RLWJR wrote:
I don't really look at it like trying to break the engine. I look at it like if I want to run outside I need OL that can get there in time, and because of the extra room available outside, I don't need them to really hold a hole open, I just need them to get in the way of the defenders. I need them to be fast and merely engage someone on the other team. That's the idea anyway, we'll see how it goes.
Likewise though, my plan is to build a D that puts a much higher import on the speed and acceleration of the DL as well. I think speed/accel is very important on both sides of the ball.
Just so you know, that wasn't a sarcastic comment - if you do something "outside of the box" and it results in unrealistic results, I want to know about it. If you do something outside of the box that actually produces realistic results (FireFly in MFN-1 had a couple games where he didn't punt - the results matched some articles we both had read on Football Outsiders about how there is an advantage to going for it on 4th down far more than teams do - but then his second game he came up short using the same strategy, as you would expect) - I'd love to hear about that too. That's really what I mean by "breaking the engine", doing something where the cause and effect doesn't match real life. The main thing is that the guys who push the envelope are ones who help identify issues with the game engine, and I _do_ love it. Your logic for moving your positions around - I'd love to hear how it goes, and if you come to any conclusions about it what they are.