Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Stobie
Wasn't GLB1 that way prior than that? Just got more prevalent?

Prior to alloy opening his builds people didn't really push the % AEQ as much. Once he opened his builds there was a streamlined way to build across the board and when they redid the player building method to make it easier to build it just got out of hand. This game kinda started by holding builds back in the first place so it isn't like it was gonna take long to hit that path anyways but I still lol at speeding up the process.

Originally posted by Galithor
You're oversimplifying it a bit.

There's so many more ways to design a roster in GLB2 than it's predecessor. The tighter limits on roster size, salary, and superstars let you build in all sorts of interesting ways.

I've been responsible for designing two teams so far. They couldn't be more radically different from one another and both are at the top of their tier right now. I've got a private forum where myself and a few others have tossed around other ideas for some interesting team designs. Some might work pretty good too, and be a whole lot of fun. Others, not so much maybe.


You can diversify your roster, yes, but the actual position builds don't differ much. Like I said there's two (maybe three for skill positions) viable 'builds' for each position. Everything on offense will be geared to your teams scheme, run or pass. Defensive players have a few set builds to go for. Coverage, run stopping or blitzing. Any player built for one of these specific roles (offense or defense) will more or less be the same, there may be a slight variation but overall the point spread will be similar.

There are so many skills that need to be at 50+ for a player to perform basic functions properly, that everyone is forced to build the same player essentially. WR#1 may have 10 more sprinting and WR#2 may have 10 more receiving hands, but they built the same WR in the end. There's no diversity to the typical player. SAs help but there aren't enough and typically each position has 2 or 3 "necessary" ones, again making players homogenized.

There needs to be more reason to more reason to make extreme, unique builds. Possibly, make it so SAs don't fire unless you've hit a certain skill cap. Say spin cycle and pass rush tech. 25/50/75 tech would be needed for bronze/silver/gold to fire. Granted most people will be hitting this number anyway, but it's an example and in conjunction with other gold SAs could force you to sacrifice points somewhere in your build.

Just thinking out loud here, but I don't like the cookie cutter route the game is taking.

I'm going to start showing the problems of GLB2 on my blog.

Basically, the problem with the game is Offensive Line builds.

A Pure O can build a dominant OLine that always play to their strengths. We know this. That's not the actual problem though.

The real problem is that the cost to increase skills is LINEAR, but the value of those skills (at high levels) is PARABOLIC.

The same issue exist with all of the other positions, but it doesn't cause the same effect.

On a balanced O, the HB is geared to run and the WRs are geared to catch. The difference in builds on a Pure O from a Balanced O is minimal, with the exception of blocking WRs.

It's the OLine builds that are screwing the game up.

In short, to fix GLB2 OLine SP costs should move to a parabolic increase. Lower the cost of SP costs at low levels and drastically raise them at high levels. You can build the parabola so that it's cheaper to get to a value of 60 but more expensive to get to 90.

As a result, teams will build a Balanced OLine and from there a Balanced Offense. All while having S* HBs and S* WRs that perform as such. S* OLine will be good/great at both run and pass, instead of ridiculously dominant at one.

Regardless of the SP cost it is still going to make loads more sense going one direction rather than splitting your resources.

Originally posted by Xars
I'm going to start showing the problems of GLB2 on my blog.

Basically, the problem with the game is Offensive Line builds.

A Pure O can build a dominant OLine that always play to their strengths. We know this. That's not the actual problem though.

The real problem is that the cost to increase skills is LINEAR, but the value of those skills (at high levels) is PARABOLIC.

The same issue exist with all of the other positions, but it doesn't cause the same effect.

On a balanced O, the HB is geared to run and the WRs are geared to catch. The difference in builds on a Pure O from a Balanced O is minimal, with the exception of blocking WRs.

It's the OLine builds that are screwing the game up.

In short, to fix GLB2 OLine SP costs should move to a parabolic increase. Lower the cost of SP costs at low levels and drastically raise them at high levels. You can build the parabola so that it's cheaper to get to a value of 60 but more expensive to get to 90.

As a result, teams will build a Balanced OLine and from there a Balanced Offense. All while having S* HBs and S* WRs that perform as such. S* OLine will be good/great at both run and pass, instead of ridiculously dominant at one.



:Mind Blown:

Not sure if I'm okay with it though. I like the idea of making 2 skills out of tech/power better.

Originally posted by bhall43
Regardless of the SP cost it is still going to make loads more sense going one direction rather than splitting your resources.

The effect will be drastically lowered though.

If you can get a Balance OLine to 70/70 for Run Blocking and 70/70 for Pass Blocking, there wouldn't be overwhelming reasons to go 80/80 Pass Blocking only.

And the ability of a Pure O to dominate a Defense that's built for Balance by definition, would reduce.

You'd bring back play calling / co-ordinator value.

Originally posted by DeeVee8
:Mind Blown:

It's what I do.

Originally posted by DeeVee8
:Mind Blown:

Not sure if I'm okay with it though. I like the idea of making 2 skills out of tech/power better.

How does condensing 4 skills into 2 skills make anything better?

Originally posted by Xars
The effect will be drastically lowered though.

If you can get a Balance OLine to 70/70 for Run Blocking and 70/70 for Pass Blocking, there wouldn't be overwhelming reasons to go 80/80 Pass Blocking only.

And the ability of a Pure O to dominate a Defense that's built for Balance by definition, would reduce.

