stops covering . Allowing two yards of separation for the catch then finally he resumes covering . He's considerably slower then gets beat for the td. My main question is how that related to the stutter? It looks like he's turning around or going for a int / knockdown but like I said how do you know it's related to the stutter? Just cause this bug wasn't there before the stutter was added? Visually it is bad, but I did shut down a long passing Attack that dropped 50 on me a few weeks ago. I don't think it's the stats that are broke but visually it looks bad. Only cause it looks like he's covered .
Re: Beta update release by setherick @ 4/12/2018 9:45 am It's commonly known that in 0.4.2, and every version previous, that DBs stop covering when a WR ends his route. The most common ways to see this are looking at routes like the 113 Post Flags or the 212 Quick Hits. In the 113 Post Flags, the WR changes directions and heads up field as soon as he "touches" the sideline. When he makes this change of direction, the DB who has stopped covering has to identify the WR and try to get back into coverage. The same thing happens with the 212 Quick Hits except the WR touches the LOS and then runs a streak upfield. The DB usually stays at the LOS since the WR ends his route there and never gets back into coverage. There are a number of exploit plays that do similar things. (And, why yes, I have built an entire game plan around them in the past although it's more effective to not do so since the QB logic gets effed by those plays.) The stutter step logic is doing the same thing as Post Flags or Quick Hits. As soon as the WR stutters, the DB stops covering. He then has to identify a man he is supposed to cover and get back into coverage. It's why low coverage LBs look so bad against TEs and RBs right now. They can't re-identify their man and end up on the other side of the field. It's also why DBs are getting torched badly on long patterns. Also, if 0.4.3 is released as is, I'm just going to build a long pass offense based around WRs and TEs that have 100 Route. I don't think SP even matters in this scenario except allowing the DB to catch up, and even then, it's iffy. Last edited 4/12/2018 2:46 pm Liked by Infinity on Trial, raymattison21
Re: Beta update release by raymattison21 @ 4/14/2018 7:30 am https://mfn1.myfootballnow.com/watch/7989#1449208 Sub 40 man cover player completely baffled on his assignment. Decided to go out of bounds.