I don't get all this anti defense talk

[amid]

Receivers always have the advantage because they (and the QB) know where they are going, the CB doesn't.

I can't tell you how many 3-3, 7-3 scores I have had at halftime lately. I NEVER see a 63-49 game score.

One question for you: (forgetting about all the CBs & LBs don't react right, balls aren't caught for interceptions, etc.)

Take a look at your game scores... are they realistic, yes or no?

When I look at mine, compared to the NFL, the scores are low!

OK, two more questions: have you been stopped on a game winning drive? Have you stopped someone on their game winning drive? I would answer 'yes' and 'yes'.

The defense has issues, but the results are realistic.

[Tbonious Prime]

i have been saying this forever, i think people just feel they should shut people down to 0 points all the time, i think its a ego thing

but one thing about the defense that i can't defend is sometimes d-linemen take extremly strange routes to get to the qb, i saw reggie white the other day, on a fan stunt, and he went about 8 yards out before heading for the qb, and he did it more than once.

another time i saw my robert brazille heading in to stop earl campbell 4 yards behind the line of scrimmage, and he just stopped running, i couldnt believe it, yes i should have switched over, but i didnt notice this happened until i saw the replay

[nyknicks33]

All things considered, I do get resonable scores. Last game I played was a double OT affair where I hld my opponent to 17 pts.

I play with generic CB's, so its a constant adjustment porcess on D to ensure that I have put them in the best possible position to not get torched. Sometimes they still get beat, but they should. It's football, and they are generic corners.

So while it is possible to play good defensive games despite the well documented shortcomings, Some of the things that I need to do as far as pre-snap adjustments, is a little excessive.

If I call a base cover 3 zone, I really shouldnt have to make anywhere between 3-5 pre snap hot adjustments just for me to feel somewhat secure that the guys I am not controling will be put in somewhat reasonable position.

I shouldnt have to play mad-scientist with 95% of my defensive playcalls to get what I want.

[Kdrontle]

Amid, I'm completely with you here. I get very reasonable game scores for the most part. I am generally pretty surprised if I give up 30 points in this game.

My best guess to the complaints is HOW some of these scores happen. We've all seen the retard animations that give undeserving TD's. With the right adjustments, making sure focus is off, and mixing up play calling these situations are kept to a minimum.

No game is perfect and this game has few enough flaws for me to still come back for more and not be left with a bad taste in my mouth 95% of the time I play it. There ARE solutions to most of the problems mentioned, they just aren't easy ones and I think many people want simpler solutions.

[Numbski]

My scores are realistic so long as I use a defensively stacked squad. If I use a team that's balanced, it turns into a shootout, and no one ever punts. Heck, as it is with my defensively stacked team, most people I play refuse to punt and go for it every 4th down anyway, expecting a shootout and if they fail to score on a drive they presume they'll lose.

I don't recall spending so much time on trying to balance online realism in 2K5. I recall being frustrated with people using money plays and exploiting glitches, but simple offensive/defensive balance didn't feel so far out of whack.

[dtrain053]

The one complaint that drives me nuts is about INTs. People are always saying how many more picks they get playing Madden.

I got news for you DBs have crappy hands, and drop INTs all the time. It's why they play defense. I like the fact that not every ball that touches a DB's hands is an interception.

I also like the fact you can't sit in the same defense all game and expect to shut a opponent down.

[Big M]

I don't have much of a problem with defense as a whole in this game; I just have some gripes with each individual unit of the defense. For example...

Defensive backs don't catch easy picks, and can't cover the wide side of the field.

Middle linebackers are way too slow reacting to the play, and always get blocked.

Defensive linemen don't have enough of an impact on the game usually.

The defense, as a whole, plays well. It's just that most of the little things have problems.

[nyknicks33]

I don't have much of a problem with defense as a whole in this game; I just have some gripes with each individual unit of the defense. For example...

Defensive backs don't catch easy picks, and can't cover the wide side of the field.

Middle linebackers are way too slow reacting to the play, and always get blocked.

Defensive linemen don't have enough of an impact on the game usually.

The defense, as a whole, plays well. It's just that most of the little things have problems.


Controlling the MLb, largely diminishes the problem of being instantly vacuum blocked.

