Warrior General Games

I play for rutgers and we honestly had one of those hiccup games every team seems to have at least one of every year regardless of standings


unlessss you own every player on your team and you can build them to your preferences and have situational players and whatnot. *ahem* you know who im talking to.

but honestly can you imaging having lvl 16 special teamers next season? because those teams who are entirely controlled by one player will have that type of squad.. they will nearly be unstoppable. Especially that high of special teamers who are built just to play special teams (i.e. high speed, blocking, tackling, agility, no SA's)

something needs to be done to regulate this

Well, until SWAT breaks down Borts door and forces him not to accept any more money, it wont be regulated. These teams are few and far between. We just happened to run into one of them in our confrence. He will be in the Pro-League soon enough.

more power to him, all he did was field a winner...now, if his sportsmanship was lacking i might sing a different tune; but he's been a class-act all season...i'm sure his games will get a bit tougher next season when he moves up.

I'd rather face teams of multiple players (even if it was handfulls from each of a few people, and you had players on all their teams, etc...) and I personally don't think anyone should play on their own team (even one "Jackie Moon" is too much in my book - I feel that the player experience and the coach experience should be separate - better to have to depend on players to follow direction).

That said, at least he paid for the privilige, and didn't try, for instance, to multi-account his way to cheap glory. (I've been seeing some multi-account shill work in another game lately).

sonny try being an owner before you decide how owners should be

Suck it up and ball! Everyone on GLB is going to have a different opinion on the "best" way the play. There all valid as long as there within the rules. That's the point of game planning. Obviously ours stunk this last game cause we got spanked like a two year old. But you learn after each game and try to get better. If you want to win all the time, stay in D-Leagues and beat up on CPUs.

I just have one quick question, what is the difference between what i am doing and what cleveland is doing?

My special teams will probably be able to be retired well before they are level 16, but until stamina gets high enough to be able to play starters on special teams, it was a move that i had to make, my cpu backups were killing me.

I just don't understand why i am constantly questioned, and i have never seen anyone question cleveland.

Originally posted by CameronWisdom
I play for rutgers and we honestly had one of those hiccup games every team seems to have at least one of every year regardless of standings


Wow...Damn. And to think I thought it was the gameplanning
that caused us to win. Or maybe the fact that I found a very useful piece of info and we exploited the hell out of it.

No hiccup...just got the tactics right

Originally posted by Oso
sonny try being an owner before you decide how owners should be

If I followed this philosophy I couldn't have an opinion on very many people. Should I accept politicians and bad cops and criminals and frat guys the way they are just because I'm not one?

Am I not entitled to an opinion? If I watch a baseball game and I want to see more baserunning and less fat guys hitting homers, why can't I say so? If I think sitting on the football with a minute to go is cowardly, what makes my opinion invaild? What about player strikes for money and lack of medical benefits for old pros? I can't have a feeling about those?

I stated a position I knew would be unpopular, even among the people who don't like the Clone Team. I think the social aspect of the game is important, and that having a team full of players that you can
a) pay just enough to keep them going & pay for equipment and
b) will always do exactly as you say
cheapens things. I won't go so far as to call it an "unfair advantage," because as of now it's not illegal and anyone else is free to do so. But if I had a magic wand, I'd make people go find their players, not grow them. Maybe I'm biased because - as a player - I want to be placed on a team and well used, and if everyone did what he's doing, there'd be no place for me.

Particularly since the supply of teams is outstripped by demand, I think getting a full team of other people's players at reasonable salaries is very feasible. I know my Owner/GM managed it in under a season. (I DO know that a large number of new players were trying to charge exorbitant rates - so screw those guys, use CPUs, and wait for them to come crawling).

I'm not telling anyone what to do, I'm just stating what I do and don't like. He's not a cheater, but I don't have to like what he does. I don't have to like people who play rough or flop. They can play that way if they want, and there's nothing I can do about it - except express myself.

Also, I wanted to be clear that it's not just him that I disapprove of, and I think that all owners should keep their own players off their rosters.

But from now on I'll keep my comments to USA A 7 East SSs, it's clearly the only thing I can possibly know about.

Seriously, everyone needs to get off fanaticsports21 ass. He is kicking all of our asses fair and square. There is nothing in the rules that say otherwise. Some of the owners have chosen to try to find many different humans to fill out the team and he just chose to do it himself. He never has to deal with inactive players and he can make sure that the teams tactics are aligned with each players tactics EACH game. If he has the money and the time, I don't blame him. I personally like the challenge of trying to find a way to exploit his team and win. It didn't happen for us (we just dont have the personnel), but I enjoyed trying anyhow.

I think it is amazing he has dominated in the fashion he has. Everyone is still learning how to best use their skill points and he managed to create a team of very good players with the skill necessary to dominate.

