Warrior General Games

Originally posted by vipermaw82
I feel even if they adjust this, they need to cap the amount of S* on each team. Limit it to say 5 (random number) then make this adjustment maybe.

I know you said 5 is random, so what is the number? Makes me curious about everyone's thoughts. 5 is too few, 12 is too many. My thoughts 9ish, gives a decent number and takes out teams with 10-12. Still gives star power and can spread two or three to other teams.

If we cap stars do we then loosen the rule for how many people can have at a time? Would bring the game more money from everyone and a better chance of all teams equal more.

Originally posted by dredgar
I know you said 5 is random, so what is the number? Makes me curious about everyone's thoughts. 5 is too few, 12 is too many. My thoughts 9ish, gives a decent number and takes out teams with 10-12. Still gives star power and can spread two or three to other teams.

If we cap stars do we then loosen the rule for how many people can have at a time? Would bring the game more money from everyone and a better chance of all teams equal more.

Should just be uncapped. All stars are not created equal, but if you had to cap it, I'd say 10. You have to sacrifice somewhere if you want the *'s.

Originally posted by Xars
Based on these numbers switching is the most obvious thing.

Should it apply to existing teams, no.

Could they announce it and make it effective in 3,4,5,6 seasons? Sure.

Give people time to adjust. Give time to add in new plays that will work better with more CBs. Give time to adjust Strip Tech, etc.

If everyone knows it’s coming, then it’s fair disclosure.

If you just lower CB salary and don’t touch LBs, then everyone is getting a bump. That’s fine too if they want to go that way, but some teams may get more of a short-term advantage.

It’s not that I’m not for your suggestion; I just think the swap idea has a better chance of being implemented.



If they announced the change and then implemented it in say 5 seasons, then fair enough I'd be for it. But I'd really rather they address the CB problem sooner than 5 seasons down the line. If they wanted to implement your change and then exempt all current teams from it, I'd be fine with that too, but I'm unsure if they have the capabilities to do that.

I do think if they did the swap though a lot of teams that don't use Supers are going to get caught in the crossfire. There are teams who use 6 or 7 LBs and they're going to feel that crunch extremely hard. Especially with how reliant LBs are on their Traits to be relevant. I think you could end up killing sets like 4-4 and 3-4 off entirely.

Originally posted by Adderfist
Should just be uncapped. All stars are not created equal, but if you had to cap it, I'd say 10. You have to sacrifice somewhere if you want the *'s.

Supers just need to be uncapped. It's a pointless limitation on Agents for no reason. But teams having a cap, I'd be all for. I'd go with 8 or 9, personally.

Originally posted by dredgar
I know you said 5 is random, so what is the number? Makes me curious about everyone's thoughts. 5 is too few, 12 is too many. My thoughts 9ish, gives a decent number and takes out teams with 10-12. Still gives star power and can spread two or three to other teams.

If we cap stars do we then loosen the rule for how many people can have at a time? Would bring the game more money from everyone and a better chance of all teams equal more.

I would think no more than 7. College, NFL its rare for 7 S*s to be on the same team (except Alabama)

Originally posted by vipermaw82
I would think no more than 7. College, NFL its rare for 7 S*s to be on the same team (except Alabama)

I think though if you get the number too low you kill off all the variety and just enforce a meta. How many teams aren't going to use a S* HB, QB, and TE nowadays? What if we add WR into the mix too now?

Are teams not going to use S* DTs, DEs, LB or Safeties?

I think if the number is too low everyone spends a season or two optimizing what the most effective 5,6,7 S*s are and that's basically all you'll see.

Hell, most teams are like that already even without a strict enforcement of such things.

Salvo has a S* CB for instance. We just did it because we could and thought it was fun. If there was a limit of 7 S*? No chance.

at 7*'s you end up with qb,hb,te,lb,ss,dt,de?

or hb, qb, wr wr the lb ss

So my question is would you still have to build dots to get to those caps or would you be able to purchase them at a slightly higher cost. like say add 25-50 per? maybe?

Originally posted by ellix
I think though if you get the number too low you kill off all the variety and just enforce a meta. How many teams aren't going to use a S* HB, QB, and TE nowadays? What if we add WR into the mix too now?

Are teams not going to use S* DTs, DEs, LB or Safeties?

I think if the number is too low everyone spends a season or two optimizing what the most effective 5,6,7 S*s are and that's basically all you'll see.

Hell, most teams are like that already even without a strict enforcement of such things.

Salvo has a S* CB for instance. We just did it because we could and thought it was fun. If there was a limit of 7 S*? No chance.

So don't make a change because people will optimize it like they already do. Checks out.

Originally posted by Corndog
So don't make a change because people will optimize it like they already do. Checks out.

I knew this was coming lol

Originally posted by Corndog
So don't make a change because people will optimize it like they already do. Checks out.

I think they are referring to a lifted superstar cap per agent and shifting that cap towards teams to prevent every whale team having 10+ S*

Would probably cut down on multi's so it would be more of a QoL change than anything.

i think a nice QoL change would be just having 3 S* of any tier rather than 1 of each tier.

I'm not a fan of the star player cap on a team, but if we had to have one 10 should be fine. I get you all want to level the playing field but fielding stars is how the game is designed and helps generate flex to keep the game funded, IMO.

Originally posted by ThePh33P
i think a nice QoL change would be just having 3 S* of any tier rather than 1 of each tier.

that's a pretty good idea too... stops flooding the game with S*DTs this way.

Originally posted by Corndog
So don't make a change because people will optimize it like they already do. Checks out.

Glad you're reading the thread!

Originally posted by ellix
I think though if you get the number too low you kill off all the variety and just enforce a meta. How many teams aren't going to use a S* HB, QB, and TE nowadays? What if we add WR into the mix too now?

Are teams not going to use S* DTs, DEs, LB or Safeties?

I think if the number is too low everyone spends a season or two optimizing what the most effective 5,6,7 S*s are and that's basically all you'll see.

Hell, most teams are like that already even without a strict enforcement of such things.

Salvo has a S* CB for instance. We just did it because we could and thought it was fun. If there was a limit of 7 S*? No chance.

Then cap the S*s at each level. Or some kind of combo.

Something like:

2 level 1
3 level 2
5 level 3 (you can get a full S* O Line)