Definitely need more parity. Rookie has been fun this season.
Edited by Duro on Apr 30, 2015 11:28:00
Edited by Duro on Apr 30, 2015 11:26:48
Forum > Goal Line Blitz 2 > What has been most FUN for you in GLB2?
That's tough though boon.
Say you fall behind 14-0 in the 1st 4 minutes of a game. Now your trailing big kicks in which is all pass -- and boom -- penalties start accruing and you've got no chance.
Say you fall behind 14-0 in the 1st 4 minutes of a game. Now your trailing big kicks in which is all pass -- and boom -- penalties start accruing and you've got no chance.
Parab00n
offline
offline
Originally posted by Galithor
I'd have a bunch of reservations with a "play streak" type nerf. There's too many legitimate circumstances in which it can be triggered, even for a really balanced team.
That's true, but a 1% or 2% bonus isn't going to make a huge difference.
Originally posted by Absolut Zero
If Corndog was ever thinking of implementing something like this, I'd love it if he'd say it so new teams can change their plans. Otherwise a whole lot of teams would reset as soon as this was implemented.
I think you would have to go with Steves suggestion of it only effecting new teams and move up the tiers like that. Any other way would cause a lot of problems, I'd have to reset my Journeyman rushing team if it was a blanket effect. Although they are so bad it would possibly be a good thing.
I'd have a bunch of reservations with a "play streak" type nerf. There's too many legitimate circumstances in which it can be triggered, even for a really balanced team.
That's true, but a 1% or 2% bonus isn't going to make a huge difference.
Originally posted by Absolut Zero
If Corndog was ever thinking of implementing something like this, I'd love it if he'd say it so new teams can change their plans. Otherwise a whole lot of teams would reset as soon as this was implemented.
I think you would have to go with Steves suggestion of it only effecting new teams and move up the tiers like that. Any other way would cause a lot of problems, I'd have to reset my Journeyman rushing team if it was a blanket effect. Although they are so bad it would possibly be a good thing.
Parab00n
offline
offline
Originally posted by TxSteve
That's tough though boon.
Say you fall behind 14-0 in the 1st 4 minutes of a game. Now your trailing big kicks in which is all pass -- and boom -- penalties start accruing and you've got no chance.
Honestly didn't think about the 3 minute offense either...so probably a bad idea...
EDIT: I guess this would fall under the suggestion category titled Xars anyway, I'd settle for the flattening of the tiers and be happy for a little while.
That's tough though boon.
Say you fall behind 14-0 in the 1st 4 minutes of a game. Now your trailing big kicks in which is all pass -- and boom -- penalties start accruing and you've got no chance.
Honestly didn't think about the 3 minute offense either...so probably a bad idea...
EDIT: I guess this would fall under the suggestion category titled Xars anyway, I'd settle for the flattening of the tiers and be happy for a little while.
Edited by Parab00n on Apr 30, 2015 11:30:02
bhall43
offline
offline
Originally posted by Parab00n
-Flatten the tiers each off-season
-Get rid of SSs
-Discourage 1 dimensional teams, whether by giving the defense a bonus or putting a penalty on the offense
I know I have said it before, but I still dig the idea of improving non superstar players through minor bonus's game to game based on the team you are playing. Superstars would still be better players, but not having them wouldn't be bad at all.
Playing a pass team? Boost non superstars awareness/deflecting/intercepting skills.
Playing a run team? Boost non superstars Break block/hold ground/tackling skills.
Playing a balanced team? Make a choice.
Would have to plan the specifics of the bonus's out a little better and have a number of different choices but I think it would really improve the game overall. Having a balanced team would really become a lot more interesting.
-Flatten the tiers each off-season
-Get rid of SSs
-Discourage 1 dimensional teams, whether by giving the defense a bonus or putting a penalty on the offense
I know I have said it before, but I still dig the idea of improving non superstar players through minor bonus's game to game based on the team you are playing. Superstars would still be better players, but not having them wouldn't be bad at all.
Playing a pass team? Boost non superstars awareness/deflecting/intercepting skills.
Playing a run team? Boost non superstars Break block/hold ground/tackling skills.
Playing a balanced team? Make a choice.
Would have to plan the specifics of the bonus's out a little better and have a number of different choices but I think it would really improve the game overall. Having a balanced team would really become a lot more interesting.
