Warrior General Games

Originally posted by AngryDragon

Really I do not understand why anybody would be upset about this. Its a good thing that only the minority are upset and they won't quit. They just like to make lots of threats because they think they are tough guys.
/Sarcasm

the only rational complaint is for those with really high special abilities already that don't want to exceed 10 and don't care for the alternative % pieces available per position

Originally posted by AngryDragon
Imagine if an you bought a car with a top of the line engine. Now imagine that six months after you bought the car the automaker decided that, for the greater good. Every car should have a lower end engine. So they sneak to your house and swap out the engine while you sleep. To make matters better they laugh at their silly customers when they are outraged by the change.

Now lets imagine that the car is your GLB player and the top of the line engine is your stacked percent AE.

:Sarcasm
Really I do not understand why anybody would be upset about this. Its a good thing that only the minority are upset and they won't quit. They just like to make lots of threats because they think they are tough guys.
/Sarcasm

We aren't buying cars. We are playing an MMORPG that frequently changes. The current change is one that everyone should have seen coming due to the OP'd nature of +%AEQ.

Originally posted by blln4lyf
Actually, you should probably fix the easy things, like overpowered AE or VA's before moving onto attributes since 1. It is the easier fix 2. The AE/VA's sway the balance so much that if you were to fix the attributes first and then fix the AE/VA's you may end up with something terribly off from the envisioned goal. Sure this is true to an extent with going AE/VA's first, but you know exactly how much you changed something so it is easy to counter and the true sim shows its hand instead of the sim that was adjusted to allow such OP'ed items.

exactly.

Originally posted by beenlurken
So you can reach 30-35% with one piece of aeq so that you can explore other aeq possibilities with another piece or two...

You can explore other options.

You just have to make choices rather than being able to maximize every possible aspect of your player.

You are not suggesting build diversity, you are suggesting uber-players.

Originally posted by beenlurken
At 30-35% they do not feel that is overpowered (ie anything below that is most likely not going to be worthwhile). To reach that with their solution you must invest in at least 2 pieces of aeq to get there and therefore cant explore other aeq options.

thats the whole point...to make you have to make a decision on whether that second piece is worth it or not...

Originally posted by SpringfieldSkins
Probably not, but OK. Glad you think you have awesome builds.

do you have a fetish for dogs or something?

Originally posted by beenlurken
Originally posted by blln4lyf

Originally posted by beenlurken


Originally posted by Catch22



Originally posted by beenlurken




I cant believe we are discussing rage quitting and I cant get an answer (from someone that matters) as to why the current solution is better than not allowing stacking but giving a 3% gain instead of a 2% gain. I thought that was what this thread was for... getting clarification as to why this decision was made and how its going to be implemented.

Decision was made because AEQ stacking was over powered.

How it's going to be implemented - see the announcement.

Whatever... you know my idea is better... your solution is set in stone and do not wish to put anymore effort into making it better... you have an idea that will be an improvement and that is enough... typical GLB half-assed fix.

I give up... you got what you wanted.

Because AE % is OP'd but you want to make it so you can only get one piece, but have that one piece be even more OP'd than it is currently, it just does not make sense.

At 30-35% they do not feel that is overpowered (ie anything below that is most likely not going to be worthwhile). To reach that with their solution you must invest in at least 2 pieces of aeq to get there and therefore cant explore other aeq options.

1. It still is OP'd at 30-35% total, just less so when your only getting a lesser return on the 2nd and 3rd pieces. The route taken will still get a lot of people to go SA's instead of a second piece, or a different % piece.

2. (ie anything below that is most likely not going to be worthwhile) - This statement is just flat wrong, sorry.

3. It does not matter if you think going to 3% and no second % will make people go to SA's next(hopefully you can't go to a second/third % in your idea b.c 35% break block 35% make tackle and 35% deflect chance wouldn't be OP'd at all)...the fact is you want to strengthen the worth of 1 % piece when it is clearly obvious that 20% per piece is way to much as it is.

The major problem in your logic is that you think that anything below 30-35% is not going to be worthwhile which is 100% incorrect, they just want to limit the damage set in place when % AE was introduced as much as possible.

Originally posted by blln4lyf
Actually, you should probably fix the easy things, like overpowered AE or VA's before moving onto attributes since 1. It is the easier fix 2. The AE/VA's sway the balance so much that if you were to fix the attributes first and then fix the AE/VA's you may end up with something terribly off from the envisioned goal. Sure this is true to an extent with going AE/VA's first, but you know exactly how much you changed something so it is easy to counter and the true sim shows its hand instead of the sim that was adjusted to allow such OP'ed items.

No, this is utterly ass backwards and why many of the implemented changes in GLB are always so hard to balance (like VAs, it only took ~8 seasons for them to work most of the kinks out). You build a solid foundation before building a house, otherwise you will be constantly making changes to the house to adjust for the poor foundation (plus any additions to the house will never go as planned).

