We’ll see how many of these I can answer before it’s time for “House” but I’ll get to the rest later.
1. WR-TE-TE-RB-FB (Two TEs)
As both respondents pointed out this adds +5 to your run ratings (not shown on the play calling screen for the RB) and subtracts 4% from your PC chances (also not shown) with no effect on INT chances or yardage on a complete pass.
2. WR-WR-WR-TE-RB (3 WRs with no FB)
This is -2 to the run rating (about .4 yards per carry) for a single RB set. However we are probably going to reduce this to just minus 1 in a minor v705 update. Too many recent teams play a lot with just 1 RB and this appears to be affecting the stats.
3. WR-WR-TE-TE-RB (Two TEs but no FB)
As both respondents notes the 2nd TE will avoid the -2/-1 penalty for not having a second RB. However a 2nd TE does not get the BB bonus (+3 to +7 yards on 1 in 20 plays) whihc is clearly noted in the play by play.
4. WR-WR-WR-RB-FB (No TE)
Minus 3 for not havinga TE in the lineup (about .6 yards per carry).
5. WR-WR-WR-WR-RB (Run and Shoot)
Still just minus 3 for no TE. You might think there should be an additional penalty for only one RB but that would penalize run and shoot teams too much. Some times concessions are made to getting the stats right.
6. WR-WR-TE-FB-FB (both RBs are FBs)
There is no penalty for this.
7. WR-WR-TE-RB-RB (two RBs but no FBs)
It’s minus 2 for using 2 RBs instead of a RB and a FB. THis is waived if a team does NOT ahve a BB on the roster (see 7a) but we are considering making some changes there for v8, particularly if a team is designated “use single RB”. Doesn’t seem right to allow them to benefit from using two RBs when they never really played that way.
7a. Does the answer to the above question change if a team has no FBs on their roster?
8. WR-TE-RB-RB-FB (3 RB set)
Minus 5 on the run ratings for 3 RBs. although you might think that 3 RBs should HELP your running game if we didn’t have the -5 then coaches might use 3 RB sets for seasons and teams which didn’t use them. So this -5 forces coaches to sue teams realistically.
9. TE-TE-RB-RB-FB (3 RB set with two TEs)
Two TEs is +5 and three RBs is minus 5 so the effects cancel. No effects
10. How does a team checked as limited formations (LF) tend to play? What effects does this have?
An LF team won’t have WRs or TEs. They’ll have ENDs. They’ll generally play with two RNDS and three RBs (probably HB-HB-FB. There are no plus or minus effects on running or passing ratings for this formation because that’s the way the team was designed to play.
Generally seen in teams from 50s and earlier but can be seen in college teams which employed the wishbone or any similar 3 RB set. Also used for teams like Georgia Tech where the two slot backs are designated HBs and the two wideouts are designated ENDs.
The previous respondents each confused LF with limited XDBs. Limited XDBs is a setting for a season or league while LF is a setting for individual teams. Limited XDBs means XDBs can only be used if a team is watching for deeper passes – that is with a deep zone or soft man defense.
V7 added a season option for no XDBs which means XDBs never can be used. The 1930s seasons were set this way.
11. Assume you have an LF team but have a flanker on your roster or that a player is rated as either HB or Flanker. What changes if you play with 2 RBs and a flanker (HB-FB-FL) versus three RBs (HB-HB-FB)?
As noted above LF generally means HB-HB-FB-End-End. However some LF teams also have a player who can flank out (listed as a flanker) and become a 3rd “end” instead of being a 3rd RB. Obviously he can’t run from that flanker spot. However his PCRs remain unchanged whether he is a 3rd RB or a flanker. So why ever use him as a flanker?
The answer has to do with the penalties for incorrect double coverage (DC). The general penalty for incorrect DC is a 4% increase in the pass completion chances (no effect on yards). Those effects are even stronger if the incorrectly DCed player is being thrown a ML or L pass. The key is understanding that incorrect DC effects do NOT apply if the player being thrown to is a RB. So playing that guy as a flanker means he’ll get a bonus on pass plays if the defense DCs another player. He wouldn’t get that bonus as a 3rd RB.
Although this question was about LF teams the same rule applies to non-LF teams: RBs do not get a bonus for incorrect DC only WRs and TEs (or ENDs and FLs on LF teams).
12. This wouldn’t be possible on a regular team (maybe on a draft team) but can happen when comparing across teams. What’s the difference between WR-WR-TE-RB-FB and WR-WR-TE-RB-BB (Fullback vs. Blocking Back)? Assume “use BBs” is checked in season rules.
BBs or FBs avoid the “-2 penalty” when “use FBs in 2 RB sets is checked. However BBs also can produce the +3 to +7 yards on many runs with a 1 in 20 chances. A FB won’t produce that bonus as frequently. I’ll add that a FB with 4-8 CPG (WH=C) will produces this bonus half as often. A 9 or more CPG FB won’t ever produce this bonus.
13. How will the AI play a team which is checked as single wing (SW) on the team editing screen?
SW teams ALWAYS will play with a FB-BB-HB-End-End and the QB. The SW designations makes sure the AI chooses BOTH a FB (who generally ran the ball a lot on real SW teams) and a BB in the lineup. It also insures the team gets that BB bonus. Normally players with 3 or less CPGs are BBs (if the BB option i set) but NOT if he has so few carries because he’s just the 2nd string FB. The SW designation gets around that problem.