Since I do control him, I absolutely must have 2 D linemen when I play 4-3, or a DT when I play a 3-4. it really makes a difference and keeps dudes off of me.

It can be a pain attimes, but I think if you manually control the MLB you can use him a lot closer to how they are used in reality.

I got tired of seeing my MLB just stand there wheile a guard or FB just engaged him, so I decided to take matters into my own hands.

[Big M]

^True. I just meant that, generally, when controlled by the game, the MLB doesn't make the plays he should, and gets sucked into the block way too easily. I use the MLB manually too and it really does help if you can control him well enough.

[GoodSense]

Receivers always have the advantage because they (and the QB) know where they are going, the CB doesn't.

I can't tell you how many 3-3, 7-3 scores I have had at halftime lately. I NEVER see a 63-49 game score.

One question for you: (forgetting about all the CBs & LBs don't react right, balls aren't caught for interceptions, etc.)

Take a look at your game scores... are they realistic, yes or no?

When I look at mine, compared to the NFL, the scores are low!

OK, two more questions: have you been stopped on a game winning drive? Have you stopped someone on their game winning drive? I would answer 'yes' and 'yes'.

The defense has issues, but the results are realistic.

I can answer Yes to all of the above.
The only exception is when someone goes for it on 4th & 2 in the 1st quarter in their own territory without success. A game like that usually turns lobsided.

[wEEman33]

Take a look at your game scores... are they realistic, yes or no?

The defense has issues, but the results are realistic.

There is a major flaw in your logic:

Real NFL teams have about three times as many offensive possessions as teams do in this game.

So while the scores may be similar, the amount of offensive possessions is not, which goes to show that the offense is more powerful in this game than it is in real life.

[amid]

There is a major flaw in your logic:

Real NFL teams have about three times as many offensive possessions as teams do in this game.

So while the scores may be similar, the amount of offensive possessions is not, which goes to show that the offense is more powerful in this game than it is in real life.

Everyone knows we are playing 5 minute quarters and the offense has the upper hand. Can you imagine the outcry if (1) we had to play 2 hours + to finish a game and/or (2) we could barely score in the game?

My point is the scores are realistic (we are not playing 64-49 games or 10-3 games). That alone is a major accomplishment for any sports game.

[Reed#20]

Everyone knows we are playing 5 minute quarters and the offense has the upper hand. Can you imagine the outcry if (1) we had to play 2 hours + to finish a game and/or (2) we could barely score in the game?

My point is the scores are realistic (we are not playing 64-49 games or 10-3 games). That alone is a major accomplishment for any sports game.


Sometimes the scores are realistic and sometimes they are not. We cannot simply distance the whole from its parts, that is the final score from the elements of how you get there. As much as one might want too you simply just cannot do that because sometimes people score when they have no business scoring, thus giving an incomplete picture of what is going on. I'll admit even I get plays that I should not get on offense and score and it's all because VC made defenders in this game dumb as a box of rocks.

I think alot of the defensive complaints are due to an incommensurable impact defensive legends have on the game. We've played this out too many times. The game will allow, I'm not going to even use Rice, the game will allow Dwight Clark to own a generic CB, but it will not allow Randy White to own a Generic Center or Mike Singletary to won a generic FB leading up the middle. How do you account for the incommensurable level of impact guys have on games? There is no rhyme or reason for it except VC intentional programmed the game to where offensive players are too strong. Clark is going to beat the generic CB every single time. I just want Randy White to beat the generic Center 4 times outta ten times. What happens after that I do not care. If he gets the sack that's gravy, but if he doesn't but hurries the QB that's cake. The sad thing about it is this is only for 2 player games and VC does the same thing EA does in this regard. When a player is on the A.I controlled team offline he does things you will never see him do when he is on your team. They need to stop this type of mess. Have the player be consistent. If he performs that way for an A.I controlled team then perform that way when you are on my team. Randy White on an A.I team does exactly what I posted, but Randy White on your or my team is an average DT.

