Deathball Defense

Wibble · Post by **Wibble** » 19-06-2004 19:23

Heh, I would argue that against a decent attacking team, a 3 on 3 situation is often an advantage to the attaackers. The main reason for this is:-

If a defender boosts an attacker away then not a real problem to the attacking team

If an attacker boosts a defender away then it often leads to a goal scorig opportunity.

My answer would be longer, but I'm off to a summer ball :p

I'll argue my point more tomorrow if I can be arsed

Fooman · Post by **Fooman** » 19-06-2004 19:32

Messy is talking about good players that have played DB over a year, not most the people you will find in pubs.

If all the players are good and know what they are doing then the defender should win most the time in a 1 on 1. The offense should win most the time in a 2 on 1 or 3 on 2. 2 on 2 favors the defense slightly and 3 on 3 favors the offense slightly.

theberkin8or · Post by **theberkin8or** » 20-06-2004 01:19

3 v 3 favors the O only because the D is not organized well enough imo (unless the O is using blocking)

Messy it is a team game but so is soccer (football) and in soccer O players very much have the ability to fake out a defender. Also waiting for another team mate often means waiting for another defender. There is a very fine balance but I wish it would allow for the possiblity of beating a lone defender if you are good enough/get lucky

R3L!K · Post by **R3L!K** » 20-06-2004 01:43

in a 1v1 att v def situation, yes the def has an advantage. not a complete advantage, but an important and NECESSARY advantage.

necessary because, if there was a built in mechanism to be able to fool defenders then this method would be whored to the max. we would see less passing and generally less motivation to play as a team.

conversely in a 2v2 situation, i'd say things are very even between attack and defense and it all comes down to timing and positioning.

3v3 is open play and attackers have maybe a slight advantage since boosting opponents generally works in their favour.

the way it is now, team play is promoted over individual play.

however i continue to see very good individual players who know how to make and use space well. at the very least, attackers currently have enough tricks available to buy time for support to arrive, if they find themselves alone in offense.

i see no reason for things to change.

theberkin8or · Post by **theberkin8or** » 20-06-2004 14:39

if the built in mechanism to fool defenders was designed correctly with a long enough delay between uses and not being more powerful than giving then regular speed for about 3 steps, I don't think it would be a huge blow to team play at least not at the top levels. Especially if you made it so that you couldn't do it while charging up.

Maybe at first when ppl were trying to figure it out it would be whored but as it became apparent that it was a wasted chance if whored then you don't have that problem (at higher levels of play)

Fooman · Post by **Fooman** » 20-06-2004 17:01

This is getting silly. Just juke the defender. [RusH]Liebs can do it well, watch him and mimic it, he's beaten me a few times 1 on 1.

theberkin8or · Post by **theberkin8or** » 21-06-2004 01:35

lol @ foo we all know about liebs the sucidier.

Fooman · Post by **Fooman** » 21-06-2004 02:35

Yeah, that's when he doesn't get killed in the box.

n00bs_own_Madogg · Post by **n00bs_own_Madogg** » 21-06-2004 07:58

But please, don't say defending is easy, a 1on1 is easy, but ever other situation possible besides that is either very hard, or it's a team's responsibility.

Even I find one on one defending easy

but Messy's right, any thing other than one on one can be pretty hard, and I find myself shouting back for help from goal hanging team mates X_x

In any case

I think there is nothing wrong with the way DB is defence wise. Complaining about the RMB abusing X_x is another way of saying you suck

in a way

... I mean it is the attackers job to get around the defence right? .. dont correct me if im wrong -_-:blabla:

nameless · Post by **nameless** » 21-06-2004 12:01

I can stop 3v1's 30-40% of the time, because i look for possibilities opposed to waiting for them to come to me.

play a good offense and you won t even get 5%. If a team can t score 3on1 with 90%, they should switch to defense and hope for 1onkeep counterattack...

in soccer O players very much have the ability to fake out a defender.

aha. Why are there many more goals in DB than in football? Cos the defenders are too good? Guess what, something is wrong here...

I agree with relic.

Messy · Post by **Messy** » 21-06-2004 17:34

Originally posted by CripTonic
am I that stupid?

Prove your case. I defend in public games constantly and get the "defenders..yadde yadde ya..ponent to beat them successfully something is wrong. This holds true in any game.

Dude, I'll gladly believe you on your skill and performance, but if it's really true, you would be by far the best defender ever :s (froste x2?)

DiStUrbeD · Post by **DiStUrbeD** » 21-06-2004 21:27

am i the only person noticing that defending gets easier and easier with each version?

R3L!K · Post by **R3L!K** » 21-06-2004 22:03

its easier in this version because deflections work. thats the only reason.

theberkin8or · Post by **theberkin8or** » 21-06-2004 22:29

nameless: it is much harder to put a good shoot on goal in soccer than it is in db, that is a large part of the reason that more goals are scored in db, than and the fact that a powerful volley is much easier to preform in db. there is no skill in the "striking of the ball". db and any real sport are very different (i am sure you can figure out the reasons for yourself) but I think it would be fun to be able to juke the d just a little bit as is possible in any game that has similar flow to db (basketball, hockey, and soccer). the two fundimentals of juking in most sports are change of direction and change in speed these are not possible in db (yes i remember that sprint suxed but my idea is better

)

btw though i do agree with distrubed I simply want the short burst of speed because it would be fun (which i thought was the point of the game). Fun for the O cuz they could try to trick the D with thier "body movement" and fun for the d cuz the good ones would learn ppls move quickly and would have a challenge trying to stop the better O 1 v 1

CripTonic · Post by **CripTonic** » 21-06-2004 23:49

Fooman wrote: Messy is talking about good players that have played DB over a year, not most the people you will find in pubs.

If all the players are good and know what they are doing then the defender should win most the time in a 1 on 1. The offense should win most the time in a 2 on 1 or 3 on 2. 2 on 2 favors the defense slightly and 3 on 3 favors the offense slightly.

Congrats, you've alienated the entire new community.

I don't care if you've been playing for 2 days or 2 years, all skills and techniques are available to everyone, and it all depends on how they use them or even if you do.

Also, thats your opinion that the defenders of offenders haev an advantage when teams are equal, and is again, determined by skill and how people decide to play the game.

Bottom line is there is almost no way for an offensive player, 1v1, to get past a defender without juking them out, which even you've said takes skill, something that is developed over time. I don't think I would find myself playing a game 2-3 months down the road where I want to play offense, but almost require a team mate to score, thats just retarded, especially if the defenders are also getting better.