Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Pariah
this Saturday, you will watch my team and Minnesota face off, where we will both throw a shitload of 4 Wide Hooks, Unders, 5 Wide Hooks/Unders, and a few other plays. And on Defense run All Dogs go and a few other plays, whoever gets out to the lead first, will most likely win, because even WITH high heart and toughness, momentum takes over and you have no chance of winning. One team will get the luck of the "roll" and regardless of builds get a shit ton of sacks and just run away with the lead.

And although this is a rant, I have tested this theory in scrims, running the same offense/defense against each other, with very similar builds, and the results make no sense, no consistency whatsoever, simply one team gets lucky with the roll and runs away with the win.


I agree this does seem to be the trend at the moment. It's very unclear at times how much of a factor builds play into everything. I definitely believe there is a lot of "random" in the games and momentum - however that is coded - is big.

As an illustration - earlier this season we ran 5 scrims against Doof over the course of 6 hours or so. All had the same tactics / playbook / etc on all sides of the ball. Though we did win all 5 games - there was tremendous variation with scores ranging from:
73-3
72-38
45-18
31-0
24-17

So the stunners win ranged from 7 to 70 points...wow! That is a big difference considering all the same plays/builds/etc.


One thing I can't understand - in GLB1 - eventually - a repeat penalty play was added -- I don't know how effective it was because I quit soon after (coincidentally)...but why didn't Bort come to GLB prepared to solve this problem from the get go (all dogs go / hooks / just like I slam / etc from GLB1)?

On a different note: We have made strides in the ladder this season so far:
currently:
Iowa: 18
Providence: 29
Stunners: 24
Maniax: 54
Murder City: 27
Revenge: 55


Every ladder day I keep expecting some combination of a Gator League match up with Iowa/Providence/Stunners/Murder all within 11 spots...maybe Friday of this week?

Originally posted by TxSteve

73-3
72-38
45-18
31-0
24-17




This shows me that one team is superior to another. I see one close game, and a the rest blowouts. No offense to Doof, but you guys have a better team, whether at that time it was game plan, or simply builds I am not sure.

Now if the builds are very similar, and the tactics/playbook are the same - This I adds to my point, that one team can get rolling, and the other team has no hope, regardless of morale and such. I have seen it play out in various scrims. Two teams, almost identical in build strategies, and actually IDENTICAL playbooks/tactics, and one just gets rolling and dominates the other. Even if the score is relatively close, there is a one sided results in the statistics.

But that all being aside, I just grow very bored of playing a game where there is one "cookie cutter" way to play, whether it is builds (GLB 1) or whether it is plans (here).

I think you are on to something with the repeat play penalty. That would be a good fix here in this situation.

Well - I didn't get into details - but at that time they were running oversmoke (pre-fix) - so we had a ton of wide open receivers...which played a large factor every game depending on how many times that matchup appeared - and how many times our guy caught it...

I may have been unclear earlier - stunners ran the same (our own) O / D -- Doof ran the same (but their own) O/D for all games.

Originally posted by TxSteve
Well - I didn't get into details - but at that time they were running oversmoke (pre-fix) - so we had a ton of wide open receivers...which played a large factor every game depending on how many times that matchup appeared - and how many times our guy caught it...

I may have been unclear earlier - stunners ran the same (our own) O / D -- Doof ran the same (but their own) O/D for all games.

And even if I am off some with my recent observations, I can deal with a "death spiral" it is the result of a bad RNG.

But my main issue is the redundancy. I hope it is fixed soon. I just get very board quickly with games that have "cookie cutter" ways of playing. I guess I am more concerned with the use of creativity because without that I do not enjoy playing.

Keep in mind a lot of real football is dice rolls with even teams and tactics... it then comes down to execution "Dice rolls" the close games are because both teams are exchanging dice rolls the blowouts unfotunrately one team one the dice rolls, im sure its just all about percentages. I am a nerd and have played many dice rolling games with card decks and i've seen similar results in those types of games. Now with a stronger deck "Builds" you can overcome some bad dice rolls however if you just get flat out lucky, you can upset anyone.

Real football can be very simply.

ill add someone as a coach to my team if you want to test the exact same settings for both teams. i will pay for half the scrims

Originally posted by Pariah
This game is so reminiscent of GLB 1, and I was hoping it would be different and it isn't.

SO in essence if you want to use "sense" to build forget about it, build your players to fit whatever the glitches of the game are. And those that knew first about the glitchy shit are at a big advantage.

If you used sense to build, you are shit out of luck, because it really has nothing to do with success. For example, my elusive back leads the league in broken tackles, yet he has shitty balance and no power skills. What the heck is that all about?

Seriously, I am struggling to understand this madness.

SO this Saturday, you will watch my team and Minnesota face off, where we will both throw a shitload of 4 Wide Hooks, Unders, 5 Wide Hooks/Unders, and a few other plays. And on Defense run All Dogs go and a few other plays, whoever gets out to the lead first, will most likely win, because even WITH high heart and toughness, momentum takes over and you have no chance of winning. One team will get the luck of the "roll" and regardless of builds get a shit ton of sacks and just run away with the lead.

