User Pass
Home Sign Up Contact Log In
Forum > Test Server Discussion > Any thoughts on low level test teams?
Page:
 
Deathblade
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by boondocksaint
Fair enough...

You know far more than p much anyone regarding the issue. I really do think that we've got to come up with some way of not fucking a player build for elite levels of competition, whilst remaining at least somewhat relevant at lower tiered levels. I'm not even really talking 14 cap (or whatever it is now), but once a player hits mid twenties even my belief is that the sim should at least be worthwhile for any type of intelligent player build.

Not possible?


First, I probably don't "know" anymore than anyone else on the issue.

But I mean, expecting a balanced sim when TEs have anywhere between 100 speed to 100 strength, QBs have anywhere between 100 speed and 100 throwing, then you have the occasional people littered throughout with 35-40 in every attribute, it's just not going to be balanced.

Regards the whole "I MEAN PLAYERS BUILT FOR LOW LEVELS"...the 100 speed / 50 agility player is going to be better than the 65/65 split. This is especially true at certain positions, like O-Line where the 100 strength 50 blocking player is going to do better than a player with 70 strength 70 blocking. DEs with 100 speed are going to trash the 8 speed OTs.

People already complained about the low level passing game...how can you expect it to be good when WRs have 100 speed, 50 agility, and 20 catching/jumping? How are they going to be balanced compared to a 100 catching, 50 jumping, 20speed/agl WR? Before level 40, it's too low to even remotely expect builds to round out.
 
Deathblade
offline
Link
 
Oh, then you will have non-boosters who are barely above the SSB crowd, that have an extra 3 seasons of training compared to similar leveled players.
 
boondocksaint
offline
Link
 


Hmm... might it be possible/plausible to just scale everything down? I get what you're saying with such a disparity in att's, and that's definitely spot on. I'm thinking out loud, and that's it, but what if everything factored less into the equation at lower levels? Or rather, 100 speed was reduced to xxx speed based on level/supporting attributes?

Am I too far off of what could be a reality here?
 
foofighter24
jumpin da snark
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Deathblade
First, I probably don't "know" anymore than anyone else on the issue.

But I mean, expecting a balanced sim when TEs have anywhere between 100 speed to 100 strength, QBs have anywhere between 100 speed and 100 throwing, then you have the occasional people littered throughout with 35-40 in every attribute, it's just not going to be balanced.

Regards the whole "I MEAN PLAYERS BUILT FOR LOW LEVELS"...the 100 speed / 50 agility player is going to be better than the 65/65 split. This is especially true at certain positions, like O-Line where the 100 strength 50 blocking player is going to do better than a player with 70 strength 70 blocking. DEs with 100 speed are going to trash the 8 speed OTs.

People already complained about the low level passing game...how can you expect it to be good when WRs have 100 speed, 50 agility, and 20 catching/jumping? How are they going to be balanced compared to a 100 catching, 50 jumping, 20speed/agl WR? Before level 40, it's too low to even remotely expect builds to round out.


While all that is true, I don't see why there still is not baseline testing. For instance, if teams were constructed that are somewhere in between a well-built team for the level and a typical slowbuild team of that level, Bort could at least find a balance he likes and then there is some basis for comparison when he changes something like o-line blocking.

As it stands now, major changes are made but balance is only considered for a small minority of users. Making the game fun at all levels needs to be considered.
 
sunshineduck
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by boondocksaint


Hmm... might it be possible/plausible to just scale everything down? I get what you're saying with such a disparity in att's, and that's definitely spot on. I'm thinking out loud, and that's it, but what if everything factored less into the equation at lower levels? Or rather, 100 speed was reduced to xxx speed based on level/supporting attributes?

Am I too far off of what could be a reality here?


I don't see how that would help.. anything.

The majority of builders gear their builds towards the end game, and they're obviously jacking up their main attributes to extremely high levels before rounding out their builds later. I don't think it's a good idea to make their experience in the minors even worse than it already is.. asking players to sacrifice their end game builds just so their dots don't completely suck in the lower levels isn't exactly going to raise interest in that section of their dot's life.
 
monsterkill
offline
Link
 
no one cares about low levels because of the wide range of lopsided and non sensical builds that exist because of bort's slowbuilding masterpiece. i certainly don't think it's worth the effort of trying to test/balance the huge attribute disparities that can exist in lower levels

so next question : why force players to wait through almost an entire year of untested/unbalanced sims?

i'm just sayin, if it's not worth testing/balancing, is it worth playing? and if it isnt worth playing...why have it?
 
jamz
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by monsterkill
no one cares about low levels because of the wide range of lopsided and non sensical builds that exist because of bort's slowbuilding masterpiece. i certainly don't think it's worth the effort of trying to test/balance the huge attribute disparities that can exist in lower levels

so next question : why force players to wait through almost an entire year of untested/unbalanced sims?

i'm just sayin, if it's not worth testing/balancing, is it worth playing? and if it isnt worth playing...why have it?


mk: I know that Bort and Catch are investigating ways to make lower levels more competitive, there's nothing concrete, but at least they know it's an issue.
 
