User Pass
Home Sign Up Contact Log In
Forum > Goal Line Blitz > Field General - How Important is it really?
Page:
 
jdbolick
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by WiSeIVIaN
Neither it's rise nor fall were tracked by any empirical proof at all.

That is not at all true, but facts have never stopped you from spewing ignorance all of the forums like a three-legged cat with diarrhea. Various people have analyzed the effect of the general abilities by reviewing morale increases from play to play, which can be tracked. Most concluded from the data that the General abilities didn't have enough of an effect to be worth end-of-tree investment.
 
bhall43
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by WiSeIVIaN
Only WL MVP QB I've OC'd had 8+ in it.


thats a wrap fellas case closed. 8+ MVP status.
 
Dub J
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by WiSeIVIaN
Seriously though, Field General on QBs is one of the random things that was group-thinked to be popular meta stuff, then group-thinked to be unpopular anti-meta stuff. Neither it's rise nor fall were tracked by any empirical proof at all.

Short answer, no one still knows if the general SA's are good.



 
Clinton
offline
Link
 
Way back when we used to build an nt and dt with specific focus on d line general and augmented stats. I remember that it did work but not for the nt. the nt was just a big road block that augmented the triggers of the rest of the line. I have not do e this since the system changed. Tempted to build a true d line general for curiosity sake.
 
nexill
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by jdbolick
Originally posted by WiSeIVIaN

Neither it's rise nor fall were tracked by any empirical proof at all.

That is not at all true, but facts have never stopped you from spewing ignorance all of the forums like a three-legged cat with diarrhea. Various people have analyzed the effect of the general abilities by reviewing morale increases from play to play, which can be tracked. Most concluded from the data that the General abilities didn't have enough of an effect to be worth end-of-tree investment.


This is true. I ran a study a long, long tiem back (like in season 15-17 somewhere) on DG on MLBs, and it made a significant difference in energy recovery whether my players were on the field with a DG 10 MLB versus a DG1 MLB. It was around 15-20 energy over the course of a normal game, *per position*. But then I tried re-running that study like 8 seasons ago, and while I didn't do nearly as comprehensive of a job, it was far less impactful. So I don't know if I just didn't look at enough data the second time, or if it got stealth-nerfed along the way.

But even if we had actual numbers...which of course are very easy to get, it just takes time...it's still a judgement call as to whether or not it is "worth it".
 
Clinton
offline
Link
 
I think it was the same time period as well. 15 or so seasons back it was effective. And yes, I stopped using it because I too stopped seeing results.

 
chivas
biblioteca n9ne
offline
Link
 
If everyone else isn't using it anymore...use it
 
Page:
 


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