Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Hzachary1
The star power obviously makes a big difference. But changing the cap wouldn’t change much. The OGs would still win from rookie to vet. If they could only fit 6 stars on the roster then they’d get 6, make a run and win a ton of games.

The salary cap is the same for every team. There is nothing stopping you or anyone else from joining or owning a team with 11 stars. In fact, that would be the better challenge. You get a team together with 11 stars and see how you fair compared to Southside. Maybe you have similar results, maybe not. Either way I just can’t see how lowering the salary cap or raising the salary of stars would help anything. Although, maybe I am missing something.



1. There are a finite number of star players available. A user, especially a new user can't just create/recruit out of thin air 11 star players. (Unless they change the game and start allowing every user to create as many star players as they want- which I would support.)

2. Most teams have on average 3 star players on their roster, if that. Take a moment to page through all the teams in all the tiers right now if you don't believe it. Now does a team with 3 stars have a better chance of winning against a team of 6 stars or 11 stars? If you can limit the rosters down to 6 stars that will help with preventing untouchable juggernauts that get their kicks stomping newbies and everyone else to death.

In order to win at this game you do need a comparable amount of star players on your roster. No team with 0-3 stars is going to win a game against 11 star players. That's not skill- that's a cheat code.

Originally posted by Bretto007
In order to win at this game you do need a comparable amount of star players on your roster. No team with 0-3 stars is going to win a game against 11 star players. That's not skill- that's a cheat code.

Is it, though? Shouldn't networking confer advantages in a competitive MMO?

If everything that gives you an advantage in the game is a cheat code, what does that leave us if we remove everything? Best of 3 in a coin flip?

Originally posted by Bretto007
(Unless they change the game and start allowing every user to create as many star players as they want- which I would support.)

Would support that too. Competition would be much better across the board, and newbies benefit the most.

Originally posted by Corndog
Is it, though? Shouldn't networking confer advantages in a competitive MMO?

If everything that gives you an advantage in the game is a cheat code, what does that leave us if we remove everything? Best of 3 in a coin flip?

Are new players going to stick around long enough to get their network in place when their getting stomped the whole time?

Originally posted by BoDiddley

Would support that too. Competition would be much better across the board, and newbies benefit the most.

Who would still make their star builds gimpy. I've seen my fair share of star builds that were awful.

Originally posted by Corndog
Is it, though? Shouldn't networking confer advantages in a competitive MMO?

If everything that gives you an advantage in the game is a cheat code, what does that leave us if we remove everything? Best of 3 in a coin flip?


What we are witnessing isn't competitive. It's domination. Again we are also talking about a finite number of users. There are not enough users for everyone to network with to create the type of 10-12 Star God like teams we've been seeing. I do think it is absolutely one of the reasons people get burnt out on the game. You can't compete with the Super loaded teams.

I see two options- either increase salary cap numbers on Star players or allow users to create more of their own Star players. You'd start seeing a lot more teams as well if you were to do it this way.

Make S* cpu players.
make A penalty for having multiple S* players at one spot/one side of the ball..
Have available good cpu coaches
put these "10-12 God like teams" in the same league starting at rookie
Make 20 rookie leagues/spread the teams out
make GLB scout free
make trades an option.. trade for S* cpu players across 20 leagues

Originally posted by coachjbax
Make S* cpu players.
make A penalty for having multiple S* players at one spot/one side of the ball..
Have available good cpu coaches
put these "10-12 God like teams" in the same league starting at rookie
Make 20 rookie leagues/spread the teams out
make GLB scout free
make trades an option.. trade for S* cpu players across 20 leagues






Superstar CPU's would be dreadful. It's as much about point assignment as it is the superstar status its certainly not a cure-all.

Don't disagree with you on the need for competitive balance to retain new players particularly as they are learning just know that won't do it. If anything it'll likely make them more frustrated. CPU players assign points and SA's at random so.

If you really wanted to be extreme you'd just enforce the 43 man roster size. That'd create a lower limit all on its own. Or just make punt coverage/returns kickoff coverage/returns as taxing physically as it really is. You don't see Star offensive/defensive players downfield covering kicks there is a reason it's the 3rd HB, the 4th defensive end , the 5th linebacker , the back SS etc.


