Warrior General Games

I've basically always hated that CPU players are so bad, but it's also hard to just make them decent builds when the meta is shifting continuously. The idea I've been thinking about to help make them generally better is to, on the back end, pick a recently retired HoF player, and work towards emulating their build. That would keep the builds dynamic at least, even if they aren't current meta, they shouldn't be awful builds, either.

The problems, of course, is that is will turn generalized CPU players into specialized builds. If blitzing LBs are topping the HoF one season, all up and coming CPU players will be blitzers, even though having all blitzing LBs wouldn't be ideal. Or a season where rushing is predominant, all CPU players for that generation will be rushing focused. You'd also never see CPU HBs that were capable of catching a pass because nobody builds that way.

I don't know. I can generally reason away the cons with "but that's how the real game is played". CPU players are already a tromp, so even if emulating real builds doesn't always hit the mark, the current version never does. HBs that are mediocre at catching passes doesn't matter if they are mediocre at everything else and spent a lot of points in blocking.

Can you make multiple specialized builds which get placed on CPUs randomly?

A blitz, coverage and run stuff LB build that rotates evenly through new CPU LBs?

do the same for other position: 2 power back builds and 2 elusive builds for every one receiving build for HBs etc.

Originally posted by HayRow
Can you make multiple specialized builds which get placed on CPUs randomly?

A blitz, coverage and run stuff LB build that rotates evenly through new CPU LBs?

do the same for other position: 2 power back builds and 2 elusive builds for every one receiving build for HBs etc.

Not in way that would make them dynamic that I can think of, no. The premise was basing them on builds that are actually in the wild that people are using, not just whatever I think might be good, especially when meta shifts and whatnot. Designing CPU builds for the current meta would be destined to fail long term, and...I'm bad at the game, so me trying to keep them up to date with new metas seems like a failing proposition.

I like the idea. Sure, the players will miss the mark much of the time, but that beats their status quo of missing the mark ALL the time. Also, desperate managers sifting through the CPU rubble to fill out their rosters might occasionally happen upon a hidden gem...

Pretty sure I suggested something similar eons ago.

Create a bunch of template builds for each position. Even better have the community build them for you or use HoF builds.

Have the CPU player's last name be the build type. That way people know what the type is (without knowing the exact values if you care about keeping that secret).

You can add some randomness to the build (+-5 skill points) in each attribute so there is still some variability.

I'm guessing there are some inherent problems with CPU builds vs Player builds. Example: Player builds maximize Conditioning to very high levels because it has high value. I doubt CPU players have 95+ Conditioning levels.

Still new here, but is there a reason why we cpu builds are not visible? Even if it was just to owners and coaches would be great. Just curious.

Can I select which CPU player I sign?

CPU teams (Randomly generated styles)

When this style is generated auto place a team of CPUs to compliment said style but just have a data base (player pool) of pre built or designed players for those styles of teams. Heck even if you cant do a name generator for those guys every time, none of us are going to remember if you reuse names. This will at least give your CPU teams an identity.

As far as players for agents to use, tricky area as it would quite possibly cost you guys a lot of money if we agents don't have to build toons. So you would want them good but still not up to the level we can boost our toons. The only thing I could think of is give them half the SP boosts with no AP boosts. On player bio page for CPU just list what style of player it is *PHB EHB SQB* Honestly if we are using cpu toons and you tell us you've designed them loosely off HOF builds we shouldnt even really need to know the CPU build. Conditioning is obviously a popular choice among all agents so design it for the cpu to at least get to 80 Conditioning maybe?

Just my opinion.

I like the idea of giving cpu toons templates... we can help you just make base templates of different styles for each option. They don't have to be meta, but decent enough to be worth while despite meta changes, especially with you all giving cpu teams their own playbooks it could be interesting.

Examples:

QB - Pocket or Tuck & Run

HB - Speedster, Power, Scat, etc

WR - Speed, Possession, Balanced, Shifty

LB - Pass Rusher, Coverage, Middle

SS - Hitter, Coverage, Combo

etc etc.

I'd have no problem helping creating base templates... like here is a low budget basic speed back who can catch out of the backfield and is a decent kick returner:

http://www.glb2scout.com/vpimages/7_3344_1559360197.png

Here's a low budget between the tackles goal line power back:

http://www.glb2scout.com/vpimages/7_3978_1559361045.png

HoF may a great way to do it. Blitzing LBs and Power HBs will almost always be at the top. It would be a great improvement though. If someone wants a run stuffing LB they may have to build one themselves.

Would be interesting to watch a team full of blitzing LBs trying to tackle PHBs, could set some ridiculous BRKTK records.

This could be awesome if we limit it to 2-4 seasons so the builds aren't stuck in the old meta - since the non-boosted CPU players won't hit the same marks as boosted players, we might need to be sure physical skills like sprinting get the CPU's foremost attention to get as closer to the benchmarks set there and sacrifice other areas a bit. They probably will need to have mental skills be closer as well.


If you just have them copy and come short in a linear fashion across the board you will probably end up with too low a values in those areas to be effective.

Just something to consider/look out for.

Actually, thinking back on it, wasn't there a change to make CPUs boosters now?

That could cause problems for new players finding teams if CPUs are more effective than even boosting newbies...

How are CPU players currently assigning their points? Is it completely random?

Would it be better to do it by percentages?

Ex. All HoF wrs invested say 22% of all gained skill points into sprinting. Then have the cpu do that +/-3% or so and every season a new wr might go to hof changing the percentage to say 20%.

Random numbers I pulled out of my ass obv