Warrior General Games

Just played a team 1 tier above us, lost, today played a team 2 tiers above us. Journeyman vs Veteran. http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/game/105248

I know the vet team is globally ranked 72 and we are ranked 77, so I get why your code pairs us up, but, it's just not fun. We get 14-15 ladder matches a season? And if 1/3 or more of them are verse teams non-competing for a trophy it turns the actual point of your game into mis-directed phooey.

There maybe some higher tiered teams that could beat you just based on the luck of the builds, and excess of signature abilities. It's easy for a crappy higher tier team for example to shut the run down more than the pass in my opinion just due to the sheer nature of D-Line and LB's and a full extra SA.

When we aren't competing for a trophy, the ladder is still fun, but eh. But when you are in the top 5, it is less fun? I would prefer playing the same teams 5x a season as we build rivalry and try to out-coach one another meeting to meeting.

Originally posted by Mezirah
Just played a team 1 tier above us, lost, today played a team 2 tiers above us. Journeyman vs Veteran. http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/game/105248

I know the vet team is globally ranked 72 and we are ranked 77, so I get why your code pairs us up, but, it's just not fun. We get 14-15 ladder matches a season? And if 1/3 or more of them are verse teams non-competing for a trophy it turns the actual point of your game into mis-directed phooey.

There maybe some higher tiered teams that could beat you just based on the luck of the builds, and excess of signature abilities. It's easy for a crappy higher tier team for example to shut the run down more than the pass in my opinion just due to the sheer nature of D-Line and LB's and a full extra SA.

When we aren't competing for a trophy, the ladder is still fun, but eh. But when you are in the top 5, it is less fun? I would prefer playing the same teams 5x a season as we build rivalry and try to out-coach one another meeting to meeting.



And as recently as two seasons ago, folks complained heavily about playing the same teams repeatedly. It's a case of there's no pleasing everyone.

And the assumption that shutting down the run is easier with higher tier builds is pretty much debunked by the fact that Minnesota is the highest rated journeyman team, and they're still climbing the ladder.

That's the only way for the ladder to be semi-accurate -- you have to fight through all those crappy upper tier teams.

The ladder can be brutal - you're probably still paying the price for losing those 6 games in a row early last season.

Journeyman seemed to get VERY spread out -- probably because when we were sophomores we weren't protected...but it will all sort out eventually I think. I figure by next season we'll be down to 2 or 3 Presidents leagues...and the competition in league play should get better (though it got weaker this season it seems)

Just dropped two ladder games to Vet teams with a chance to punch it in at the two.

Personally, I don't mind. When I get a match like that I know it means a low scoring close loss. But it gives me a little idea of what areas need work.

I'd like to see some games within the top ten tier though

Seasoned vs vet is even more fun.

I still like this system though compared to the old one. If you are playing teams that are regularly killing you, you are probably ranked too high.

Ladder has gone from one extreme to the other...my team is top-5 seasoned, and we have yet to play even a fellow top-10 seasoned team all season. Its either someone 10 ranks below us or a journeyman team. I see a similar trend for the rest of the seasoned teams. How are we supposed to determine who is better if we never play each other? There should at least be a little bit of favoritism for teams in the same tier.

We're 5th in ladder and out of the SEVEN scheduled ladder games only ONE has been in our ladder, which was stobie's team who is ranked BELOW us at 7.


This season is nearly half over and it's been such a terrible abysmal ladder experience with zero games to be excited for and gameplan for. The game is literally keeping us from playing GLB2.

I'm sorry maybe the Veteran ladder ranks are all playing each other over and over and fighting for every win, but that sounds great to me and my staff. I'm still waiting for GLB2 to release half it's game, the ladder race.

Originally posted by Mezirah
This season is nearly half over and it's been such a terrible abysmal ladder experience with zero games to be excited for and gameplan for. The game is literally keeping us from playing GLB2.

So you don't like the challenge of playing teams better than you? I do understand wanting to play teams in your age bracket but to say there's nothing to be excited about seems like a bit of an overreaction. In all honesty, as the owner of a Veteran team, I enjoy the challenge of playing the Pro teams who are around us in overall rank. It gives me an idea of how my team stands now against what are in all honestly better organized teams with superstars.

Sorry bub, I like playing very difficult and challenging teams with coordinators who change their gameplan. Being forced to constantly play higher tier teams is an entirely different competition and one I can schedule a scrimmage for if I want to try. Half the Vet teams we play don't gameplan and if they win, it's just from sheer HB ability to break tackles, or something else silly that strictly has to do with a full 10 more levels of just building normally. They aren't better teams, they are just inactive teams on steroids.

I'd prefer to play the 4 teams above me in the ladder over and over as every game becomes a nail biter where I'm sitting on the edge of my seat every snap. Each ladder game feeling like playoff atmosphere would be a great reward for putting together a great roster for the season. The ladder trophy shouldn't be awarded to the best team in tier who had the most success vs Veterans.

I mean, it's kind of obvious, I feel like your just trolling me brah.

I've never understood why teams play outside their tier. Each tier should be separated and play only each other. There should be a playoff the final 4 ladder weeks of the season, which includes the top 16 teams in the ladder. All the other teams outside the top 16 can keep playing ladder games too. If you lose in the playoff, you just play other playoff losers to determine the final 16 rankings.

Something like this:

Week 1:
G1(1 vs 16)
G2(2 vs 15)
G3(3 vs 14)
G4(4 vs 13)
G5(5 vs 12)
G6(6 vs 11)
G7(7 vs 10)
G8(8 vs 9)

Week 2:
Winner from week before:
G9(G1 vs G8); G10(G2 vs G7); G11(G3 vs G6); G12(G4 vs G5)

Loser from week before:
G13(G1 vs G8); G14(G2 vs G7); G15(G3 vs G6); G16(G4 vs G5)

Week 3:
Winner from week before:
Championship Road: G17(G9 vs G10); G18(G11 vs G12)

G21(G13 vs G14); G22(G15 vs G16)

Loser from week before:
G19(G9 vs G10); G20(G11 vs G12)

G22(G13 vs G14); G23(G15 vs G16)

Week 4:
etc..

Your talking about a league or a tournament structure. The ladder just needs to be a grind through the rankings. The issue is it follows global rankings first, but you are awarded a tier trophy.

I would like to see you have less momentum for wins above, so a rematch is possible etc. If you ideally defend your new position in the ladder, forward momentum will make your next game vs a team 1-2 spots above you. It should be a battle for ground. The system seems okay right now, but teams need to be taken off the global tier ladder for match making.

Originally posted by Mezirah
Your talking about a league or a tournament structure. The ladder just needs to be a grind through the rankings. The issue is it follows global rankings first, but you are awarded a tier trophy.


NO...a playoff on each tier with the top 16 teams at the end of the season would be a hell of a lot more entertaining than anything on this site. And if it is scheduled like I suggested, every team would play the correct number of games they are already playing.

so teams compete to be ranked in the top 16, and then there is a tournament at the end? How is not like NCAA march madness?

Originally posted by Mezirah
so teams compete to be ranked in the top 16, and then there is a tournament at the end? How is not like NCAA march madness?

It is like NCAA March Madness. It is also like every other sport where you have a playoff. You can't tell me there would not be some serious hype around a 16 team playoff on each tier at the end of each season. If you are number 17...go cry to the number 69 NCAA team.

Supposedly we're getting tournaments eventually. It's what was supposed to be happening on the current off-day in the 3 day cycle.

Dunno if Corndog's canned the idea of finishing them yet or not though.