Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Nyria
If you keep going 2-10, find a way to improve.

Here lies our fundamental difference. This attitude is oblivious to the mass exodus of players from GLB2 in the first place, right in front of their nose

Players in the past and present, this thread does not exist otherwise, have left this game solely because they've invested and played for a long time and got nowhere. Others, who are new, quit because there was no level playing field to start building.

You say that College football is way ahead of the NFL, I would wholeheartedly disagree. Baltimore Ravens won a Super Bowl within 5 years of existence.

That magnificent achievement was not due to some leftist charity.

I also find it ironic that promotion to be amongst the elite is something to fear (it's fear and I can smell it) when there is a likelihood of going 2-8 and improving your game

I think part of this stems from some bad Intel provided to Nyria from the current Sophomore tier.

It's a very important distinction to make that while I own the Frost Giants, they are not a generational powerhouse.

The reality is, the Frost Giants are a completely ***run of the mill*** and even meme worthy team in any regular tier.

The disparity going on in Sophomore right now is actually illustrative of the issue we're taking about. A random for funsies team of mine that I built solely to harass Hayrow is 58-0 right now.

I think you're a good coach Nyria with a good attitude to continue to improve and do well, but the gap is a lot more vast than you might be yet to realize.

Originally posted by Mango Fandango
Here lies our fundamental difference. This attitude is oblivious to the mass exodus of players from GLB2 in the first place, right in front of their nose

Players in the past and present, this thread does not exist otherwise, have left this game solely because they've invested and played for a long time and got nowhere. Others, who are new, quit because there was no level playing field to start building.

You say that College football is way ahead of the NFL, I would wholeheartedly disagree. Baltimore Ravens won a Super Bowl within 5 years of existence.

That magnificent achievement was not due to some leftist charity.

I also find it ironic that promotion to be amongst the elite is something to fear (it's fear and I can smell it) when there is a likelihood of going 2-8 and improving your game

This isn't fully true. The Ravens had a good team base to get started. Starting with Ray Lewis is a big deal.

Originally posted by dredgar
This isn't fully true. The Ravens had a good team base to get started. Starting with Ray Lewis is a big deal.

Yeah having a guy like that, that you know would KILL for a ring is important lol

Originally posted by dredgar
This isn't fully true. The Ravens had a good team base to get started. Starting with Ray Lewis is a big deal.

My point was that on a level playing field, anything is possible. That Any Given Sunday vibe. Ravens never went above .500 for 4 seasons and then boom... the chip. When the competition is on a level playing field, great things happen. You can sign greatness and be run by arguably the greatest coach in sport, but you need that opportunity.

Even teams with perennial losing records can become World Champs, Tampa Bay did it with Tom. The NFL lets stories like that happen, it's why it's the best sport in the world and the basis for why an Englishman would rather play GLB2 than Football Manager. Not College Football, rather the N F L

Originally posted by Mango Fandango
My point was that on a level playing field, anything is possible. That Any Given Sunday vibe. Ravens never went above .500 for 4 seasons and then boom... the chip. When the competition is on a level playing field, great things happen. You can sign greatness and be run by arguably the greatest coach in sport, but you need that opportunity.
L

You have a strange idea of a level playing field. In your idea I have to play tougher teams than others in my tier (outside of ladder). That's why league games and not ladder games are counted in league leader stats. Though I'd consider it unfair to turn my playoff team into one that most likely isn't. But the stat thing is also true, in that no matter how good I ever got.

You want a harder game for better players than for lesser players, in the hopes of keeping bad ones around. There are ways to advocate for that as much as I disagree with them, but it is anything but a level playing field. What you seem to mean by a level playing field is one that a bad coach can win as easily as a good one.

Originally posted by Nyria
What you seem to mean by a level playing field is one that a bad coach can win as easily as a good one.

Close. A "bad" coach in a weak field can have some enjoyment in learning to improve their game. There's always something to play for. Some reward at the end of the season. It is very simple to understand.

Beat the field, get promoted, and cut your teeth against better-quality opposition. Rinse and repeat.
Get beaten, get relegated, and strive to work your way up cos you know for sure that there's room to improve.

There's always something to aim for, whether it's a playoff push, a final, or to avoid the drop. In European soccer, the competition to escape relegation is just as thrilling as winning the title.

Originally posted by Mango Fandango
Close. A "bad" coach in a weak field can have some enjoyment in learning to improve their game. There's always something to play for. Some reward at the end of the season. It is very simple to understand.

Beat the field, get promoted, and cut your teeth against better-quality opposition. Rinse and repeat.
Get beaten, get relegated, and strive to work your way up cos you know for sure that there's room to improve.



