Warrior General Games

Originally posted by bhall43
Yup and this was my point earlier in that between rookie and sophmore I have had to help a lot of people fill out teams. The owners market starts up at Journeyman though where there is only 4 leagues and a lot of FA's. It has just been hard to keep teams floating between rookie and vet so far. But hopefully when vet league starts to fill that will encourage people to keep with it. Or GLB can provide some sort of incentive to do so.

I try and keep a few players in the d-leagues as experimental builds, but I'll generally accept contracts from human teams in order to help fill some spots.

The scary part is the blind offer from an agent you've never heard of when you have a closed build. Reeks of desparation if they don't even care what kind of bot you are building. How likely is it that you are going to fit into their system (or lol, if they even have a system).

Originally posted by Time Trial
I try and keep a few players in the d-leagues as experimental builds, but I'll generally accept contracts from human teams in order to help fill some spots.

The scary part is the blind offer from an agent you've never heard of when you have a closed build. Reeks of desparation if they don't even care what kind of bot you are building. How likely is it that you are going to fit into their system (or lol, if they even have a system).

eh i have tons of players right now running around not being used entirely at their best interest but its a little more appealing than the CPU gameplan they would have had.

Originally posted by bhall43
eh i have tons of players right now running around not being used entirely at their best interest but its a little more appealing than the CPU gameplan they would have had.

Yeah, I'm not worried about the bot, I'm worried about the viability of the team when they aren't concerned about the build.

Just because you are getting a human bot doesn't mean its the human bot you were looking for.

In fact, I'd love a contract rejection option of "these aren't the bots you are looking for, move along".

Originally posted by Time Trial
Yeah, I'm not worried about the bot, I'm worried about the viability of the team when they aren't concerned about the build.

Just because you are getting a human bot doesn't mean its the human bot you were looking for.

In fact, I'd love a contract rejection option of "these aren't the bots you are looking for, move along".

Would you argue that keeping a CPU player would be better than a human player that doesn't fit? Genuine question, not meant as a hostile one.

Originally posted by SunDevil03
Would you argue that keeping a CPU player would be better than a human player that doesn't fit? Genuine question, not meant as a hostile one.

1) It is kind of a stupid question, because if you aren't just sending blind offers, you don't have to make that choice and;

2) This:

Depends on the CPU player, the Human player, what build you are looking for, and what level you are at.

The CPU players more closely resemble human bots at the lower levels. The fairly random assignment of their SP can lead to some terrible builds as they get older, but I remember the outrage that someone won a league with 90% CPU players in S1.

If you need a run stuffer and you've gone and blind recruited a bot that has 11/11 hold ground/break run block, you would have been better off taking the CPU player. If you wanted a blitzing LB and you blind recruited a Run Stuffer, you would be better off taking the CPU player.

If you blind recruited a human player who never logs in to assign his SP, you'd be better off with a CPU player.

Gonna send you a PM because I don't want to derail the topic of this thread.

GLB2 is very similar to other MMO-style games.

If you join a team with good leadership, you can learn a lot about the game. Active forum posting, etc. help engage the user base.

If you join a team with bad leadership, you learn nothing and have a bad experience.

It was the same in EQ, WoW, etc. All the MMOs have realized that there needs to be a Guild/Group system. People play games because of the community and the friends they make in game.

In GLB2, Teams should take this role, but the problem as I see it is that the best Team Leadership people are all coming over from GLB1, made their Teams in S1 and are now hitting Pro. Five seasons into the game, the only way you get experienced players leading Rookie teams is through reset.

My idea:

1. Reduce the Chemistry hit for all teams after Rookie. Make it scale by Tier. Sophomores start at 20 chem; Seasoned at 40, Journeyman 60, Pro 80. This makes it easier to sign FAs. In the NFL, this is the point of training camp and veteran players pickup new playbooks / game plans much faster than Rookies. Why shouldn't GLB2 do the same?

2. Allow people to own more than one team. If there is a shortage of Teams and Leadership, why is GLB limiting the number of teams that good people/groups can start? Allow more than one team and lower the price of each team you have by 100 flex. Price it at 400, 300, 200, 100. Make the cap 5 teams per agent, one per tier.

(Actually, I think that price is too high. In all other MMOs Guilds are free to create. I think 2nd-5th team should be free or cost like 100 each OR allow multiple agents to contribute to the cost of teams(s). Again, this is more like real life in that there are dozens of limited partners in the ownership of some real teams. This allows strong Leadership groups to create farm teams for their Vet team. WG should want as many strong leadership people/groups to be involved in as many Teams as possible.)

If you want Free Market economics/ideas, then you have to implement a Free Market.

Currently, strong leadership is restricted while poor leadership is unrestricted. (Bort, Corndog - this is the key point.)

And this is why you have lots of agents (customers) having poor play experiences.

Combining #1 and #2 makes the whole system much better than just implementing one.

Originally posted by Xars
It was the same in EQ, WoW, etc. All the MMOs have realized that there needs to be a Guild/Group system. People play games because of the community and the friends they make in game.


Originally posted by Xars
1. Reduce the Chemistry hit for all teams after Rookie.Why shouldn't GLB2 do the same?

No. indestructible farm teams.

Originally posted by Xars

2. Allow people to own more than one team. If there is a shortage of Teams and Leadership, why is GLB limiting the number of teams that good people/groups can start? Allow more than one team and lower the price of each team you have by 100 flex. Price it at 400, 300, 200, 100. Make the cap 5 teams per agent, one per tier.


