Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Corndog
It makes the game a lot more fun and less by the numbers, but also "screws over" players.

Probably one shining example of the concepts of "fair and balanced" getting in the way of actually enjoying the game.

It's hard to say that GLB2 is 'by the numbers' with my shitty builds finding success.

Originally posted by Raid
It's hard to say that GLB2 is 'by the numbers' with my shitty builds finding success.

I mean, if your shitty builds are finding success, anyone can replicate that 100% and have more or less the same level of effectiveness. Players being inexplicably better than their build would suggest made the first dozen seasons of GLB Classic feel so exciting. Players output on the field was more important their build hitting specific numbers. Average builders could stumble into greatness, while the old guard couldn't dominate everyone every season.

Nobody composes songs to recruit top talent anymore. They just make their own.
http://www.glb2scout.com/assets/BandIMO/BMarsh.mp3

What. The. Fuck

I guess I've gotta make a song for whenever Flint resets

Originally posted by Corndog
I mean, if your shitty builds are finding success, anyone can replicate that 100% and have more or less the same level of effectiveness. Players being inexplicably better than their build would suggest made the first dozen seasons of GLB Classic feel so exciting. Players output on the field was more important their build hitting specific numbers. Average builders could stumble into greatness, while the old guard couldn't dominate everyone every season.

Nobody composes songs to recruit top talent anymore. They just make their own.
http://www.glb2scout.com/assets/BandIMO/BMarsh.mp3

XD

amazing

Originally posted by Corndog
I mean, if your shitty builds are finding success, anyone can replicate that 100% and have more or less the same level of effectiveness. Players being inexplicably better than their build would suggest made the first dozen seasons of GLB Classic feel so exciting. Players output on the field was more important their build hitting specific numbers. Average builders could stumble into greatness, while the old guard couldn't dominate everyone every season.

Nobody composes songs to recruit top talent anymore. They just make their own.
http://www.glb2scout.com/assets/BandIMO/BMarsh.mp3

I ain't letting my shitty secrets slip! You'll have to ask me nicely and then I'll expound for several hours on all the things I've found out about building.

Originally posted by Corndog
I mean, if your shitty builds are finding success, anyone can replicate that 100% and have more or less the same level of effectiveness. Players being inexplicably better than their build would suggest made the first dozen seasons of GLB Classic feel so exciting. Players output on the field was more important their build hitting specific numbers. Average builders could stumble into greatness, while the old guard couldn't dominate everyone every season.

Nobody composes songs to recruit top talent anymore. They just make their own.
http://www.glb2scout.com/assets/BandIMO/BMarsh.mp3

i kinda wish the game was more of a scouting/teambuilding sim sometimes

Originally posted by ThePh33P
i kinda wish the game was more of a scouting/teambuilding sim sometimes

Elaborate team building, i understand scouting, classic theres a lot of scouting, but what more could be brought into team building?

Originally posted by Bengals4ever
Elaborate team building, i understand scouting, classic theres a lot of scouting, but what more could be brought into team building?

Well, I'm not sure what he meant, but I meant not being whether to tell if a player is good or not solely by his build.

Partly what this would mean is that, even if you built every player on your team to exact specifications, those players wouldn't be guaranteed to be the best.

Which would mean, to build the best team, you'd likely have to recruit and interact with other people playing the game.

In early development, we talked about like a 5% chance for any created player to just have boosted skills behind the scenes to create diversity and exciting "playmakers". In my opinion, the game is the most fun when some players are just amazingly good without any discernible reason, compared to every player just kind of existing in the gray. It creates more community play, players to root against, players to root for, and players to try to recruit.

At the end of the day, we decided to sort of emulate the system above the board with superstar players, but they end up being a mechanic that is eventually minmaxed and exploited to the max.

Originally posted by ThePh33P
i kinda wish the game was more of a scouting/teambuilding sim sometimes
Could that be achieved with a league of human owners and CPU players? So you'd see combine numbers, height/weight etc and then you'd be relying on production/tape to assess the players?