I can only assume those that are bitching are pissed that he is so good because Cleveland did the same thing except he didnt pay to boost his players. I dont see anyone bitching that they get to beat up on this team each week. Its too bad they possibly get demoted because next year I think they could be a really competitive team since their guys will mostly have caught up.

Congrats to fanaticsports21 on the great season thus far. Hopefully, you will advance to play in the AA ranks next year and we will see you again when we are worthy competitors.

Originally posted by Sonny Walker
Originally posted by Oso

sonny try being an owner before you decide how owners should be

If I followed this philosophy I couldn't have an opinion on very many people. Should I accept politicians and bad cops and criminals and frat guys the way they are just because I'm not one?

Am I not entitled to an opinion? If I watch a baseball game and I want to see more baserunning and less fat guys hitting homers, why can't I say so? If I think sitting on the football with a minute to go is cowardly, what makes my opinion invaild? What about player strikes for money and lack of medical benefits for old pros? I can't have a feeling about those?

I stated a position I knew would be unpopular, even among the people who don't like the Clone Team. I think the social aspect of the game is important, and that having a team full of players that you can
a) pay just enough to keep them going & pay for equipment and
b) will always do exactly as you say
cheapens things. I won't go so far as to call it an "unfair advantage," because as of now it's not illegal and anyone else is free to do so. But if I had a magic wand, I'd make people go find their players, not grow them. Maybe I'm biased because - as a player - I want to be placed on a team and well used, and if everyone did what he's doing, there'd be no place for me.

Particularly since the supply of teams is outstripped by demand, I think getting a full team of other people's players at reasonable salaries is very feasible. I know my Owner/GM managed it in under a season. (I DO know that a large number of new players were trying to charge exorbitant rates - so screw those guys, use CPUs, and wait for them to come crawling).

I'm not telling anyone what to do, I'm just stating what I do and don't like. He's not a cheater, but I don't have to like what he does. I don't have to like people who play rough or flop. They can play that way if they want, and there's nothing I can do about it - except express myself.

Also, I wanted to be clear that it's not just him that I disapprove of, and I think that all owners should keep their own players off their rosters.

But from now on I'll keep my comments to USA A 7 East SSs, it's clearly the only thing I can possibly know about.



valid points and well said. Obviously i disagree with you but i think its healthy for a growing game to have differing opinions.

Counter Points: Should GMs not be allowed to have players on the team either. I think what you are suggesting would cause not only a severe drop off in income for the developers, but would also force people to decide do they want to spend $10 to own a team or $10 to build a player. As a team owner/gm if i don't have any idea about making a good player build, am i really any use to my team. At that point the owner becomes the evil idiot who knows nothing about building a team and will be questioned about his lack of gameplanning knowledge every time a close game or loss happens.

Last season i had many players that were spread out amongst teams, no two were on the same team. For many this is the way to go, and i have no problem with that. For myself, it was a nightmare. I only have a limited amount of time i can afford this game and i wasn't as useful to my teams by deviding my already limited time by the amount of teams i participated in. It soon became clear to me that if i were to have any enjoyment then i needed to focus my attention to one team and "use my time wisely" (my elementary grade teachers will be proud that i improved a little in this catogory, but probably dissapointed that my spelling never improved)

With any MMO you are going to have just about as many different opinions on how the game should be played as there are people. Some focus on winning, some on the role playing, and some on the social aspect. None of them are wrong as long as they are getting entertainment in exchange for their time/money.

When i first started playing this game, i couldn't believe they would let you have more than one player, as you can tell, i quickly got over that. I still have trouble with multiple teams owned /GM and i realy have a problem with the multiple players on different teams in the same conference. And goodness knows how many people have multiple accounts, close friends that share info ect. It would be very easy to gain access to anyones' forum. I know a lot of owners dont put gameplans in forums just because of this. but once again, those are my opinions.

We are very lucky to have a great group of owners/gms/players in our conference/league. Someone said it earlier and i think it bears repeating from me, it wouldn't hurt my feelings one bit if i lose out in the playoffs and play in A#7 again next year. Besides if you take a second to look at who will be promoted to our league from the BBB, i think you will quickly see that they will put my team to shame.

Originally posted by Sonny Walker
I'd rather face teams of multiple players (even if it was handfulls from each of a few people, and you had players on all their teams, etc...) and I personally don't think anyone should play on their own team (even one "Jackie Moon" is too much in my book - I feel that the player experience and the coach experience should be separate - better to have to depend on players to follow direction).

That said, at least he paid for the privilige, and didn't try, for instance, to multi-account his way to cheap glory. (I've been seeing some multi-account shill work in another game lately).


