Warrior General Games

Originally posted by _OSIRIS_


I don't remember Whoville getting mad about losing eternia.

Fwiw I just assumed thats what started all of this. I seen that rookie thread and all the mad was centered around a team of maybe multi non superstar agents winning. Just seemed kInda whiny. It was another competitive team. Great for the game. Not worse.

I just don't see teams like eternia as great for the game. First off it was a multi team made for the purpose of easy S*s rather than having to network and recruit for them. It was purposely picked to play in the easiest least competitive league, which should have been for newer less established owners to compete against similar teams. It was 100% early bloomer 100% run without any kind of long term builds to hold them back.

They end up with the 22nd toughest schedule where we had the toughest schedule. We played the #1 team twice, the #2 team twice, the #4 team twice, the #5 team 3 times, and played in a competitive league. Even with that schedule we finish with the #2 defense and #2 yards differential but we were very unlucky. We are the ones that need to step it up? We did beat eternia but there was no bragging or put downs. Rookie was never our focus but I wish we could have won some of those close games.

Originally posted by bhall43
Eternia had a good team with a lack of superstars which was owned by what may or may not be GE'S multi and this brought up this much mad? I'm confused. You would think GE had a team of 11+ superstars.

I say bring on as much competition as possible. Great for the game. Whoville trolled everyone with cpu players last season and gets mad about losing to a maybe multi? Just gotta step up the game.

I think you completely missed the point. Osiris complained about blatant cheating, not about losing to Eternia. Eternia's record didn't bring up any mad at all afaia.

Also, fwiw, Whoville's record against Eternia last season was L 13-14 and W 13-10.

Originally posted by bhall43
Fwiw I just assumed thats what started all of this. I seen that rookie thread and all the mad was centered around a team of maybe multi non superstar agents winning. Just seemed kInda whiny. It was another competitive team. Great for the game. Not worse.

Yeah, it's great for the game that someone built a one season rookie team with his multi to farm S*s for his main team. Going to be really fun not playing another competitive team in sophomore because they don't exist any more.

And again, there was no mad centered around Eternia winning, except for maybe Trump.

why bring up him as the example????

he might have 3 accounts. Mysterio has about 7 and has all s* on like 2 teams

Originally posted by _OSIRIS_
easy S*s rather than having to network and recruit for them.

This is actually an issue with the game and was discussed in another thread.

Yes, there's value in people recruiting players to a team, particularly S*. BUT

The problem is that teams have figured out how to load up rosters with a ridiculous amount of S*. This does two things: it of course takes away Supply and makes it harder for other teams to get S* because they don't exist and even the ones that are available are now looking to join their own S* ladden team.

Look at the Pro Tier. We are down to 7 teams. One is Inactive Hawaii - they are CPU. One is a team full of Journeyman players playing at Pro and have no S* (Tucson). Tokeneke has a real team but no S*. LogZilla and Freakville have 3 S* each. Bronx has 8 S* and BSB has 10 S*.

There are 24 S* players in the tier and they are all (ok, 18) bunched up on two teams. All the other teams from our Rookie season have given up over time that we are now down to 7 seven, really 5 teams --- IN THE TIER.

I'm not looking to make this a one agent builds a team of players and fills it with their personal S* game(ala LogZilla and others), but we've got to find a way to spread S* around better. Let's have more teams with 2-3 of them and less of these 8-10 teams.

My only thought is to raise the price of S* contracts. But I'm not sure that really fixes the problem.

Or just limit the number of S*s on a team. Never understood why they didn't put something like this in place. Guess they thought the salary cap would take care of it. It doesn't have to be a flat number either. Something like 9 "points" per teams max. A 150 tier player would = 3 points, 100 tier player = 2 points, 50 tier player = 1 point. So you could get

3 150 tier players on a team

or 2 150 tier players, a 100 tier player and a 50 tier player on a team

or 9 50 tier players

or etc...

Originally posted by Xars
This is actually an issue with the game and was discussed in another thread.

Yes, there's value in people recruiting players to a team, particularly S*. BUT

The problem is that teams have figured out how to load up rosters with a ridiculous amount of S*. This does two things: it of course takes away Supply and makes it harder for other teams to get S* because they don't exist and even the ones that are available are now looking to join their own S* ladden team.

Look at the Pro Tier. We are down to 7 teams. One is Inactive Hawaii - they are CPU. One is a team full of Journeyman players playing at Pro and have no S* (Tucson). Tokeneke has a real team but no S*. LogZilla and Freakville have 3 S* each. Bronx has 8 S* and BSB has 10 S*.

There are 24 S* players in the tier and they are all (ok, 18) bunched up on two teams. All the other teams from our Rookie season have given up over time that we are now down to 7 seven, really 5 teams --- IN THE TIER.

I'm not looking to make this a one agent builds a team of players and fills it with their personal S* game(ala LogZilla and others), but we've got to find a way to spread S* around better. Let's have more teams with 2-3 of them and less of these 8-10 teams.

My only thought is to raise the price of S* contracts. But I'm not sure that really fixes the problem.

Well with the ability to PuP guys to vet it really took away from the rest of the tiers because people like me just want to play end game. Especially with superstars.

It's not bad playing the rookie and sophomore tier with no superstars but beyond that point it's pretty hard to play against a team like mysterios with 11+ superstars when you have none. Not to mention the fact of having to end up playing teams in above tiers for ladder games.

How about ditching the S* tier levels altogether? Just go with S* points, and have agents create S* players with any available S* points they have. Like with flex points for normal players or PuPs. S* QB/RB/LB would cost more and positions like K/P less, as usual. The team salary cap does a good job of preventing too many S*s on one team, but the cap impact can always bee increased if needed.

Just add points per league/ladder games played, and ditch the completed tier trigger since many can just catchup players they don't use or use PuPs to get S* points. Would force people to actual put active players in the game(spend flex).

One thing that should certainly get outlawed is guys multiple tiers lower being able to be on a team. Allowing rookies to be on veteran teams only gives more power of Superstar laden teams.

Originally posted by BoDiddley
How about ditching the S* tier levels altogether? Just go with S* points, and have agents create S* players with any available S* points they have. Like with flex points for normal players or PuPs. S* QB/RB/LB would cost more and positions like K/P less, as usual. The team salary cap does a good job of preventing too many S*s on one team, but the cap impact can always bee increased if needed.

Just add points per league/ladder games played, and ditch the completed tier trigger since many can just catchup players they don't use or use PuPs to get S* points. Would force people to actual put active players in the game(spend flex).

This is a good idea.

The 100 tier is a kind of a joke as most of the most useful players sit in that tier and you only get one, but you get to have an OL or a DT like anyone cares.

Originally posted by Cuivienen

The 100 tier is a kind of a joke as most of the most useful players sit in that tier and you only get one, but you get to have an OL or a DT like anyone cares.
Totally agree, and when it comes to recruiting there's a bit too many S* QB/RBs, and not enough 100 tier S* players because of it. I also think it would keep rookie/soph more active season to season because agents won't face the dilemma of having to retire S*s before their run is over, just to get the points back.

Originally posted by bhall43
One thing that should certainly get outlawed is guys multiple tiers lower being able to be on a team. Allowing rookies to be on veteran teams only gives more power of Superstar laden teams.

This x1000000 This would drastically change the ability to load up on S*s. I think a player should only be able to be signed to a team on the same tier.

Just make a minimum salary per tier so teams can sign whoever they want but a minimum salary would limit any shenanigans

Rich get richer, no I don't like it