First of all, I absolutely love the game or I wouldn't dedicate so much time to it. But and this is a huge issue, you my friend have a major game exploitation occurring on the defensive side of the ball with game calling. Succinctly put and without personalizing it, a GM could spend 5 minutes on their team reducing the defensive play calling to two specific plays that stop essentially everything and not touch anything else offensively or special team wise and transform their losing situation overnight to long winning streaks.

There is a specific example I can provide but I'll keep it clean and just say that from scouting this particular situation before and after and having no issues covering their negative and low average run plays + minimal offensive plays of burst overall that the lone move of reducing their defensive play book down to two plays and having it generate such overwhelming positive results is scary and downright game manipulation, to be honest.

Contrast this with those whom spend 2-3 hours+ with their teams when setting them up for a new season and you can understand the frustration and why one may come close to quitting.

My solution and I've heard there has been testing in MFN-1 to off-set and marginalize this 'strategy', would be too either a) allow the reduction of 30 to 10 minimum plays in one's defensive playbook meaning a GM has to use at least 10 defensive plays. That and/or if I'm facing a 2 defensive play opponent I should be able to allocate 5 scouting shares to each play thus greatly reducing its otherwise lovely effect.

I've been hesitant to broadcast this over the entire platform but really it has gotten out of hand.

i think the Increase negative impact of running the same play multiple times that is on the development roadmap which is scheduled for the next release/update will take care of the play calling either be offense or defense.

I think people should wait until that thing is released to every league because it might solve the problem.

You could have all 30 plays in your PB and still only call two if you set your matrix or rules to specifically target those. So unfortunately wouldn't do much to alter this strategy. Plus it only addresses the symptom, not the cause.



This is a pretty elegant solution, I think. I like it a lot, and don't know why it hasn't already been implemented as a 'patchwork' resolution until more permanent fixes address the defensive play-calling issues.

Thank you and you are absolutely correct about rule implementation that could be used to stream only 2 defensive plays even with a 10 defensive play setting.