Secondly, not only is impact a factor, but taking me out of the game when I'm reading and reacting to plays is also a factor. Do you get how frustrating it is to drop back in coverage with your linebacker covering a silver or gold TE on the post route, you've read it perfectly, and you are right on the TE's hip. You press the pass defend button and your linebacker stops in place while the TE' warps forward for the catch or you press the INT button and the ball goes through your linebackers flesh like it isn't even solid just so the TE can catch the ball.

And let's not forget the CAPS, 6'6 WR's with bump buster, hops, speed burner, route god, break away burst and soft hands.


Third, the tool set is limited. By this I mean the playbook is pretty old and filled with old schemes that a high school team could exploit. Defensive hot routes can only do so much.

So yeah I understand the defensive complaints, IMO they are warranted. The whole can never be understood fully without its parts. So while scores may be realistic at times, to neglect the aspects that made up for the scores is an inadequate picture.

[amid]

the defensive flaws have been addressed many times and i recognize them. the end result, with flaws in place, yield realistic results... that's all i'm saying. check your game scores.

[Reed#20]

the defensive flaws have been addressed many times and i recognize them. the end result, with flaws in place, yield realistic results... that's all i'm saying. check your game scores.


Right and I'm saying the end results cannot simply be distanced from the aspects of how the results were obtained. That's why people have an anti-defense sentiment. You are saying because the end results are realistic then the aspects of how they get there are not as important. I'm saying, I don't think that's the case. I think both the end results and how they get there are on equal footing and that's why you get the anti-defense talk.

[greekstile]

Look, the bottom line with this game is pretty simple. You don't need guys like Jerry Rice, Dan Marino, or Barry Sanders to have success on offense. You can have a dangerous offense with all bronze players, although not as dynamic. If you utilize them right and play to their strengths, you will be successful.

However, high level players on defense are a must. I'll use all my gold and silver picks on defense, and I can hold people to about 7 points per game. If I want to get really sick, I can just run with 4 bronze players on offense, and be succesful against most anyone.

In my opinion, don't bother wasting a single pick on the DL. For the little impact they have, you are better off with a LB or a DB that can actually have an influence on the game. It's only worth picking a DLineman if you are going to manually control him, and seriously, what fun is that?

So it's pretty simple, if you want good D, pay for it. Learn how to play effective offense with lesser players.

[wEEman33]

the defensive flaws have been addressed many times and i recognize them. the end result, with flaws in place, yield realistic results... that's all i'm saying. check your game scores.

So I guess if someone made a football game where the defense was so superhuman that INT, fumble, and special teams returns were often the only ways that points were scored that game's fine as long as the final scores tend to be realistic?

Yeah right.

[amid]

Right and I'm saying the end results cannot simply be distanced from the aspects of how the results were obtained. That's why people have an anti-defense sentiment. You are saying because the end results are realistic then the aspects of how they get there are not as important. I'm saying, I don't think that's the case. I think both the end results and how they get there are on equal footing and that's why you get the anti-defense talk.

if every defensive flaw was corrected, you would have 9-3 scores and everyone would cry that the game is no fun and the worst, most frustrating game ever. the game with its defensive flaws is realistic and fun.

[Reed#20]

if every defensive flaw was corrected, you would have 9-3 scores and everyone would cry that the game is no fun and the worst, most frustrating game ever. the game with its defensive flaws is realistic and fun.


That's a stretch of the imagination. We wouldn't know the scores would be that way unless the flaws themselves were completely absent. And we wouldn't know whether or not the game would be fun or not.

[kcxiv]

My scores are pretty much realistic and i use a balance attack. I have gotten a ton better on defense and i know almost exactly what players are going to do in certain money situations for them. I learned the tendancies. People will ALWAYS go to their money plays. I have played so many games, that i have seen all the money plays and i can recognize them fast.

I played Wreckers the other day and he scored 14 points off me on offense. He had a pick 6 becuase i did something boneheaded. He replied to me, great freaking D. WE need to rematch though, because i had a blast.

Anyways, i know there is flaws in this game on both O and D, but you can be good on D with a balanced attack.

[StIlLpUsHiN']

It's this simple the game yields realistic results, in an unrealistic way. Thats it point blank. I don't care about the scores I care about the gameplay. That's why we buy the game given enough time if the D wasn't as flawed people would figure out how to score in a realistic fashion, and not by praying the Rocket Arm Qb can sling it to J. Rice on the fade route. Overall its a good game but when I have games where a have 17-19 PD (passes defended) and no INT's something is wrong.