You'd bring back play calling / co-ordinator value.


Then you are just forcing balance.

Originally posted by bhall43
How does condensing 4 skills into 2 skills make anything better?

It leaves more SPs to spend in other areas of the build, allowing for more diversity...it also just makes more sense logically. It annoys me to see all those skills sub 20 on my pure run blockers.

Originally posted by DeeVee8
It leaves more SPs to spend in other areas of the build, allowing for more diversity...it also just makes more sense logically. It annoys me to see all those skills sub 20 on my pure run blockers.

It annoys you that you had to max out on 2 skills rather than 1 and that left you with less SP for the rest of your build? ok.

Originally posted by Big_B
You can diversify your roster, yes, but the actual position builds don't differ much. Like I said there's two (maybe three for skill positions) viable 'builds' for each position. Everything on offense will be geared to your teams scheme, run or pass. Defensive players have a few set builds to go for. Coverage, run stopping or blitzing. Any player built for one of these specific roles (offense or defense) will more or less be the same, there may be a slight variation but overall the point spread will be similar.

There are so many skills that need to be at 50+ for a player to perform basic functions properly, that everyone is forced to build the same player essentially. WR#1 may have 10 more sprinting and WR#2 may have 10 more receiving hands, but they built the same WR in the end. There's no diversity to the typical player. SAs help but there aren't enough and typically each position has 2 or 3 "necessary" ones, again making players homogenized.

There needs to be more reason to more reason to make extreme, unique builds. Possibly, make it so SAs don't fire unless you've hit a certain skill cap. Say spin cycle and pass rush tech. 25/50/75 tech would be needed for bronze/silver/gold to fire. Granted most people will be hitting this number anyway, but it's an example and in conjunction with other gold SAs could force you to sacrifice points somewhere in your build.

Just thinking out loud here, but I don't like the cookie cutter route the game is taking.

I actually like that bolded idea a lot. Triggers points to have SAs fire would most definitely make for more unique builds

Originally posted by Xars
I'm going to start showing the problems of GLB2 on my blog.

Basically, the problem with the game is Offensive Line builds.

A Pure O can build a dominant OLine that always play to their strengths. We know this. That's not the actual problem though.

The real problem is that the cost to increase skills is LINEAR, but the value of those skills (at high levels) is PARABOLIC.

The same issue exist with all of the other positions, but it doesn't cause the same effect.

On a balanced O, the HB is geared to run and the WRs are geared to catch. The difference in builds on a Pure O from a Balanced O is minimal, with the exception of blocking WRs.

It's the OLine builds that are screwing the game up.

In short, to fix GLB2 OLine SP costs should move to a parabolic increase. Lower the cost of SP costs at low levels and drastically raise them at high levels. You can build the parabola so that it's cheaper to get to a value of 60 but more expensive to get to 90.

As a result, teams will build a Balanced OLine and from there a Balanced Offense. All while having S* HBs and S* WRs that perform as such. S* OLine will be good/great at both run and pass, instead of ridiculously dominant at one.



I think pass blocking is mostly overrated. A pure run blocking line can dominate a game, but a pure pass blocking offensive line doesn't make a significant difference. Everything comes down to play calling.

I present you Fear Factory: http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/team/1153

This team passes 60% of the time, but has a pure run blocking offensive line.
With their pure run blocking offensive line, they have a 9.3% hurry rate and a 0.9% sack rate.

Let's look at Logzilla Boys with a pure pass blocking line.
They have a 14.3% hurry rate and a 3.5% sack rate.

The moral of the story. You can have a balanced offense, but don't need a balanced offensive line.

Originally posted by Xars
The real problem is that the cost to increase skills is LINEAR

No it's not.

There is a simple fix to limiting the min/max approach. Buff the defense against the run or the pass the more it deviates from 50/50 split. Anything up to 60/40 or whatever could be flat. As you get higher and higher, the defensive players get stronger and stronger against that play type.

It would still allow for variety, as 60 is 50% more often that 40, so you could still built a run or pass focused offense. Hell, you could go to 67/33 split to be doing your main thing twice as often, and the defense should only get a small buff to help stop you. But if you are just running the ball every down, the defense should become unbeatable. Even mediocre defensive dots with a terrible coordinator should be competing with the best o dots in the game with the best game plan.

Originally posted by Rob.
I think pass blocking is mostly overrated. A pure run blocking line can dominate a game, but a pure pass blocking offensive line doesn't make a significant difference. Everything comes down to play calling.

I present you Fear Factory: http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/team/1153

This team passes 60% of the time, but has a pure run blocking offensive line.
With their pure run blocking offensive line, they have a 9.3% hurry rate and a 0.9% sack rate.

Let's look at Logzilla Boys with a pure pass blocking line.
They have a 14.3% hurry rate and a 3.5% sack rate.

The moral of the story. You can have a balanced offense, but don't need a balanced offensive line.

Yep, it really doesn't make any sense to build a pass blocking O-Line anymore when all the good offensive linemen SAs only work for run blockers.

My pure run blocking o-linemen on Fear Factory..
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/player/96292
116 pancakes to only 32 revcakes
http://glb2.warriorgeneral.com/game/player/96293
66 pancakes to 26 revcakes

Neither one of those guys have one point invested in pass blocking skills on a team that passes 60% of the time and they are still towards the top in the HoF.