Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Jiddy78
Originally posted by rawss

I apologize in advance if my points have already been made, 60 pages of posts are a lot to go through.

I think this nerf is a terrible idea and just punishes patient agents who are willing to try something different in this game.

Those of us that have had the patience to shop for 3 pieces of the same % AEQ also already ran the risk of missing out on ever having enough BTs to fully upgrade those 3 pieces because of the BTs not earned from all the shopping. So now on top of the needed patience and risk of not being able to fully upgrade all pieces, the Admins have now decided to handicap these players.

I also don't think this nerf is needed due to the fact that most % AEQ have counter % AEQ.
If you're upset that a power back with 3 pieces of % break tackle just ran over your LB then build an LB with 3 pieces of % make tackle. If you're upset that a DE just torched your OT with 3 pieces of % break block then build an OT with 3 pieces of % hold block.

I have a few veteran players building 3 pieces of % AEQ and several young players that I was looking forward to trying 3 pieces of % AEQ experiments. I have also been building these players to take advantage of this AEQ. If this nerf goes through, I will lose interest in these players and will retire them because they will just be the same old, same old. To the Admins, if you are going to force this nerf on us, you should also offer a full flex reimbursement to players who are already built and are being built to effectively use 3 pieces of % AEQ.

Thank you.
I'm interested to know exactly what you would change in the player's build if they are, say, under level 40 because of this change.

Example maybe?

I'm failing to see where "Hit the primary attributes to x cap...work on secondaries etc" has been thwarted by AEQ % equipment effectiveness changing.
Here is one example:

For the most part, high Catching and 1 piece of % INT chance has been found to be pretty useless for trying to get a CB more INTs. So most agents don't bother getting Catching to high or bother with % INT pieces.

But, what if the low INT numbers were from not enough Catching and not enough % INT?
Yes, CBs have always needed to prioritize Speed/Agility/Vision to be any good at anything and most agents work on Jumping next so their CBs are good at PDs.

Why not take a chance and experiment with a high Catching, 3 piece of %INT CB and see what happens?
At the very least, it is a fun experiment that keeps the game interesting.
This experiment moves Catching up the priority list and this % AEQ nerf automatically makes this CB less effective because he is now as less likely as ever to rack up any decent amount of INTs and he has become a bigger liability in other aspects of the D where those risks were more acceptable because of the higher potential reward of more INTs.

raws, that CB still will be the best INT CB in the business next season with 2 +% AE pieces, and the 3rd piece can go into an SA. Furthermore, since WR's can't nasty stack catch%, and QBs can't nasty stack PQ%, you are just as well off, if not more well off in the long run. Your INT CB has not been ruined, in fact I have a 68 catching CB who got 84 INTs with a ton in pro, and he didn't even have the benefit of +35% int chance from two AE pieces.

Also, I'd contend that in the VAST majority of positions this is not the case anyhow, and that VERY few people are making high catching CBs.

Originally posted by WiSeIVIaN
raws, that CB still will be the best INT CB in the business next season with 2 +% AE pieces, and the 3rd piece can go into an SA. Furthermore, since WR's can't nasty stack catch%, and QBs can't nasty stack PQ%, you are just as well off, if not more well off in the long run. Your INT CB has not been ruined, in fact I have a 68 catching CB who got 84 INTs with a ton in pro, and he didn't even have the benefit of +35% int chance from two AE pieces.

Also, I'd contend that in the VAST majority of positions this is not the case anyhow, and that VERY few people are making high catching CBs.



High catching CBs might make a comeback if INTs stay up somewhat. But yeah, for the past few seasons most CBs have completely neglected catching in their build plans.

Originally posted by WiSeIVIaN
raws, that CB still will be the best INT CB in the business next season with 2 +% AE pieces, and the 3rd piece can go into an SA. Furthermore, since WR's can't nasty stack catch%, and QBs can't nasty stack PQ%, you are just as well off, if not more well off in the long run. Your INT CB has not been ruined, in fact I have a 68 catching CB who got 84 INTs with a ton in pro, and he didn't even have the benefit of +35% int chance from two AE pieces.

Also, I'd contend that in the VAST majority of positions this is not the case anyhow, and that VERY few people are making high catching CBs.


This is my point.
This nerf is punishing experimenting with certain potential build types.
Why even go high Catching in the 1st place when the end build you're planning for is nerfed before you can even get there?

Originally posted by WiSeIVIaN


Also, I'd contend that in the VAST majority of positions this is not the case anyhow, and that VERY few people are making high catching CBs.



I have one and he sucks

Just wanted to point out another thing as well.

Slippery is a +30% increase to break tackle chance. Work-out warrior is a 7.5% increase to strength. If you can get a max of +25% bonuses from an AEQ, that's roughly the equivalent of 13 VA pts (or a 6.5% increase to a physical attribute) compared to the VA system. So, if you do a compare and contrast of the data... +25% bonus from AEQ is equal to a +4.7 attribute bonus (6.5% of a 73 natural attribute). So using VA bonuses as a guideline, a +3 attribute piece of AEQ (with 2 upgrades) is actually worth more than a +5% bonus piece of AEQ (fully upgraded, just factoring the +% bonus).

What this means is that a +5 attribute is worth roughly the same as a +25% bonus AEQ, when compared to the VA system. So maybe we should remove the combination of +attributes and +%/+SA from AEQ. There's no consistency in player development (from attributes to VAs to SAs to AEQ and even within their own category) and that's the real problem. Without consistency in value, you create choices that are clearly better than others. This change will not create consistency either, it will just shift the choices around (such as attributes becoming the top dawg once more or SAs becoming the new flavor of the month after the SA adjustments).

Originally posted by rawss

This is my point.
This nerf is punishing experimenting with certain potential build types.
Why even go high Catching in the 1st place when the end build you're planning for is nerfed before you can even get there?