[amid]

when I have games where a have 17-19 PD (passes defended)
that's a good example, fix the offense in this game, the scores are too low.

[StIlLpUsHiN']

that's a good example, fix the offense in this game, the scores are too low.

But honestly do we really buy the game so that we can have games end up being 24-17, when 1-3 of the scores were because the game lacks the programming to make the players perform as the should, or do we buy the game for the gameplay sim aspect(as close to real life as possible) this may be my opinion only but if I had to play a ten minute game to get a realistic score with good defense from the game I'd be ok with that. For some that would totally defuse the idea the get the Gold back and take a qaurter per drive concept.:rolleyes:

But thats just me I like good defense and offense let my Generics catch when open, and let my "Legends" perform like "Legends":D

[JUIC3D 3]

The defense is fine when not on all-pro setting.

Most of the complaining is because most of the people's playcalling sucks. Once you learn to call the right plays and play on Legend, the D is fine.

I just played FlaxWless with the final score endeding up as 17-10. His playcalling was phenomenal on D, which made it actually *gasp* hard to score?!!!! This isn't madden where you run the same D every time and be successful. Once you learn to playcall and have playmakers on your Defense, you'll realize there is nothing wrong with the defense.

[StIlLpUsHiN']

The defense is fine when not on all-pro setting.

Most of the complaining is because most of the people's playcalling sucks. Once you learn to call the right plays and play on Legend, the D is fine.

I just played FlaxWless with the final score endeding up as 17-10. His playcalling was phenomenal on D, which made it actually *gasp* hard to score?!!!! This isn't madden where you run the same D every time and be successful. Once you learn to playcall and have playmakers on your Defense, you'll realize there is nothing wrong with the defense.

I've played only three All-Pro games (before reset) and over 250 games collectively since the reset, I play exclusively in the Legend Lobby the D at best is a 6.5-7 out of ten, combined with the one armed whiffs, awkward DB animations vs deep balls, LB's stopping in place or delaying while user controlled or just no reaction at all, is plenty to cause frustration. I know how to play defense whether I choose to run a base defense or I need to do match-ups within a Zone. Truth is the defense does yield realistic scores but still in an un-realistic fashions, have most of us found band-aids for most of these troubles yes of course but that alone doesn't excuse the issue with the programming A.I. for the defensive palyers. :)

[JUIC3D 3]

^^^

Maybe, it's because I'm in leagues with the sliders on Legend with a few changes. (Ask NFLHITMAN for them). I don't expect my D to be perfect, but most of the time they do a good job.

[nyknicks33]

It's this simple the game yields realistic results, in an unrealistic way.


That really is the best, most concise why of putting it :thumbsup:

[StIlLpUsHiN']

That really is the best, most concise why of putting it :thumbsup:

I appreciate the post check your grammar....:D

[nyknicks33]

This issue conflicts me, because there are times when I see some truly wonderful things occur on defense--like a perfect looking transition from back peddle to sprint, or drive by a DB, or when my LB's have filled their gaps when I have blown up a counter play with my MLB.


At the same time, it is frustrating because it just shows that the potential is there to make something truly great. The game is just flat out unfinished.

I think a lot of these issues would not be discussed if 1 change was made. If the dominant defensive lineman was as dominant as any other top tier player.

Example: Take the impact that the greatest WR of all time has on the game: Jerry Rice; has on the game as compared to the guy considered by many to be the greatest defensive tackle of all time: Bob Lilly.

You have to account for Jerry Rice on each and every possession of the game, whether you have Night Train Lane or Tom Brookshier out there. If you do not, you will pay a severe price.

Bob Lilly(who is really very good if you ever took the time to use him in this game), by all accounts, was borderline unblockable yet his impact on the game vs a all generic oline is nothing compared to how Jerry Rice terrorizes stacked defensive secondaries.

This just isnt right, and is completely out of balance.

If Reggie White was tossing generic tackles around like rag dolls dang near every play, you'd see some changes in guy's team builds right quick.