Originally posted by bhall43
I know I have said it before, but I still dig the idea of improving non superstar players through minor bonus's game to game based on the team you are playing. Superstars would still be better players, but not having them wouldn't be bad at all.
Playing a pass team? Boost non superstars awareness/deflecting/intercepting skills.
Playing a run team? Boost non superstars Break block/hold ground/tackling skills.
Playing a balanced team? Make a choice.
Would have to plan the specifics of the bonus's out a little better and have a number of different choices but I think it would really improve the game overall. Having a balanced team would really become a lot more interesting.
Sounds simpler and more do-able than my idea maybe. But this would punish balanced teams just like it punishes pure teams. Oh - you're a balanced team and noticed that your opponent plays terrible run D? Oh -you are going with a run heavy offense (75%)? Bad news: your opponent picks "buff run D" every game to make up for the fact that they are building for pass D.
seems to me there has to be some kind of qualifier -- where the bonus is only an option against 90% one dimensional offenses
I know I have said it before, but I still dig the idea of improving non superstar players through minor bonus's game to game based on the team you are playing. Superstars would still be better players, but not having them wouldn't be bad at all.
Playing a pass team? Boost non superstars awareness/deflecting/intercepting skills.
Playing a run team? Boost non superstars Break block/hold ground/tackling skills.
Playing a balanced team? Make a choice.
Would have to plan the specifics of the bonus's out a little better and have a number of different choices but I think it would really improve the game overall. Having a balanced team would really become a lot more interesting.
Sounds simpler and more do-able than my idea maybe. But this would punish balanced teams just like it punishes pure teams. Oh - you're a balanced team and noticed that your opponent plays terrible run D? Oh -you are going with a run heavy offense (75%)? Bad news: your opponent picks "buff run D" every game to make up for the fact that they are building for pass D.
seems to me there has to be some kind of qualifier -- where the bonus is only an option against 90% one dimensional offenses
bhall43
offline
offline
Originally posted by TxSteve
Sounds simpler and more do-able than my idea maybe. But this would punish balanced teams just like it punishes pure teams. Oh - you're a balanced team and noticed that your opponent plays terrible run D? Oh -you are going with a run heavy offense (75%)? Bad news: your opponent picks "buff run D" every game to make up for the fact that they are building for pass D.
seems to me there has to be some kind of qualifier -- where the bonus is only an option against 90% one dimensional offenses
How does it punish balanced teams? You can't pick bonus's for both pass and run. The specifics would have to be thought out a little better though. My original thought was you could only choose one bonus. So it would be a team wide +5 Break Block or something. Seems minimal maybe, but when you think about the team wide boost it could be nice. But maybe that isn't enough to make the idea viable.
Sounds simpler and more do-able than my idea maybe. But this would punish balanced teams just like it punishes pure teams. Oh - you're a balanced team and noticed that your opponent plays terrible run D? Oh -you are going with a run heavy offense (75%)? Bad news: your opponent picks "buff run D" every game to make up for the fact that they are building for pass D.
seems to me there has to be some kind of qualifier -- where the bonus is only an option against 90% one dimensional offenses
How does it punish balanced teams? You can't pick bonus's for both pass and run. The specifics would have to be thought out a little better though. My original thought was you could only choose one bonus. So it would be a team wide +5 Break Block or something. Seems minimal maybe, but when you think about the team wide boost it could be nice. But maybe that isn't enough to make the idea viable.
Cuivienen
offline
offline
If you want to force parity, introduce dynamic player salaries. The better a player does in terms of stats, the more expensive he is next season.
Would force teams to pay more for great builds, which would then force them to make tough choices, which would then distribute great builds to other teams.
Would force teams to pay more for great builds, which would then force them to make tough choices, which would then distribute great builds to other teams.
bhall43
offline
offline
Originally posted by Cuivienen
If you want to force parity, introduce dynamic player salaries. The better a player does in terms of stats, the more expensive he is next season.
Would force teams to pay more for great builds, which would then force them to make tough choices, which would then distribute great builds to other teams.
Seems really exploitable and unfair to non superstar players.
If you want to force parity, introduce dynamic player salaries. The better a player does in terms of stats, the more expensive he is next season.
Would force teams to pay more for great builds, which would then force them to make tough choices, which would then distribute great builds to other teams.
Seems really exploitable and unfair to non superstar players.