Time Trial
offline
Link
 
I think that this game needs to work from level 1 to 80. I realize that there is a solid base of people who think that anything below pro is a joke, but there are quite a few people who invest heavily in this game that think that Pee Wee is srs business.

The nice thing about being able to test the game to make sure that it works in Pee Wee is that the builds aren't able to be crazy. There's no SSBing and there isn't a huge disparity in builds because they are often one and done type builds. Many of us even (god forbid) take catching to the first cap on our WRs.

There aren't that many builds that need to be tested and it would be a good baseline to see if the tweaks that you make for the level 70 player aren't destroying the Pee Wee game.

inb4PeeWeedoesn'tmattertrolls.
 
Deathblade
offline
Link
 
you should complain to darkus about it

he used to be the one testing peewee, but he quit doing it
 
Time Trial
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Deathblade
you should complain to darkus about it

he used to be the one testing peewee, but he quit doing it


He did it for the passing buff to fix the sim after season 12 that Fu mentioned earlier in this thread.
 
Rage Kinard
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Time Trial
I think that this game needs to work from level 1 to 80. I realize that there is a solid base of people who think that anything below pro is a joke, but there are quite a few people who invest heavily in this game that think that Pee Wee is srs business.

The nice thing about being able to test the game to make sure that it works in Pee Wee is that the builds aren't able to be crazy. There's no SSBing and there isn't a huge disparity in builds because they are often one and done type builds. Many of us even (god forbid) take catching to the first cap on our WRs.

There aren't that many builds that need to be tested and it would be a good baseline to see if the tweaks that you make for the level 70 player aren't destroying the Pee Wee game.

inb4PeeWeedoesn'tmattertrolls.


We are discussing possible ways to balance out the SIM at lower levels. Nothing concrete yet. One thing under consideration is figuring out a way to artificially enhance mental and football skills at lower levels. The big concern is finding a way to do this without making imbalanced builds even more powerful than they already are at those levels.
 
Staz
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by pottsman
The issue with setting up level 30 test builds is first, do you test "good level 30s" or "level 30s who will be good at level 60", as there's a diference between the two. Secondly, balancing game mechanics for them causes problems - if you make the sim work so that level 30s have the ideal passing game...then level 40s suddenly have above ideal, 50s even higher, level 60s it gets insane. You need to balance from one end, not the middle.


There was a brief discussion about possibly having the sim change based on competition level so that this wouldn't be the case. Obviously, things should get tougher at the higher leagues, and require higher skills/balance.
 
.spider.
Lead Mod
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by foofighter24
Not at all. It should be balanced around well built players for that level. If someone is purely building towards the end game, there is nothing you can do. I don't think anyone has sympathy for the WR with ridiculous speed/agility and little in the way of supporting attributes not performing, but when someone is rounding out earlier, if they can't perform at those levels, their entire GLB experience sucks.


So a different sim for each cap level?

And if the majority of minots is "slowbuilding" why is it a problem? They are all uneven builds across the board, so they should be on the same playing grounds.
 
Time Trial
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by jbleich
Originally posted by foofighter24

Not at all. It should be balanced around well built players for that level. If someone is purely building towards the end game, there is nothing you can do. I don't think anyone has sympathy for the WR with ridiculous speed/agility and little in the way of supporting attributes not performing, but when someone is rounding out earlier, if they can't perform at those levels, their entire GLB experience sucks.


So a different sim for each cap level?

And if the majority of minots is "slowbuilding" why is it a problem? They are all uneven builds across the board, so they should be on the same playing grounds.


Has GLB thought of capping builds effectiveness based on level? I was playing an old RPG last week and they had limiters on your four primary attributes to make sure that you couldn't just spend all of your skill points on Strength or Intelligence, but instead of saying that you couldn't assign that skill point, the game said that all skill points over X level would only be half as effective until you reached a higher level.

So in GLB that might mean that a level 10 has its top end capped at 61. Let's say someone builds a STOP with 78 Strength and 49 Speed. That STOP would play like a player with 69.5 Strength and 49 Speed because his strength above 61 only counts for half as much value.

It won't stop players from building for a long-term build, but it will limit the value of doing that in the meantime.
 
foofighter24
jumpin da snark
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by jbleich
Originally posted by foofighter24

Not at all. It should be balanced around well built players for that level. If someone is purely building towards the end game, there is nothing you can do. I don't think anyone has sympathy for the WR with ridiculous speed/agility and little in the way of supporting attributes not performing, but when someone is rounding out earlier, if they can't perform at those levels, their entire GLB experience sucks.


So a different sim for each cap level?

And if the majority of minots is "slowbuilding" why is it a problem? They are all uneven builds across the board, so they should be on the same playing grounds.


It is a problem when new users look at their simmed games and see a mess for several seasons. Can you make a compelling argument for the 5 WR's on typical cap 24 team to continue dumping money into those players? I can't.
 
Page:
 


You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.