Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Warlock
Again, the problem is these numbers you are showing. They contradict anything that I've seen in the game and I had a player with one of the better ratios of broken tackles. From my observations, SAs were responsible for ~25% of my broken tackles (power thru proc), ~15-20% of my broken tackles were from SYM (which also includes bruiser and AEQ) and ~10-15% were from just +% AEQ (when no VAs were active). Plus the vast majority of my broken tackles came against DBs or lower leveled players (even if slightly).

Are you arguing that an SA working has nothing to do with the % bonuses from such things as Bruiser, SYM and AEQ? I'm a believer that an SA such as Power Through modifiers your break tackle chance (with VA's, EQ factored in) and if it works you see the SA fire on the PBP, if it doesn't you are tackled.

The fact that you see an SA fire, break a tackle behind the line of scrimmage, within 8 yards of the line of scrimmage has nothing really to do with the power of AEQ...or maybe it does.

I've noticed my power FB breaks far less tackles 8+ yards down the field. Wonder why that is? Could it be that he lost +45% break tackle? Now...he's also got +46% break tackle from AEQ. So, I can see that when he losses +45% he starts to kind suck, but when I add +45% he starts to really look good. Gee...kinda looks like that bonus from AEQ makes him suck/not suck.

Originally posted by Deathblade
Nuclear warheads aren't overpowered compared to other conventional warfare methods. All you have to do is get nuclear warheads then it's balanced. Fix your military.

It's worked for 60 years now

Originally posted by PackMan97
It's worked for 60 years now

Well, there's no problem with % AEQ if you keep it on your player, but unequipped. Having it but not using it isn't a problem.

Just like countries with nuclear warheads have shown restraint. If they wouldn't have, and used them at leisure, I don't think a humvee and a guy with an AK is going to really compete.

What this change does is tries to make AEQ% less nuclear warheadish compared to the alternative AK + humvee approach.

Originally posted by Deathblade
You are apparently really bad at this game, and shouldn't comment on things you aren't very knowledgeable in.

I do love how you are arguing against math with your own, subjective opinion though.

Yeah, I'm horrible... good counter point Dr. House.

As not one of know the actual formula/equation... we're all arguing subjective opinions. I also posted math that backs up my PoV, it's what happens when we're basing theories on unknowns... the difference is that my numbers are general concepts, not specific like what pack is showing. It makes no sense to post specific numbers when you do not have the foggiest idea what they actually are.

If a player has a 5% chance to break a tackle and he increases that chance by +50%, he has effectively increased his chance of success by 2.5%. Taken within the context of how the sim works, a 2.5% effective increase is not overpowered. Even a 10% effective increase isn't what I would call overpowered (which is probably closer to reality). Besides, you're also condemning something that is much easier to attain via a VA selection (as opposed to spending 140 SP worth of bonus tokens and millions in cash)... which makes this argument utterly fucking ridiculous.

But your logic doesn't even make sense, either on paper or on the dotball field.

Your whole logic of "HARHAR 10% BECOMES 15%" pretty much goes out the window when an HB with 0% break tackle breaks 1 tackle a game, and that same HB with 50% break tackle breaks 22 per game.

NB4MYFBISAWESOMEINAALEAGUES

Originally posted by Warlock
If a player has a 5% chance to break a tackle and he increases that chance by +50%, he has effectively increased his chance of success by 2.5%.

AEQ% does not modify your chance of success, it modifies your roll. This is why +% AEQ can increase you chance of success far greater than the actual +% on the AEQ.

Ya, I'm posting numbers for illustrative purposes...but it's not hard to see how these +%'s stack.

Take your average power runner...with +46% AEQ, Bruiser +45% and SYM +60%

Behind the LOS (+151%) UNGODLY! Will almost never get tackled for a loss.
LOS +8 yards (91%) breaks a fair amount of tackles
>8 yards (46%) rarely breaks tackles

Is that an accurate description of your typical power back? Clearly stacking all of these +% really begin to add up especially if you can add a third +% AEQ to that mix and get those even higher. you don't have to know the actually roll vs roll numbers to realize significantly raising your roll and your average roll greatly increases your chances for success.

Originally posted by PackMan97
Are you arguing that an SA working has nothing to do with the % bonuses from such things as Bruiser, SYM and AEQ? I'm a believer that an SA such as Power Through modifiers your break tackle chance (with VA's, EQ factored in) and if it works you see the SA fire on the PBP, if it doesn't you are tackled.