I guess you'd also have to change the salary from low/med/high so you could pay more/less depending on demand and how much you valued a certain player and maybe introduce trades too.

Originally posted by bmg_3

Could that be achieved with a league of human owners and CPU players? So you'd see combine numbers, height/weight etc and then you'd be relying on production/tape to assess the players?

I guess you'd also have to change the salary from low/med/high so you could pay more/less depending on demand and how much you valued a certain player and maybe introduce trades too.

Splitting the already low userbase between different game modes seems like a bad idea in a multiplayer game.

Originally posted by bmg_3

Could that be achieved with a league of human owners and CPU players? So you'd see combine numbers, height/weight etc and then you'd be relying on production/tape to assess the players?

I guess you'd also have to change the salary from low/med/high so you could pay more/less depending on demand and how much you valued a certain player and maybe introduce trades too.

Originally posted by Corndog
Splitting the already low userbase between different game modes seems like a bad idea in a multiplayer game.

Splitting up, yes bad idea, but could it be possible to add a seperate league "CPU VET" since you dont actually do anything to build a CPU dot, why not have a veteran league with only CPUs that players could buy a team just to coach? Kinda like how classic has casual and competitive and peewee, but instead have it only be cpu dots. This would give some owners a chance to test out their own ideas as coaching and tactics and playbooks. There would be no supers (well i havnt seen superCPU yet)

This would give a chance for players to learn coaching without having to hear agents whine because they cant figure out in first season and went 0-16 with human dots and potentially ruining their stats.

Originally posted by Corndog
In early development, we talked about like a 5% chance for any created player to just have boosted skills behind the scenes to create diversity and exciting "playmakers".

Still could be done through something like equipment or endorsements for MVPs etc.

But yeah, when the sim is a game of "rolls" there kind of already is enough randomness to it.

Originally posted by o The Boss x
Still could be done through something like equipment or endorsements for MVPs etc.

But yeah, when the sim is a game of "rolls" there kind of already is enough randomness to it.

Not sure how equipment or endorsements would be behind the scenes.

Is there enough randomness, though? Without regular, drastic changes, people "figure it out" and get bored. There's no sense of wonder outside of "do I take conditioning to 90 or 95?" Also keep in mind, that some players extrinsically being better would throw off the whole "figuring it out" aspect of the game. The game is currently just "copy whatever the best player is", but with a sufficient back end modifier, it would be harder to pinpoint what skills a player great.

With endorsements I was talking about randomness not behind the scenes. Endorsements from GLB1 were random, if you got a fake chance % on your power back you'd think about throwing juke on him or if your QB got a break sack multiplier you'd maybe invest more in drop back power, etc.

You talk so much about people creating cookie-cutter builds but there's absolutely no way it's as prevalent as you think it is. Recycling a build and tweaking it to make it fit your scheme better, maybe, but someone creating the same build that they saw on another player? No way.

Copying whatever the best player is doesn't work if that player isn't put in the same positions to maximize whatever it is that makes them the best, plus, I don't think the game has gotten there or ever will. The only position I could see this is maybe RB, and what is the best RB in the game right now? Nobody knows because it depends so much on situation.

People will always gravitate to whatever they think is best, and that'll always be subjective.

This game doesn't have the same problem that GLB1 has in that building is a giant math equation where your build is 100 in your primary skill (+50 equipment in it) 90 in the secondary, 80 in the tertiary and so on. GLB2 isn't tied down to the harsh building constraints that led to cookie-cutters in GLB1 because "player values" are constant.

This game has many skills, diverse SAs, and many things we haven't figured out. For example, when a player falls, there are so many attributes that could have caused the fall and still so many different theories on so many things.

Originally posted by o The Boss x
This game has many skills, diverse SAs, and many things we haven't figured out. For example, when a player falls, there are so many attributes that could have caused the fall and still so many different theories on so many things.

I mean, yeah, because something drastic is changed every few seasons when people start narrowing down the "ideal" build.