Like I've repeated multiple times, maybe you can go back a few pages and read the build up to this point... If you truly dig deep, you will find the problems aren't that the established agents need more teams, or teams cost too much...

Originally posted by SunDevil03
Hey guys, I haven't read this entire conversation, and I obviously haven't been doing GLB2 as long as most of you. But I find it odd to hear talk about there being more players than teams... at least in sophomore.

My quest to fill Olaf's Warm Hugs was not easy at all. Players were either horrible builds or owners were inactive or don't log on often.

I guess my point of view, at least in my first pre-season as a team owner on GLB2, it was incredibly hard to build a team that at least resembles a quality/competitive one.

So if you ask me, the barrier to team ownership is how stupid hard it is to find decent players to fill your team with, how full of junk/inactive players the marketplace is, and how you basically MUST have a fully human team in order to be competitive. I don't know anyone who is going to buy a team (myself included) if it can't at least be competitive. Heck, if I didn't own almost 100% of my own defense I probably would never have bought a team.

**Edit** I should also add that you would really need to hold a team owner's hand and teach them more about the game to make it more popular to own a team. Frankly, if I wasn't an avid GLB1 player back in the day, and if I didn't take the time to scour these forums, I wouldn't know anything about team ownership and would have been intimidated right away from doing it. You can't ask a newbie to jump into team ownership if they have to scour forums to find valuable information about making a team competitive. They just won't do it. Most people aren't as passionate about this as you guys.

Just my .02 cents on what I think we're talking about here. haha

Honestly ^^^^ This post won the thread.

Read it and understand it ppl. This is a game that forces a lot on its newbies (glb2 less so than glb1), but glb2 still pushes for a lot of results. It's like their is no room for newbies being bad, which is a key to MMOs... The experienced should help the newbies.

Originally posted by Jampy2.0
The experienced should help the newbies.

Exactly my point. The experienced need a place to do that. What is Romo going to teach anyone when his entire focus is on a Pro level team? If you want people to join his team, then give him and them a place where they can start their communication - AT THE BEGINNING. How else are going to stop the "bad build" problem? Let people join a Rookie team with an experienced vet. With guidance from a Romo/bhall/parab00n, do you think bad builds increase or decrease for the new agent?


Originally posted by Jampy2.0
No. indestructible farm teams.

This is just dumb. Every Major League Baseball team has had farm teams for decades. Barcelona now uses that method and it's so successful that the MLS REQUIRED new owners to implement it. Aren't you a fan of the World Cup? Why are you against an idea that clearly works in reality?

Of course some of these will exist, but they'll be competing with others trying to do the same. Yes, there is always the NY Yankees, Montreal Canadians, Barcelona's of the world, but that doesn't mean that other people stop trying to beat them.

Farm teams don't solve the problem of teams quitting if that is what you are trying to solve.

So far, we haven't hit plateau and teams drop off each season. It isn't because they lack a bunch of players or because there isn't a "guild" or a network for them to join, it is because they weren't successful and thought that by starting again they might get better.

The real problem is that they don't add any human teams and give them a chemistry grace period to absorb all of the players who aren't retiring with their team.

Alternatively, fewer teams would restart if there was some limited way for people to create bots that can play at that level. As I suggested earlier, some limited form of advanced age creation might prevent some people from retiring. Again, you would need to limit this type of addition to perhaps three or four players of this kind per team and season. The reason that respecs weren't 100% was to prevent people from doing super meta game stuff without going through off-season personnel changes.

The chem hits are pretty nasty from making drastic changes, so teams are currently retiring instead of rebuilding. If the goal is to keep the teams going, this is the problem that needs to be addressed.

Originally posted by Time Trial
Farm teams don't solve the problem of teams quitting if that is what you are trying to solve.

Yes and no. Teams quit/reset because they weren't successful. That's true. But that's also because they are currently faced with a choice of not getting better vs. restarting. It's the only choice because you can't have multiple teams.

I wouldn't have restarted my team if I could have started another one. I would have built up a Rookie team with builds, etc. of positions I wanted to replace at my higher team once they both became Pro.

But since I was limited to one team, I chose to restart. It's a false choice. Simply allowing me to have more teams would have allowed me to continue my Seasoned team into Journeyman.

Originally posted by Xars
Yes and no. Teams quit/reset because they weren't successful. That's true. But that's also because they are currently faced with a choice of not getting better vs. restarting. It's the only choice because you can't have multiple teams.

I wouldn't have restarted my team if I could have started another one. I would have built up a Rookie team with builds, etc. of positions I wanted to replace at my higher team once they both became Pro.

But since I was limited to one team, I chose to restart. It's a false choice. Simply allowing me to have more teams would have allowed me to continue my Seasoned team into Journeyman.

That being said, you don't want people to have their "team in plateau they care about" and their "farm team that is in the lol minors".

I realize that limiting team ownership doesn't prevent that entirely (network farm teams of a sort already exist where the OC becomes the owner), but I think that expressly having farm teams will generate the lolminors mentality a lot sooner than expected.

What GLB has never been able to do was to provide an incentive for winning and caring in the minors (once a huge chunk of players are in plateau... it was never really a problem in GLB1 in the days when none of the dots had hit plateau or declined). You can't make the reward anything that makes the players better, but a flex bonus or a career extension (career stats will still stop counting at the same point, but you could maybe keep the player out of the Legendary leagues for a season longer) would maybe encourage people to continue caring about winning in every season.