Warrior General Games

Originally posted by

No more creating 100+ players to try out caps only to retire them. The visual impact is exceedingly clear.


Exactly this! I have several players that could have turned out better if i could only have been arsed to create-retire a few more guys before i made up my mind. I am definitely buying another season!

Originally posted by kaiijy
Don't think only of skill caps. Just a suggestion (:

This was the biggest reason I created a full builder rather than just a cap generator. Slow Built is proven to show pretty caps, but in many cases on certain positions it actually hinders the potential of the build.

Originally posted by kaiijy
Don't think only of skill caps. Just a suggestion (:

Yes it removes the whole "Inspect Element" thing too.

Slow Built can be a pretty good method of raising certain caps for no extra salary. If you really know what you want out of player, it's great. But Slow Built just for all of the pretty caps (ooo...sooo pretty), is the definition of short sighted.

Originally posted by Adderfist
In the play selector, can you add a filter for minimum number of times plays have been ran?

I will see what I can do, make sense.

Originally posted by Stobie
I will see what I can do, make sense.

PLSSSSSS. Looking for filters there as well! WR filters would be cool too, there

Originally posted by peeti
PLSSSSSS. Looking for filters there as well! WR filters would be cool too, there



I will see what I can do about making similar to the gamescout page with some of the options. I'll let you guys know what I come up with and when it is implemented.

put your mouse over it... it means plays of 10 yards or more. I'm going to see if they can fix some things before i buy it Stobie (developers of this game not your scout tool) if they balance the game out more so its not an offensive passing spam then ill probably buy your tool as it can save me a lot of time.

Originally posted by vipermaw82
put your mouse over it... it means plays of 10 yards or more. I'm going to see if they can fix some things before i buy it Stobie (developers of this game not your scout tool) if they balance the game out more so its not an offensive passing spam then ill probably buy your tool as it can save me a lot of time.

Bullshit...Running is still just as stupid. See it from rrokie thru Vet. Just because the Stunenrs now lost 2 Games doesnt mean anything^^

I do agree passing needs a nerf. Just saying defending the outside run is just as pointless in higher tiers

I'd argue that defense just needs a buff in general. Might be able to balance things out without killing builds/teams who are 100% run or pass

Originally posted by jfbueno
I'd argue that defense just needs a buff in general. Might be able to balance things out without killing builds/teams who are 100% run or pass
nah, defense is fine

Originally posted by Stobie

Originally posted by Adderfist
In the play selector, can you add a filter for minimum number of times plays have been ran?

I will see what I can do, make sense.


I added another field that has Min Plays Count, by default it is 0 but if you want to increase then you can. Due to this filter, there is a possibility 0 plays are available to which I have added something in there to let you know.

This is just a quick solution and I will continue to probably look for a more elegant filter option rather than a run parameter. But none the less, its functional and is working.

Originally posted by Stobie
I added another field that has Min Plays Count, by default it is 0 but if you want to increase then you can. Due to this filter, there is a possibility 0 plays are available to which I have added something in there to let you know.

This is just a quick solution and I will continue to probably look for a more elegant filter option rather than a run parameter. But none the less, its functional and is working.

why not simply set "1" to default?

Originally posted by peeti
why not simply set "1" to default?

1 || 0 essentially the same results since I am doing a >= not a >

Ill change it no biggie on my part.

Originally posted by Stobie
1 || 0 essentially the same results since I am doing a >= not a >

Ill change it no biggie on my part.

Dont u ever, EVER say again that 1 is the same result as 0! Part of my life wouldnt make any sense if that'd be the case