Ok... Well then my point (aside from the above stated that you aren't really hurt by this) is that its easily worth it to piss off a very tiny bit of the userbase in order to make the game decidedly better.

Originally posted by WiSeIVIaN
Do you have any idea how powerful 10 in an SA would have to be to be "balanced" with +46% to your positions more important roll, every time he rolls it?

A little lesson. When bort first made AE, the +SA and +% that you see right now NEVER went up. Then after a couple days of people rightfully complaining that it is not worth it to spend BTs on AE, bort said ok and made it so they got up +1 SA and +2% each level. People complained that 1 SA/level was too much so it was nerfed to +1 SA every 2 levels, but the % remained the same, since neither bort nor the userbase appearantly understood the effect it'd have...

+% AE as is happens to be a gross oversight by bort. There is no way that SA's could be balanced with the percentages currently available, and tbh this nerf doesn't go far enough, so people need to chillaxe imo.

I really think you need to do the math before making these kinds of statements. Oh that's right, we really have no clue what effect an SA has due to the lack of transparency in that system. So how exactly do you know that 10 in an SA clearly so underpowered compared to +% bonuses? You also do not factor in the effect of SAs vs +% bonuses when facing different types of contested builds... SAs could actually be far superior in some situations.

Originally posted by WiSeIVIaN
Ok... Well then my point (aside from the above stated that you aren't really hurt by this) is that its easily worth it to piss off a very tiny bit of the userbase in order to make the game decidedly better.

That's a pretty big leap of faith TBBH.

Warlock, that isn't right because you can't have 40 in slippery, so to value a break tackle AE at 13 VPs is WAY off, since it trumps the crap out of all but 2-3 VA's and those VA's can be selected with the AE on top of it.

Also, a % bonus easily beats +3 to an attribute. If you have a +25% break tackle AE, you are getting a 25% bonus to EVERY ATTRTIBUTE in the break tackle role, EVERY TIME you try to break a tackle...

Originally posted by PP
For the most part, I agree strongly with this. The problem is that it's "natural course" is every agent that's worth a pinch of shit at building dots are all doing the same thing at certain positions, and that's stacking all their AEQ into the same % pieces. It doesn't take "patient agents" to do it. It just takes having a clue what it takes to make the most dominant dots in the game. The problems are that it's not a very well kept secret, as virtually everyone that's decent at building dots knows it. You guys really want to play a game where everyone builds dots the exact same way or they suck ass? It's not being creative. It isn't being insightful. It isn't somehow outbuilding the next guy. It's something that should have never happened in the first place and is being addressed.

The % AEQ isn't getting changed because "it's unfair" at all. It's getting changed because by the time your 3 5% brk tkl PBs, 3 5% pass quality QBs, 3 5% brk blk DEs, 3 5% fake HBs and so on hit the age of being able to play in PLs & WLs, EVERYONE worth a pinch of shit will have the exact same thing. So, if it doesn't get changed, like it or not, Bort would just have to change the sim to compensate for the vast majority of well built dots all having 69-75+% gear anyway. What I believe a lot of you are missing is that you think you alone have found the golden key. the majority of those at least decent at building dots already are either doing or planning on doing the same.

I sure can't promise that there never will be another change to player builds. However, the idea is to get as many addressed with the Archetypes as possible, make it so that their is more than 1 way to build a great dot for each position group and then leave it the hell alone.

nice write up PP - can you come back in this thread and post that every 3 pages or so?

Originally posted by Warlock
That's a pretty big leap of faith TBBH.

So you'd argue that a players success being greatly determined by their ability to get 3 +% AE pieces is good for the game? 8 years from now in Pro, players with 3 pieces of +% AE would be good/great players, and everyone who didn't have them would be a step below. Taking a ton of value out of building players to let people "choose" AE which is in no doubt better, is bad for the game.

Originally posted by WiSeIVIaN
Warlock, that isn't right because you can't have 40 in slippery, so to value a break tackle AE at 13 VPs is WAY off, since it trumps the crap out of all but 2-3 VA's and those VA's can be selected with the AE on top of it.

Also, a % bonus easily beats +3 to an attribute. If you have a +25% break tackle AE, you are getting a 25% bonus to EVERY ATTRTIBUTE in the break tackle role, EVERY TIME you try to break a tackle...

No you are not. That is not how the system works, as per Bort's own words. You do not add the multiplicative bonuses to the attributes, you add it after the base chance to break the tackle has already been solved. It's this thing called order of operations.

Originally posted by WiSeIVIaN
Originally posted by rawss

This is my point.
This nerf is punishing experimenting with certain potential build types.
Why even go high Catching in the 1st place when the end build you're planning for is nerfed before you can even get there?


Ok... Well then my point (aside from the above stated that you aren't really hurt by this) is that its easily worth it to piss off a very tiny bit of the userbase in order to make the game decidedly better.
This is why I think the Admins should grant a full flex reimbursement to those that you refer to as "a very tiny bit of the userbase".

Originally posted by Warlock
So how exactly do you know that 10 in an SA clearly so underpowered compared to +% bonuses? You also do not factor in the effect of SAs vs +% bonuses when facing different types of contested builds... SAs could actually be far superior in some situations.

While some SA's have a larger effect than +% bonuses in particular situations, that same SA has NO CHANCE to match a large % bonus every play in almost every relevant situation. DUCY?

There is a reason why all of the top teams in the WL are literally LITTERED with players using +% AE. It is 100% without a doubt superior to +5 in a SA, and due to the huge effect that +46% on your positions most important roll has EVERY TIME you roll it, it would be insane to think that +10 in a SA should or could match that without being the most overpowered SA in the world.

It's not that hard buddy....