And although this is a rant, I have tested this theory in scrims, running the same offense/defense against each other, with very similar builds, and the results make no sense, no consistency whatsoever, simply one team gets lucky with the roll and runs away with the win.

I was hoping it wouldn't get this redundant and boring so fast. It is exactly why I left GLB 1, and I won't waste much time here either.

I'd address your concerns, but I'm honestly not even sure what your concerns are.

Is it that teams run the plays with the best chance of success? That will be true in every competitive game ever. I mean, I'm working on code to address things like All Dogs Go, but I'm not daft enough to think that once that's not as effective that something else won't pop up to be the cream of the crop. It's just how it works, it works that way in Madden, it works that way in World of Warcraft, and it works that way in pretty much every other game I've played with any kind of competitive nature...people flock to whatever is slightly better than other options.

Is it that momentum plays too much of a role? I think you're vastly underestimating the strength of Heart. Heart increases morale gain as well as decreasing morale loss, having a double effect on momentum swings. Of course there's going to be randomness, it becomes even more boring when it boils down to a predictable mathematical formula for who wins any given game. It's kind of the same way in actual football, and is why they play the games rather than just looking at numbers and deciding the winner.

Originally posted by Corndog
I'd address your concerns, but I'm honestly not even sure what your concerns are.

Is it that teams run the plays with the best chance of success? That will be true in every competitive game ever. I mean, I'm working on code to address things like All Dogs Go, but I'm not daft enough to think that once that's not as effective that something else won't pop up to be the cream of the crop. It's just how it works, it works that way in Madden, it works that way in World of Warcraft, and it works that way in pretty much every other game I've played with any kind of competitive nature...people flock to whatever is slightly better than other options.

Is it that momentum plays too much of a role? I think you're vastly underestimating the strength of Heart. Heart increases morale gain as well as decreasing morale loss, having a double effect on momentum swings. Of course there's going to be randomness, it becomes even more boring when it boils down to a predictable mathematical formula for who wins any given game. It's kind of the same way in actual football, and is why they play the games rather than just looking at numbers and deciding the winner.

This does make sense... i think what they are getting at is the same play should not work every time to the extent these plays are (this is "Maddenesk" Perhaps if there is a way the D can coordinate up to 3 plays that we can pick out of a playbook to "key" on which gives us the ability to get coverage boosts everytime that offense runs that play because out toons "know" the play is coming. This would make it so the play has some effectiveness but we have a better chance to defend it.

Is the "all dogs" less effective at the higher levels? im guessing this is so effective because of lack of vision check ability? Just a couple of ideas... i think this is a much better version than GLB1 and random is a great thing to have because it gives the underdogs a shot!

Were you saying that Heart is a HUGE factor?

Originally posted by vipermaw82
This does make sense... i think what they are getting at is the same play should not work every time to the extent these plays are (this is "Maddenesk" Perhaps if there is a way the D can coordinate up to 3 plays that we can pick out of a playbook to "key" on which gives us the ability to get coverage boosts everytime that offense runs that play because out toons "know" the play is coming. This would make it so the play has some effectiveness but we have a better chance to defend it.

I kind of like the idea, but not sure how complicated it would be to implement and how complicated it would be for end users. I'm also not sure what effect it would actually have...but it does make sense from a realism and a game mechanic point of view.

I think you took a wrong turn somewhere Corndog - this is the GATOR league forum....

Thanks for the input. I agree with you - there will ALWAYS be something - and the people who find it first will likely get the most use out of it.

Remember when Miami destroyed New England with the Wildcat? That looked amazing for a game or two...


And just like in those other games you mentioned - when something appears to be over powered...and then many people start using it...and then it is either tweaked down (nerfed) or work arounds are discovered -- people become frustrated. I'm not saying that is the case with Pariah -- but the cycles of a game and the cycles of strategies in a game are ever changing...even without 2 dedicated coders.

Originally posted by TxSteve
And just like in those other games you mentioned - when something appears to be over powered...and then many people start using it...and then it is either tweaked down (nerfed) or work arounds are discovered -- people become frustrated. I'm not saying that is the case with Pariah -- but the cycles of a game and the cycles of strategies in a game are ever changing...even without 2 dedicated coders.

Yeah, I mean I see some teams already doing their best to counter Dogs All Go, by finding where it's weak points are regards rushing, and trying to short pass it up, and they're having varying levels of success.


Edit: And I was linked here (to Pariah's post in particular) by somebody raging about how GLB2 sucks on the GLB Classic forums.

Haha...

Better keep that quiet! Don't want it getting out that rage posting links to random forums is a rabbit hole you are willing to go down!

Originally posted by Corndog


Edit: And I was linked here (to Pariah's post in particular) by somebody raging about how GLB2 sucks on the GLB Classic forums.

You weren't the only one. Although, I didn't realise what the intention was, apart from showing a rage post in general, for the lols.

doobas™

Link so GLB2ers can go troll GLB1?