Originally posted by tautology
Originally posted by beenlurken

So you can reach 30-35% with one piece of aeq so that you can explore other aeq possibilities with another piece or two...

You can explore other options.

You just have to make choices rather than being able to maximize every possible aspect of your player.

You are not suggesting build diversity, you are suggesting uber-players.

You dont understand.... they are setting the cuttoff at around 35% for % chances. They are not going to set it at a level that will be overpowered... more like the level where is worthwhile to have (anything past that fringes on being overpowered). That said to go with a less % than the max you can get is most likely not worthwhile. For example, get a Shed Block SA piece may be better than having a piece that is 23% break block... yet having 33% bb would be comparable to having the Shed block piece (my idea the bb% and SB piece are interchangeable... theirs its not because you need two pieces to get 33% bb).

Originally posted by Warlock
As someone who took full advantage of +% to turn an ordinary build into a good/great build, I think I should weigh in on the discussion...

+% stacking is not too powerful. It is perceived as such because of the different trends in player development. By removing the ability to build in a specialized fashion, you are hurting build diversity, this is a fact and I will illustrate why. As long as something has an equally effective counter, it is balanced. For example +% break tackle chance is, in theory, balanced because of +% make tackle chance. The problems that have developed, have not one iota to do with +% stacking, it has to do with build trends... for the longest time defenders (hell most positions) were built with the "speed kills" mentality. Well guess what, a HB with a considerable advantage in break tackle attributes has a very good base chance to break a tackle, this discrepancy is only further widened by multiplicative bonuses... for example, 60% bonus * 5% base = 3% increase, 60% bonus * 25% base = 15% increase... that's a 500% increase to the effectiveness, based solely on key attribute differences.

What this means is that it's not the +% that is the flaw, it's the build trend. By removing the ability to specialize, you do not fix the problem nor add diversity, all that is accomplished is forcing everyone to build mediocre balanced players... because it will become the trend, due to being the most viable route.

The real problem in GLB is the failure of diversity in attributes. If catching was just as valuable as strength, we might not see builds that take the "overpowered" attributes to ridiculous levels. Even if someone wanted to take an attribute to a ridiculously high level, the balance would be in what they sacrificed by doing so... right now, many secondary attributes (stamina/confidence/vision/jumping and most football skills) do not impact the game anywhere near the primary ones (strength/speed/agility). If you want more build diversity, make all attributes of equal value.

The bottom line is that attributes need to be fixed before making any changes to the rest of the game... if you build a house on shoddy foundation, you should expect major issues to arise.

I think you make a lot of sense but here is where I disagree with you. In theory the things are balanced with %break block and the % hold block etc. The problem is that there is no way possible for the Defense to keep enough players to stop the different overpowered exploits.

When the power back with Break Block goes in the D sends in the best run stoppers and tacklers Make tackle chance guys. When the speed guy (fake chance) comes in the D might bring in speed guys (avoid fake) to counter it. The offense can have two different guys loaded up on one of the % chances, while the Defense can not have the appropriate % chances to stop one or the other.

Originally posted by beenlurken
Originally posted by tautology

Originally posted by beenlurken


So you can reach 30-35% with one piece of aeq so that you can explore other aeq possibilities with another piece or two...

You can explore other options.

You just have to make choices rather than being able to maximize every possible aspect of your player.

You are not suggesting build diversity, you are suggesting uber-players.

You dont understand.... they are setting the cuttoff at around 35% for % chances. They are not going to set it at a level that will be overpowered... more like the level where is worthwhile to have (anything past that fringes on being overpowered). That said to go with a less % than the max you can get is most likely not worthwhile. For example, get a Shed Block SA piece may be better than having a piece that is 23% break block... yet having 33% bb would be comparable to having the Shed block piece (my idea the bb% and SB piece are interchangeable... theirs its not because you need two pieces to get 33% bb).

Please read my post before making more asinine comments.

Originally posted by beenlurken
You dont understand.... they are setting the cuttoff at around 35% for % chances. They are not going to set it at a level that will be overpowered... more like the level where is worthwhile to have (anything past that fringes on being overpowered). That said to go with a less % than the max you can get is most likely not worthwhile. For example, get a Shed Block SA piece may be better than having a piece that is 23% break block... yet having 33% bb would be comparable to having the Shed block piece (my idea the bb% and SB piece are interchangeable... theirs its not because you need two pieces to get 33% bb).

but really who knows what % gained with each level of shed block or if it even works or stacks....

meh....like most of them even work anyway...seems like a window dressing anyway....

Crap, like an idiot, I sold my extra piece of BB (just +3% BB) on my level 35 DT after seeing this announcement. Am I SOL on the trade in?

Originally posted by blln4lyf
The major problem in your logic is that you think that anything below 30-35% is not going to be worthwhile which is 100% incorrect, they just want to limit the damage set in place when % AE was introduced as much as possible.

Yet you have no proof to suggest that anything less than 30-35% is worthwhile. One opinion vs another.