While I want the player who puts together a better team, including coaching, to be the one who gets the rewards. What I'm offended by is that you want to tax much of my joy (as unless I tanked I probably wouldn't relegate, but also never make the playoffs) to give welfare to the guy signing cpu players and not scouting or game planning. You were the one who brought capitalism into the discussion, and you're arguing for the equivalent of socialism. You want to share the wealth. I'm unwilling to pay your tax.

What you said in derogating ladder games, that at the bottom they're not as big a deal as at the top...well, that's part of the point. To those who do better goes the glory. No tax on it, either. But, if you're looking at it from the standpoint of that everyone should get some matchups they can win, then ladder games do that, if ladder is fixed. That should happen, so half the games everyone plays are games they can win or lose. Then league games, the ones that count for leader standings, schedules are fairly equal. But the only people who should get to seem better than me are those who truly do better than me. In my league, that's HayRow and Ellix. I think I have a small chance of winning, by merit, some glory this season from HayRow, though most likely he'll win.

The one point you make that registers with me is that it's not dynamic enough from season to season. Changes should have to happen by actually becoming better, not by getting your turn. I don't believe in this libertarian economic view in real life, because things like food and housing are necessities. Winning and glory are not. Let's set something up so top coaches can tutor new and bad ones, that are willing to listen: A hand up, not a hand out. And other ways to liven up changes in teams are good, but not only to bad teams. Everyone gets the chance, but if a bad team uses it better than the good team they'll gain on better teams. Best I can come up with is everyone can add one player each season of their team's level, no Superstar but any other traits, with no added salary for those traits- so they'd all be Prodigies, maybe with Natural and Hidden Potential or whatever, or Egotist or Adept, etc.. I'd say the player must come from an account not the owner's (to encourage team building) but most have an alt they'd use, so one may as well let the owner just do it. There might well be a better idea. That one isn't that great, but that's the kind of thing I'm thinking.

I love this convo

Originally posted by Mango Fandango


If you feel you're a middle-of-the-ground coach, who would struggle against the best yet beat down the weaker teams, then you would naturally equilibrate to the middle of the pack where other teams would reside. You will get an Any Given Sunday vibe.


Which is why I suggested to use the last 3 games/weeks of the ladder season for several tournaments/brackets, pitting similar teams against each other.

1-16
17-32
33-48
49-64, etc...

Originally posted by Nyria
If we're capitalists, that means the best can achieve all they can and don't have to give up some of their wins so that inferior teams (in talent plus coaching) can have them. Capitalism is, you want to be better than me, then beat me. Don't ask for welfare.

Yeah...capitalism is the opposite

Originally posted by Mango Fandango

You say that College football is way ahead of the NFL, I would wholeheartedly disagree. Baltimore Ravens won a Super Bowl within 5 years of existence.



NFL = communism. (draft, salary cap, etc...)
College Football = capitalism. (boosters, NIL, Blue Bloods, etc...)

Originally posted by Nyria
While I want the player who puts together a better team, including coaching, to be the one who gets the rewards. What I'm offended by is that you want to tax much of my joy (as unless I tanked I probably wouldn't relegate, but also never make the playoffs) to give welfare to the guy signing cpu players and not scouting or game planning. You were the one who brought capitalism into the discussion, and you're arguing for the equivalent of socialism. You want to share the wealth. I'm unwilling to pay your tax.

Look we're both capitalists, but I guess European Capitalism is more leftist/socialist to the American model. So be it. I'm not gonna split hairs over a semantic point of definitions. European capitalism is different from what you're accustomed to, and vice versa.

I never thought someone who is afraid of facing better, deeper, competition would run to the excuse of being taxed out of enjoyment.

How can you not get better by facing better opposition?

And as for ladder. Meh. I'm the reigning Veteran Gold Champ, and I'm gonna get dethroned next week (finally). It's not a priority as it's been ticked off the bucket list. You want Ladder fixed, fair enough - I'll go along. But I sure hell want League fixed, cos in it's current state it's broken.

This conversation is in a loop. You're hesitant to change the status quo because it taxes your enjoyment; I want to change because the status quo taxes my mental well-being (tongue firmly in cheek, so as to not listen to a pedantic semantic clinger on point)

Originally posted by Cybertron
Yeah...capitalism is the opposite

Our definitions are defined by our countries.

Originally posted by Mango Fandango
Our definitions are defined by our countries.

lol...wut??? This sounds like some kind of liberal spin bullshit. Capitalism is capitalism, communism is communism and socialism is socialism, rather you live here or on Mars.