"Key on" vs "Man to Man"

[dreamtheatervt]

Dave (or anyone else) -

What are the differences between the two?

From what I can tell, M2M puts the player "over" the player they are covering, whereas "key on" allows you to set a starting position; and players in "key on" don't cover nearly as well as M2M. I like using "key on" for LB's that way they can cover without looking out of position. For instance, if I used M2M for the OLB's, with a MLB playing in the middle, and the offense is in the I formation, the three LB's would be stacked on each other.

The problem I run into is that the LB's with "key on" are completely incompetent once the RB they are assigned goes deeper than their original depth on pass plays. I don't think this was intended, could you sure this up in a future update Dave?

[David Winter]

M2M is for coverages. If you put a man in to M2M cover, he'll line up on that player and stick to him whereever he goes using the M2M cover settings you assigned.
 
Key On is not a pass coverage command and shouldn't be expected to work like one. Key On is designed to track a player that is still in the backfield and watch what he's doing. For example if you Key On the QB, he'll drop back a bit if the QB has dropped back looking to pass. If the QB rolls out, the defender will roll out. Key On will not line a player up against his target. If the target player comes out of the back field and into a pass route, the Key On will try to use an over cover process similar to M2M cover. Key on is basically a run stopping command. You shouldn't be expecting it to be effective for pass coverages.

[hack153]

how are most people using m2m plays. 
 
are you keeping one LB "key on"-ed a HB and the rest m2m?
 
if using m2m...how are people selecting how people get covered?  the only way it seems to work is use the same variable (as in speed, catching, etc.) for the coverage.
 
feedback would be great!

[dreamtheatervt]

Well, I was using key on for RB's and M2M for receivers, namely because I didn't want all three linebackers standing on top of each other before the snap.  It goes beyond just making it look real - maintaining backer spacing is critical for disguising coverages/assignments, maintaining proper gap control, and containing the toss play.  I'd like to see some kind of fix that will either A) improve "key on" coverage, or B) allow M2M without lining up over the man being covered.

[Marauders]

are you keeping one LB "key on"-ed a HB and the rest m2m?

 
I use Line Up On: and Key On: with mixed coverages (man/zone) and run coverage plays.
 

if using m2m...how are people selecting how people get covered?  the only way it seems to work is use the same variable (as in speed, catching, etc.) for the coverage.

 
M2M should really use one attribute, or the coverage could get changes up.

[Scott_WAR]

Yeah, I always use M2M to cover all eligible receivers. So 5 men are in M2M coverage. I always have at least 1 LB reading, unless its an obvious passing situation.
 
   My favorite setup is 5 DB in M2M. 3 or 4 DL, all pass rushing. 2 or 3 LB-- this is where the defense changes based on the situatuion. One defense for running situations with all LB reading, one for passing situations, with all LB pass rushing, one for 'any' which has 1 LB reading, and the other LB('s) pass rushing.

[Brockleigh]

M2M should really use one attribute, or the coverage could get changes up.

The one problem I have with the M2M logic is that my playbook is for a Canadian, 12-man ruleset. 5 lineman and one QB means that there are six eligible receivers in a pattern.

The M2M logic only allows you to assign to 5 players in any one attribute.

Therefore, I usually end up leaving one man uncovered. The best work-around I have is to assign by speed, and then for the one leftover guy assign by strength, but that doesn't work so hot.

[David Winter]

The M2M logic only allows you to assign to 5 players in any one attribute.

Oh for .... !!! [no applicable emoticon available]

That's a problem.. I'll get that changed for 2.2. That's what I get for looking at too many designs based on 11 man football... sorry about that.