In real life the QB was really called the tail back, the FB was the FB, the BB was the QB (lined up close to the line and was there primarily to block at the point of attack) bad the HB was the wing back (lined up outside the end).
14. How will the AI play a team that is checked as “single RB” on the team editing screen?
This is somewhat of an obvious answer: the AI will mostly run plays with that team in WR-WR-WR-TE-RB set. This fits many modern teams well who play the spread offense.
However they won’t always line up with three WRs. Sometimes they’ll line up with a 2nd RB, particularly in short yardage situations, especially if they also have a BB on the roster.
From: simarcw 3:46 pm
To: poniewaz (11 of 15)
4952.11 in reply to 4952.10
Wayne,
I found this very interesting. I consider myself a decent/veteran SAT coach and I learned some interesting things.
3 quick questions I always wanted to ask:
1. Why are we not allowed to have a 3 TE formation ?
2. How come in the RB-BB-WR-TE-TE formation the pass penalty isn’t higher than 4% ?
3. How come sack / hurry numbers don’t go up for a no TE formation ?
From: poniewaz 4:25 pm
To: simarcw (12 of 15)
4952.12 in reply to 4952.11
1. 3 TE formations would be somewhat difficult. Let me review the problems encountered with even allowing for two TEs. To do that with the way SAT is set up every team must have two TEs available on the play calling screen. If they don’t then one slot will be used by the program to create a dummy TE. So for 3 TEs every team would either have to have 3 TEs for a game or potentially two dummy TEs would be on the play-calling screen. I don’t like the way Blocking TE looks now let alone having that appear twice. For some teams there would be definite space limitations – that 3rd TE might knock out a WR with catches.
The solution to the above would be to have some kind of separate button somewhere which is “3rd TE.” The 3rd TE does not appear on the roster screen and is nameless and can’t catch passes etc. He could be a backup linemen for that matter. The idea is that if you click 3 TE you could only select TE-TE-RB-RB (4 guys) on the play callings screen.
I think it also has the possibility of creating imbalances. For every new wrinkle we add we have to decide on a balancing effect (a disadvantage. Perhaps more importantly we have to program the offensive AI when to use the formation and the defensive AI how to respond when a human opponent uses it. It’s just another way for a human coach to gain an advantage over the AI.
Not saying we won’t ever consider it, just that it is more difficult to implement than it first appears.
2. 4% was chosen because that really is the general trade-off in most defensive calls. If a defense is dn2 on runs (which is about 1 yard per carry, probably a bit more) it tends to be Up4 on passes.
So the +5 on the run rating is equivalent to about an extra yard so it made sense to have the effects on passes be dn 4%. Of course two TEs do NOT affect yardage on completions or int chances as a Dn4 defensive effect would on passes. OTOH, keep in mind that a 2nd TE probably isn’t as good of a receiver as the 2nd WR would be. In fact generally it is unlikely a TE (let alone a 2nd TE) is much of a deep threat (ML/L).
3. Never thought about it. Although by “go up” do you mean more chance for a sack/hurry or less chance? I’m not even sure two TEs should make a difference there. I will admit that it makes some sense that single RB formations (or no RB formations) probably should have increased sack chances. Of course with a single RB it all depends if a team does or doesn’t send him out on a pass. And we all know in real-life that he’d probably look for a blitz and then decide whether to release. That’s hard to program.
On a side note, last year someone suggested a MAX PROTECT option to protect the QB. I did some reading on it and some stuff I read by a defensive coach said max protect is irrelevant to his defense (or at least has no effects on sack chances). His LBers simply read what the RBs are doing: pass blocking or releasing. If an extra RB blocks, the LB reads that and an extra LBer rushes.
So much of real FB is not about what the coach or QB calls ahead of time, it’s about players on the field reading and reacting. That’s why I’ve always maintained that no football sim, however complicated, ever captures real FB. In sims, we try to fool the defense into making a wrong call. In real FB plays try to fool A SINGLE PLAYER (maybe two) into making a wrong read of the ongoing action.
Let me make one more general comment about formation effects. It makes sense that different formations have different advantages/disadvantages. They do in real life as well. However the stats upon which the ratings were based were made with a team using whatever formation they used.
For example assumes Manning and INDY average 4 yards per carry with X% (X being low) of sacks and 67% completions using a shotgun formation with 3 wides. So Manning gets rated based on those stats. Now what happens if we put formation effect in such as 1 RB is minus 2 on runs or 1 RB should produce increased sacks or 3 wides improves PC% (that’s not a rule in SAT other than a 3rd WR probably will be a better receiver than the 2nd RB)?
Here’s what happens: Indy’s RBs under-perform, Manning gets sacked more than he should and Manning completes a higher % than what he really did. That’s the danger in formation effects and it is certainly a danger in having large formation effects. I’ll add that in v705 (out this weekend) we removed the -2 penalty for 1 RB. Quite simply most teams run that formation these days and rushing averages were falling short of real.
How’s that for some more long-winded ramblings!
Wayne