How about something even simpler (this is not fleshed out well).
on page 1 of the offensive tactics - have a box that totals up "run %" and a box that totals up "pass %" - from the entire page. Probably makes sense to include numbers from Red Zone as well.
Some kind of simple formula is used to gauge the 'intended' run/pass break down of that offensive tactics page (shouldn't be too hard). like if someone is going to pass 100% of the time when they are at 3rd and 6.87 yards to go - the system can't be gamed like that (by jimmying with distances).
If that formula determines that the tactics realistically intended goal is to run or pass > 85% or 90% of the time...then a text appears at the top that says "this tactic will result in a one dimensional passing offense. as a result: your opponent will receive +10% to deflection / INT / cov tech / pass rush tech / vertical for the entire game if you use it"
Something similar in place for running.
Sounds like it requires programming -- but seems like the kind of thing Stobie could knock out in an hour or less (isn't that what computer illiterate people always say?)
on page 1 of the offensive tactics - have a box that totals up "run %" and a box that totals up "pass %" - from the entire page. Probably makes sense to include numbers from Red Zone as well.
Some kind of simple formula is used to gauge the 'intended' run/pass break down of that offensive tactics page (shouldn't be too hard). like if someone is going to pass 100% of the time when they are at 3rd and 6.87 yards to go - the system can't be gamed like that (by jimmying with distances).
If that formula determines that the tactics realistically intended goal is to run or pass > 85% or 90% of the time...then a text appears at the top that says "this tactic will result in a one dimensional passing offense. as a result: your opponent will receive +10% to deflection / INT / cov tech / pass rush tech / vertical for the entire game if you use it"
Something similar in place for running.
Sounds like it requires programming -- but seems like the kind of thing Stobie could knock out in an hour or less (isn't that what computer illiterate people always say?)
MileHighShoes
offline
offline
There should be a counter.
Say if you choose to buff run D, you receive an equal and opposite nerf to pass D. So if you choose the buff, you better be damn sure they don't switch tactics.
Say if you choose to buff run D, you receive an equal and opposite nerf to pass D. So if you choose the buff, you better be damn sure they don't switch tactics.
Originally posted by MileHighShoes
There should be a counter.
Say if you choose to buff run D, you receive an equal and opposite nerf to pass D. So if you choose the buff, you better be damn sure they don't switch tactics.
that makes sense and is a good idea:
drop down for GM/Owner:
Choose 1:
Pass focused D: Entire D gets: +10% deflect / int / vertical / cov tech / man aware / zone aware & -10% break block / hold ground / tackling skills / pursuit
Run focused D: Entire D gets +10% break block / hold ground / tackling skills / pursuit & -10% deflect / int / vertical / cov tech / man aware / zone aware
No Focus
There should be a counter.
Say if you choose to buff run D, you receive an equal and opposite nerf to pass D. So if you choose the buff, you better be damn sure they don't switch tactics.
that makes sense and is a good idea:
drop down for GM/Owner:
Choose 1:
Pass focused D: Entire D gets: +10% deflect / int / vertical / cov tech / man aware / zone aware & -10% break block / hold ground / tackling skills / pursuit
Run focused D: Entire D gets +10% break block / hold ground / tackling skills / pursuit & -10% deflect / int / vertical / cov tech / man aware / zone aware
No Focus
Edited by TxSteve on Apr 30, 2015 12:41:38
Lack of parity is always the downside of competitive RPGs.
Either your choices make a large impact, in which case there's a huge gap between good and bad players, or that gap is narrowed by diminishing the effects of player choices. You really can't have meaningful player decisions while still having strong parity between the good and bad players.
This becomes even more of an issue when player decisions are the only way they interact with the game. At least in something like TF2, people can get more skilled at the game, but in a game like this, the only way to "get better" is make better decisions on where you spent your points and set your sliders.
Either your choices make a large impact, in which case there's a huge gap between good and bad players, or that gap is narrowed by diminishing the effects of player choices. You really can't have meaningful player decisions while still having strong parity between the good and bad players.
This becomes even more of an issue when player decisions are the only way they interact with the game. At least in something like TF2, people can get more skilled at the game, but in a game like this, the only way to "get better" is make better decisions on where you spent your points and set your sliders.
Edited by Corndog on Apr 30, 2015 16:21:14
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