I just think that's a game flow mechanics issue - player conditioning , in game breath , tends to degrade somewhat lineally during the course of the game and that's not precisely how it happens. Watch the NFL Combine - each player get's 2 runs at the 40 yard dash not uncommon for a player to do better on the 2nd run. That's after a long day of drills and other tests. They simply have 10-12 minutes of rest between the runs, with TV timeouts that's usually about 4-5 minutes of game play IRR.

On the other hand , how many 300+ guys you see go for oxygen after returning a 40-50 yard fumble etc, even speedsters on the 100 yards. They need sometime.

Tweaking / reworking the in game breath regimen would solve some of the issues - your starting left guard well I don't know any 300 lbs man who covers every kick and blocks on every punt return and still lines up chipper every line play - no human is that well conditioned.

Originally posted by Myrik_Justiciar
Who would still make their star builds gimpy. I've seen my fair share of star builds that were awful.



Likely yes, but gimpy S* builds are still better than gimpy non-S* builds at least.

More control over your team build. When you start your team lets say you want run heavy, then have the cpu players generated for your team build. so run heavy OL etc is generated.. Then at least new players can get stomped with everyone on the same page.. still better than madden..

highlight trending plays

Radical Idea:

Have S* lower Team Chemistry caps. After all, isn’t that what most do?

Every S* on the team lowers the Team Chemistry cap by 2 points.

So a 10 S* team can only reach 80 Chemistry. A zero S* team hits the 100 current max.

Would be a pretty interesting code change to keep me happy 🤣🤣🤣.

How about having first down % actually mean something. Like instead of a 5% chance to pass on first down in tactics meaning that 7/12 first downs are a pass, make it something like 1 in 20. All other downs seem to work great.

Or when an SS has a TE blanket covered, maybe give him only a 90% chance to catch the ball instead of closer to 100.

Originally posted by Raid
How about having first down % actually mean something. Like instead of a 5% chance to pass on first down in tactics meaning that 7/12 first downs are a pass, make it something like 1 in 20. All other downs seem to work great.

Observational bias. No matter how it actually works out, it's not like first down uses a different method for calculating %. If the others are working fine then first down is working fine.

Originally posted by Xars
Radical Idea:

Have S* lower Team Chemistry caps. After all, isn’t that what most do?

Every S* on the team lowers the Team Chemistry cap by 2 points.

So a 10 S* team can only reach 80 Chemistry. A zero S* team hits the 100 current max.

Would be a pretty interesting code change to keep me happy 🤣🤣🤣.

That suggestion actually seems interesting.

Originally posted by Corndog
That suggestion actually seems interesting.

It does, though sometimes having SuperStars galvinizes your team - certainly adding Brady hasn't hurt my Buccaneers at all. Mike Evans was always a SuperStar and matchup nightmare, NFL record 8 straight 1,000 yard receiving season and Brady's been a calming addition - it works well.

Thing is its actually harder to "repeat" that - as people have success - players want to move on your back QB wants to run San Francisco , your 2nd best pass rusher wants to go elsewhere and earn #1 edge rusher money, your coach wants to show its about him.

Doesn't even have to be Brady, sustained success gets harder and harder to repeat (at the pro level) simply because other ambitions become more than winning.

Perhaps if you are intrigued by the idea it could be something - otherwise the SuperStar effect even moderately starts to have an impact in really illogical ways, I mean no one cares if you have a SuperStar QB , SuperSTar WR, SuperSTar K and SuperStar edge player. However a SS HB and QB might always be at tension over run/pass. Plus if its an absolute commutative effect - no one would use a Level 1 SS if the penalty is the same.

That said I still think you get more run out of simply modeling a more correct in game breath regimen - Right now it looks more like a steady downward slope than a more realistic rocky mountain type effect. Plus it's also somewhat illogical QB's accrue some loss simply turning and handing the ball off - I realize there is more for hard exertion, but OL don't rotate in many normal games DL do simply for the reason that the OL isn't actually engaged in pursuit.