The fact that you see an SA fire, break a tackle behind the line of scrimmage, within 8 yards of the line of scrimmage has nothing really to do with the power of AEQ...or maybe it does.

I've noticed my power FB breaks far less tackles 8+ yards down the field. Wonder why that is? Could it be that he lost +45% break tackle? Now...he's also got +46% break tackle from AEQ. So, I can see that when he losses +45% he starts to kind suck, but when I add +45% he starts to really look good. Gee...kinda looks like that bonus from AEQ makes him suck/not suck.

You're totally ignoring half of the game... the opposing player's build... which is why your perception is biased.

Also, if you're arguing that +45% break tackle chance is overpowered; then so is bruiser, SYM, YAC Attack, Slippery, etc... or maybe, just maybe it's the combined potency of it all stacking or possibly it's a combination of contested builds + VAs + AEQ... I mean I noticed how my FB kind of sucked vs good builds, higher level players and/or swarming defenses. Gee...kinda looks like that bonus from AEQ wasn't the only or primary factor in making him suck/not suck.

Originally posted by Deathblade
But your logic doesn't even make sense, either on paper or on the dotball field.

Your whole logic of "HARHAR 10% BECOMES 15%" pretty much goes out the window when an HB with 0% break tackle breaks 1 tackle a game, and that same HB with 50% break tackle breaks 22 per game.

NB4MYFBISAWESOMEINAALEAGUES

Examples of this magical 2200% increase in effectiveness by adding +50% break tackle chance?

Originally posted by PackMan97
AEQ% does not modify your chance of success, it modifies your roll. This is why +% AEQ can increase you chance of success far greater than the actual +% on the AEQ.

Ya, I'm posting numbers for illustrative purposes...but it's not hard to see how these +%'s stack.

Take your average power runner...with +46% AEQ, Bruiser +45% and SYM +60%

Behind the LOS (+151%) UNGODLY! Will almost never get tackled for a loss.
LOS +8 yards (91%) breaks a fair amount of tackles
>8 yards (46%) rarely breaks tackles

Is that an accurate description of your typical power back? Clearly stacking all of these +% really begin to add up especially if you can add a third +% AEQ to that mix and get those even higher. you don't have to know the actually roll vs roll numbers to realize significantly raising your roll and your average roll greatly increases your chances for success.

How do you know this? Even if it is true, we have no idea what the formula is, so who knows how much it *could* theoretically increase your chance of success by.

No, it's not ignoring the opposing players build. If an opposing player doesn't counter with his own AEQ% stack or VA's he's screwed.

I certainly think that SYM and YAC Attack are overpowered. I also think that having 3 +% AEQ stacks is also overpowered for the same reason. I think DvG is overpowered and plenty of other VA's as well. Hopefully those are being looked at on the test server (http://goallineblitz.com/game/forum_thread.pl?thread_id=3670441&page=1#33411305)

MAK struggled against good builds because he wasn't a great build. It's the same reason my FB (while very good) has never been able to carry a game. He's merely good, not great.

Warlock has to be trolling, nobody can be this dumb.

Originally posted by PackMan97
No, it's not ignoring the opposing players build. If an opposing player doesn't counter with his own AEQ% stack or VA's he's screwed.

I certainly think that SYM and YAC Attack are overpowered. I also think that having 3 +% AEQ stacks is also overpowered for the same reason. I think DvG is overpowered and plenty of other VA's as well. Hopefully those are being looked at on the test server (http://goallineblitz.com/game/forum_thread.pl?thread_id=3670441&page=1#33411305)

MAK struggled against good builds because he wasn't a great build. It's the same reason my FB (while very good) has never been able to carry a game. He's merely good, not great.

So wouldn't logic dictate that good built players would lose effectiveness against similarly good built contesting players. MAK was definitely not a great build, but he was pretty good for S1 player. When he faced other pretty good S1 players, he struggled, especially in broken tackles (broken tackle effectiveness would typically drop by 25% or more). This is why I firmly believe that contested builds are far more of the catalyst than +% stacking is... without the attributes to support the +% stuff, it losses a ton of it's potency. Thus once builds adapt, +% stacking will become balanced. Although if nerfed before builds adjust, it will become almost useless.

Last few pages of this thread it's been Warlock vs the World, let's tone it down brosephs.

We respect your individualized opinions.