Originally posted by bhall43
I'd gizz my pants and retire everything GLB2 had to offer.
Which isn't a whole lot from what I've experienced
I'd gizz my pants and retire everything GLB2 had to offer.
Which isn't a whole lot from what I've experienced
Forum > Goal Line Blitz > GLB is still on Bort's radar
ghuffman
offline
offline
Originally posted by bhall43
Not really. If the whole game reset tomorrow with an entire different strategy I would bet a lot of people would swing right back over here for all the control. If they went insta level 79's, made up a ton of new VA's, swapped in some new SA trees and said for the next 4 seasons you were going to get SA and VA points. All while changing all the formations and plays to something mostly new. I'd gizz my pants and retire everything GLB2 had to offer.
As crappy as this sim was at times, adding plays and changing VAs and SAs kept me interested. That seem to stop when they went to work on glb2. Of course, i never followed the game that closely to know for sure. It was good talking points when users disagreed on VAs and SAs powers.
Not really. If the whole game reset tomorrow with an entire different strategy I would bet a lot of people would swing right back over here for all the control. If they went insta level 79's, made up a ton of new VA's, swapped in some new SA trees and said for the next 4 seasons you were going to get SA and VA points. All while changing all the formations and plays to something mostly new. I'd gizz my pants and retire everything GLB2 had to offer.
As crappy as this sim was at times, adding plays and changing VAs and SAs kept me interested. That seem to stop when they went to work on glb2. Of course, i never followed the game that closely to know for sure. It was good talking points when users disagreed on VAs and SAs powers.
SteveMax58
offline
offline
Originally posted by bhall43
They would be great if the game wasn't still the same game. But if all they do is introduce insta 79's well I guess the writing is certainly on the wall that this game is done.
Reduce the roster sizes to 40 & you'd change some build strategies in the process as well.
They would be great if the game wasn't still the same game. But if all they do is introduce insta 79's well I guess the writing is certainly on the wall that this game is done.
Reduce the roster sizes to 40 & you'd change some build strategies in the process as well.
bhall43
offline
offline
Originally posted by SteveMax58
Reduce the roster sizes to 40 & you'd change some build strategies in the process as well.
With the same set of plays as they currently have I really don't think anything would change all that much. An all run offense would be by far superior though. More so than it is now.
Reduce the roster sizes to 40 & you'd change some build strategies in the process as well.
With the same set of plays as they currently have I really don't think anything would change all that much. An all run offense would be by far superior though. More so than it is now.
Originally posted by euchrid
We've primarily been focused on developing other things for a while, but potential changes for GLB were discussed at our most recent meeting, first time in a while. (Sorry, the discussion was not about implementing things from the Suggestions forum.) Again, there's nothing official to announce, just thought some of you guys might like to hear that.
Yes because GLB2 SUCKS.
We've primarily been focused on developing other things for a while, but potential changes for GLB were discussed at our most recent meeting, first time in a while. (Sorry, the discussion was not about implementing things from the Suggestions forum.) Again, there's nothing official to announce, just thought some of you guys might like to hear that.
Yes because GLB2 SUCKS.
Dub J
offline
offline
Originally posted by Tajson
[As recent WG meeting starts]
Bort: Lets stick the agenda this time! (Insert stink eye)
Conehold: But boss, did you see the plane?
Bort: What PLANE??
Conehold: Oh, I mean the recent GLB-linked purchase report.
Bort: Oh, we need more of that.
[Insert the Superbowl ad with monkies in a boardroom before the punline]
Aka discussed...
I posted something like that. Was hilarious but someone got mad and leted et.
[As recent WG meeting starts]
Bort: Lets stick the agenda this time! (Insert stink eye)
Conehold: But boss, did you see the plane?
Bort: What PLANE??
Conehold: Oh, I mean the recent GLB-linked purchase report.
Bort: Oh, we need more of that.
[Insert the Superbowl ad with monkies in a boardroom before the punline]
Aka discussed...
