Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Cuivienen
It doesn't favor anyone.

I'd much rather compete against a top UFC fighter in a coin flip than in the ring. Seems the odds are much more in my favor.

Originally posted by Cuivienen
But rookie isn't random any way.
Originally posted by Cuivienen
Why make the first half of rookie such a throw away experience? Half the games for the season are almost entirely determined by RNG, assuming competent coordinators.

You do know what RNG stands for?

Originally posted by Corndog
Randomness favors the unskilled.

This.

But mostly I like rookie for the fact of a level playing field despite players. Ya, there is a coordinating gap, but it really isn't hard to explore the gap and close it. Which is great. You can have a mostly if not all CPU team and compete at a rookie level. Learning what you need to learn. In fact if you have 3 DE's and 4-5 LB's on the CPU team that are human you can almost compete for #1 most of the season. Near the end it really differentiates. But that is what it is. I think if they allowed for CPU superstars that would make things much better at the rookie level for competition all around. If not even up to sophomore tier. Yes at some point you need human players but wouldn't it be nice to be a mostly human team and not be able to get these human superstars but fuck it you can get a couple midly ok superstars as CPU's that make your team at least marginally better than it was? Of course it would. At the very least rookie in GLB2 is much closer to vet than a year and a half that it takes in GLB1. And the tiers from rookie to seasoned are equally as competitive as vet rather than what it is in GLB1.

Originally posted by bhall43
This.

But mostly I like rookie for the fact of a level playing field despite players. Ya, there is a coordinating gap, but it really isn't hard to explore the gap and close it. Which is great. You can have a mostly if not all CPU team and compete at a rookie level. Learning what you need to learn. In fact if you have 3 DE's and 4-5 LB's on the CPU team that are human you can almost compete for #1 most of the season. Near the end it really differentiates. But that is what it is. I think if they allowed for CPU superstars that would make things much better at the rookie level for competition all around. If not even up to sophomore tier. Yes at some point you need human players but wouldn't it be nice to be a mostly human team and not be able to get these human superstars but fuck it you can get a couple midly ok superstars as CPU's that make your team at least marginally better than it was? Of course it would. At the very least rookie in GLB2 is much closer to vet than a year and a half that it takes in GLB1. And the tiers from rookie to seasoned are equally as competitive as vet rather than what it is in GLB1.

And you give me such a hard time because I preferred peewee. Compete every season. No waiting. No Minors boredom. Recycle players every season. Like I have a year and a half and a ton of money to waste on a dot that I messed up a few training sessions on and turns out worthless.

Originally posted by _OSIRIS_
And you give me such a hard time because I preferred peewee. Compete every season. No waiting. No Minors boredom. Recycle players every season. Like I have a year and a half and a ton of money to waste on a dot that I messed up a few training sessions on and turns out worthless.

My problem with Peewee was really the speed of the game. I mean you are talking a year and a half difference in levels there. I spent almost a year straight watching nothing but high level dot play and then to actually look at a peewee game was daunting. Don't worry I understand why you guys liked it. It was just so far out of my realm at that point that it was completely absurd I even had to make a rookie dot.

Early rookie games are purely determined by gameplans, so new owners are going to get ransacked anyways. With a new system that front loaded SP they might enjoy their players not being quite as incompetent and stick around a little longer.

It's not a coin flip. Good plays will win every time if you are facing a team that is using the kitchen sink.

Yes Yes 2 thumbs up

Originally posted by Corndog
You do know what RNG stands for?

Do you know what assuming stands for?

Originally posted by Corndog
I'd much rather compete against a top UFC fighter in a coin flip than in the ring. Seems the odds are much more in my favor.

I'm guessing it seems that way because you don't understand probability.

Originally posted by Rob.
Early rookie games are purely determined by gameplans, so new owners are going to get ransacked anyways. With a new system that front loaded SP they might enjoy their players not being quite as incompetent and stick around a little longer.

It's not a coin flip. Good plays will win every time if you are facing a team that is using the kitchen sink.

Exactly.

Originally posted by bhall43
This.

But mostly I like rookie for the fact of a level playing field despite players. Ya, there is a coordinating gap, but it really isn't hard to explore the gap and close it. Which is great. You can have a mostly if not all CPU team and compete at a rookie level. Learning what you need to learn. In fact if you have 3 DE's and 4-5 LB's on the CPU team that are human you can almost compete for #1 most of the season. Near the end it really differentiates. But that is what it is. I think if they allowed for CPU superstars that would make things much better at the rookie level for competition all around. If not even up to sophomore tier. Yes at some point you need human players but wouldn't it be nice to be a mostly human team and not be able to get these human superstars but fuck it you can get a couple midly ok superstars as CPU's that make your team at least marginally better than it was? Of course it would. At the very least rookie in GLB2 is much closer to vet than a year and a half that it takes in GLB1. And the tiers from rookie to seasoned are equally as competitive as vet rather than what it is in GLB1.

It's really great for new player retention for them to get schooled by a CPU roster.

Originally posted by Rob.
Early rookie games are purely determined by gameplans, so new owners are going to get ransacked anyways. With a new system that front loaded SP they might enjoy their players not being quite as incompetent and stick around a little longer.

It's not a coin flip. Good plays will win every time if you are facing a team that is using the kitchen sink.

Yes, because people who don't know how to game plan are likely to spend their SP wisely and be much more competitive. That's why the difference between the top teams in vet and the bottoms teams is so small, that SP difference really helps the bottom tier teams be competitive, even with bad coordinating.

Originally posted by Corndog
Yes, because people who don't know how to game plan are likely to spend their SP wisely and be much more competitive. That's why the difference between the top teams in vet and the bottoms teams is so small, that SP difference really helps the bottom tier teams be competitive, even with bad coordinating.

Did you re-read the premise in the OP yet and figure out why your argument is a red herring?

Originally posted by Rob.
Early rookie games are purely determined by gameplans, so new owners are going to get ransacked anyways. With a new system that front loaded SP they might enjoy their players not being quite as incompetent and stick around a little longer.

It's not a coin flip. Good plays will win every time if you are facing a team that is using the kitchen sink.

I've liked more of your posts this week than I think I ever have, Stop being so reasonable.

Corndog,

If you're really right about the coin flip analogy, then there should be a decent number of brand new co-ordinators in the Top 10 come game 6,7,8 of Rookie season. And there should be a bunch of experienced co-ordinators in the middle/bottom of the Ladder during that time frame too.

Because that's RNG.

If you flip a coin 6 times, someone will have gotten 5-6 Heads and someone 5-6 Tails. There should be plenty of examples each Rookie season of this happening.

Yet to Rob.'s point, you're not getting RNG type outcomes in early Rookie when a new co-ordinator is going up against someone experienced.

Unless you've been collecting a bunch of data that we're not aware of.