But this isnt real life...i cant go grab a face mask and shake sense in to a player who wont set his tactics right. I dont have 100 players waiting for practice knowing im gona cut 50 of them. This real interaction with people who only come around for 3 minutes a day if ur lucky is a "real" pain in the ass. 40+ different egos you have to figure out. 40+ guys and half of them dont "get" it.

Yea u have an opinion, on this subject, for me to listen to it again, I will need to see a team owned under ur name.
Cuz right now ur just a virgin talking about the prom and you cant dance.

Originally posted by jebby69
Seriously, everyone needs to get off fanaticsports21 ass... There is nothing in the rules that say otherwise.

You must not be talking about me. I hate to think you'd respond angrily to my post without, y'know, READING it... like the part where I say he's within his rights to do what he's doing.

Originally posted by jebby69
He never has to deal with... players.

FTFY. And more power to him. To me, it sort of seems like playing a board game by yourself, rather than being part of a team. But if that's what he wants to get out of it, fine.

Originally posted by jebby69
I think it is amazing he has dominated in the fashion he has.

I don't get what's so amazing. Sure, he certainly could have done a lot worse. Buying & boosting your own players isn't a guarantee you'll succeed, but there's nothing amazing about the favored team winning. He had more tools than everyone else. Could he have won without them? Maybe. But we won't know. If any team had beaten his, THAT would have been amazing.

Originally posted by jebby69
I can only assume those that are bitching are pissed that he is so good

That's probably true for some, but not for me. But then, I don't think I'm bitching. My team has only won 3 games so far, and is out of the playoff picture. So that extra loss (and it might not be extra because he could well have beaten us anyway) doesn't hurt. But if somebody misses out on the playoffs (or advancing) because of one loss, and they truly feel they would have had a chance if the scales were more balanced... well, I wouldn't fault them for being angry.

But then, that's sports. From pee wee to pros, some teams can just get better talent than others. And however the rules are set, some will think they're fair and some won't. (Anybody watch The Mighty Ducks? Great example of the rules you love coming to bite you in the ass.)

Originally posted by fanaticsports21

Counter Points: Should GMs not be allowed to have players on the team either. I think what you are suggesting would cause not only a severe drop off in income for the developers, but would also force people to decide do they want to spend $10 to own a team or $10 to build a player.


I agree, the current situation is set to maximize profits for the developers, and that's fine. If that's what it takes for me to play for free, I'll take it. As for the other thing - do you mean because they will have to split focus?

Originally posted by fanaticsports21

goodness knows how many people have multiple accounts, close friends that share info ect. It would be very easy to gain access to anyones' forum. I know a lot of owners dont put gameplans in forums just because of this.

Wow. I hadn't even thought of that. Yeah, I think limiting people to one team per conference would be smart.

Of course, I don't expect any sort of change in this direction. I think I'd be happy with a 4 athletes per team per player limit. That way a free player could have all his players on one team (if he could swing it), and people who want to have lots of players could have them on several teams, and owners/GMs could focus on a few positions they feel are most important (or where they have the greatest need), and pick up other players or CPUs for the rest.

I mean, if the argument is that some people couldn't focus on 6 players on 2 teams, what chance do they have with 20 players on 1 team?

I haven't looked into it - are people allowed to own/GM multiple teams? If so, it would be impossible to guarantee that they won't face each other (if they're good and advance all the way up the ladder), at which point you have to worry about tanking.

Originally posted by Oso
But this isnt real life...i cant go grab a face mask and shake sense in to a player who wont set his tactics right.

If they're that bad, cut them. Maybe the team I'm on (and the posts I've read) are exceptions and not the rule. Maybe the teams that got bought up so fast will all crumble. I don't know. But I do know that what makes this game different, for better or worse, is that some people play owners and some play players (and some do both). That's what makes it interesting. It's not people running teams of faceless computer players (though that can be fun), it's people playing on teams run by people.

But if everyone decides that running teams of people is too much of a hassle, all you're going to see is teams of one agent's players, and individual playes playing on d-league teams. We'll just have to wait and see if that happens.

Originally posted by Oso
Yea u have an opinion, on this subject, for me to listen to it again, I will need to see a team owned under ur name.
Cuz right now ur just a virgin talking about the prom and you cant dance.

And for me to read this comment I have to forget everything I learned in high school.

Your point is ridiculous (if you want to complain about a corporation, go start one first!)

You think players on real teams don't complain about management? Owners? CBA? Commissioners? Other teams? Just because all they do is throw the ball around they can't have an opinion on how things run?

Your metaphor blows too. A better one is to say I don't like the smell of coffee. I don't know how it tastes, and I know plenty of people like to drink it, but I don't like how it smells. I don't have to buy a cup to know that. And I don't need anyone's permission to hold that opinion.