I posted something like that. Was hilarious but someone got mad and leted et.
SteveMax58
offline
offline
Originally posted by bhall43
With the same set of plays as they currently have I really don't think anything would change all that much. An all run offense would be by far superior though. More so than it is now.
Agree. Thats why they need to just remove Big I. Yeah some teams are really really good at it, but any team can be pretty good at it & get the homerun play.
You think removing Big I would change the strategy of being a run vs pass team?
With the same set of plays as they currently have I really don't think anything would change all that much. An all run offense would be by far superior though. More so than it is now.
Agree. Thats why they need to just remove Big I. Yeah some teams are really really good at it, but any team can be pretty good at it & get the homerun play.
You think removing Big I would change the strategy of being a run vs pass team?
bhall43
offline
offline
Originally posted by SteveMax58
Agree. Thats why they need to just remove Big I. Yeah some teams are really really good at it, but any team can be pretty good at it & get the homerun play.
You think removing Big I would change the strategy of being a run vs pass team?
Even if you removed Big I an all run team would still dominate through GL, Shotgun, and Single Back.
Agree. Thats why they need to just remove Big I. Yeah some teams are really really good at it, but any team can be pretty good at it & get the homerun play.
You think removing Big I would change the strategy of being a run vs pass team?
Even if you removed Big I an all run team would still dominate through GL, Shotgun, and Single Back.
Originally posted by ghuffman
This game was done when they decided to create their own competition (glb2).
That's like saying Vanilla ice cream was done when they created chocolate ice cream.
This game was done when they decided to create their own competition (glb2).
That's like saying Vanilla ice cream was done when they created chocolate ice cream.
Originally posted by bhall43
They would be great if the game wasn't still the same game. But if all they do is introduce insta 79's well I guess the writing is certainly on the wall that this game is done.
Not necessarily, I think insta79's would help out quite a bit, I love the game at plateau, but I've lost all enjoyment in building....so boring.
They would be great if the game wasn't still the same game. But if all they do is introduce insta 79's well I guess the writing is certainly on the wall that this game is done.
Not necessarily, I think insta79's would help out quite a bit, I love the game at plateau, but I've lost all enjoyment in building....so boring.
What part of hamstringing a team owner from fielding a complete roster makes this game better?
It don't you say!
Well why does GLB make it difficult to field a full roster then?
You don't know?
I'll tell you why...
Bort obviously don't believe that the time and effort will translate into profit. I believe that it wouldn't be hard to make it so an agent can create an any level dot between day -8 and day 0.
Hmmm, would people spend more flex to fill in some needed gaps on the roster?
I say F**k yeah.
Sounds like more profit for a little, tiny effort.
Edit: Maybe the NFL should stop allowing FA acquisitions during preseason, and reg season. It's dumb!
It don't you say!
Well why does GLB make it difficult to field a full roster then?
You don't know?
I'll tell you why...
Bort obviously don't believe that the time and effort will translate into profit. I believe that it wouldn't be hard to make it so an agent can create an any level dot between day -8 and day 0.
Hmmm, would people spend more flex to fill in some needed gaps on the roster?
I say F**k yeah.
Sounds like more profit for a little, tiny effort.
Edit: Maybe the NFL should stop allowing FA acquisitions during preseason, and reg season. It's dumb!
Edited by BadBuc99 on Feb 10, 2015 16:16:18
ghuffman
offline
offline
Originally posted by BadBuc99
That's like saying Vanilla ice cream was done when they created chocolate ice cream.
Seriously
That's like saying Vanilla ice cream was done when they created chocolate ice cream.
Seriously
All the ideas may have merit to some extent and might make us feel good. Might even encourage us to open our wallets and buy some flex or create some dots. But 10,000 people aren't sitting on the sidelines refusing to play because the Big I is overpowered, roster sizes are too big or the O formations need to be flipped. Those things might prolong the decline and make the game more enjoyable while it does, but unless Bort has a plan to expand the user base, the decline will only be stalled for a bit and then march forward again.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
