0.4.6 is far from perfect, and is even a big step back compared to 0.4.5, the actual engine has been a big downgrade for offense by killing the passing game and limiting it by mostly using short passes.

The IA is not smart enough to take advantage of a WR vs LB matchup, and not smart enough to allow the QB to call an other play when there is an advantage with the formations, and many found that using only 2 CBs formation was still very effective even when the offense is passing with 3 or more WRs, and obviously also limiting the run with 7 men facing the offensive line.

While this is killing more the offense and reducing the offensive gameplan options, it is also reducing the defensive gameplan options by only spamming few plays from the "normal defensive backfield" personnel formations, and obviously reducing the interest we can have to play the game and making it being more and more unrealistic.

This is why, to keep a minimum of realism in the game, to keep a minimum of variety in the different teams gameplans, and not get 32 teams spamming the same plays resulting for both offense to get like 20 points max per game, I propose a vote to ban the "Normal Defensive Backfield" plays against 3 or more WRs formations.

I'll reply to this message with a yes and a no, so peoples can like the message they want to vote for, and then it will be to the commissioner to decide...

YES

NO

I haven't seen evidence that this is true, and the rule would be difficult for some teams to implement and even more difficult to monitor for violations.

I'm more concerned about how to beat the GL Attack 3, which appears to be breaking the code for non-GL offensive plays.

It is not up to league administrator's to fix the problems within the game. What does Gustoon do when someone violates it? LA's have no recourse other than to boot people. Can't take draft picks or change their lineups/play calls.

It's hard enough to know whether to complain about violations of existing rules.

Does Tennessee win every game without an underweight TE who racks up 1,500 receiving yards? I'm inclined to think it didn't matter much, especially since he's only 15 pounds under weight.

I'm not particularly thrilled about playing Detroit twice a year with their 230-pound DT getting pressure and sacks, but I haven't lost to them yet, and they just let some serious talent walk away in FA, so I don't anticipate it being a problem.

I always have two FS and two SS, but I tend to move my DBs all around depending on matchups throughout the year. Under a strict reading of the rules, I'm in violation by sometimes playing a CB at safety and vice versa. I also made a midseason change to the starting lineup in my LB corps, with my MLB and WLB flipped. I hope I didn't give anybody heartburn with that.

I don't envy the job of being a league administrator, and favor keeping it easy for them. One of the reasons I'm committed to staying in this league is Gus is one of my all-time favorites.

Instead of adding another rule, we could have a thread in the Rivalries section where we discuss how to plan for and counteract trends, like playing normal defense against three-wide sets.

Gus is one of the best commish….hands down

My 2 cents .

First off , thanks for the kind words :)


This league is still here because of the community that’s in it, some of you have been here for MFN years and made it what it is.
The OP is right we don’t want an exploit being run every game as it will just make it really boring .
But we still want to keep this unpredictable and fun , so I’m not sure what the answer is. We can implement a rule(s) but I couldn’t police this on my own , and do we want to go down this route?

Thoughts please ?

Broadly speaking, I don't think you gain an advantage by running a base defense against non-base offenses, especially if they are throwing the ball. I am not a fan of rules that tell me how I have to match up personnel.

However, I've seen a couple of teams in other leagues spamming a specific 3-4 play that effectively shuts down just about anything. Perhaps a better rule would be to cap the number of times you could call a single defensive play in a game, with some grace for infrequent unintentional violations. I don't even know if it's necessary to set a hard and fast rule so much as just have a blanket declaration like: Don't just call the same play over and over again.

I'm in favor of restricting play spamming but sometimes the RNG might get "stuck" on a certain play so additionally maybe have a minimum # of plays selected.