Warrior General Games

Originally posted by ND Irish1
i will say this if ya guys want to get new people in the gm nobody does more on promotin this gm than agerm he streams stuff on twitch an youtube nobody does more for this gm than him ,he at least goes out there to promote this gm an stuff most of u guys just complain about shit , i just want this SAID u want the gm to maybe get better an want some new guys in here then i ask u want are u doin in that aspect ,dont care about most of you peoples responses to this either i have listened to the same complaints for yrs just gettin tired of it. MY QUESTION TO U IS WHAT ARE U DOIN TO HELP BESIDES COMPLAIN cause ya cant build players or playbooks or figure out tacts stop playin cause it aint goin your way deal with it get better most of us will help ya , im always respectful for the most part but tired of these stupid in depth bitchin questions ,if ya dont like i do not care i am happy to be a villian in here ,im not fazed by any of ya at all everyone can be beat lol if ya dont like a challenge then this gm is not for ya sorry if ya cant figure out the math an realize what ya see in gms is not exactly how u see it sometimes cause of the ticks of things with pixels an stuff beat it ,if ya want some info on builds an stuff hit me up i always will leave my builds open an give good advice i pay it forward like it was done for me by agerm73 dlcurt an ghanima who have helped me out a lot but at same time have shown them some things as well SORRY FOR THE RANT just needed to get some things off my chest is all

Agerm was a huge factor in me becoming more initially involved in the game. Definitely deserving of all the credit you give him and more - it's not just the content creation but also his presence on the forums, the open builds, mentoring newer players, everything.

Originally posted by Kvothe27
Agerm was a huge factor in me becoming more initially involved in the game. Definitely deserving of all the credit you give him and more - it's not just the content creation but also his presence on the forums, the open builds, mentoring newer players, everything.

ditto for me like 6or 7 yrs ago

ND & Vipermaw - I'm not really sure what the agitation is - just because a suggestion is lengthy and detailed doesn't imply frustration or bitching.

Corndog et all are free to do whatever they want to with the suggestion or free tod do nothing at all with it. There isn't even anything hostile in what I've written - it's an offered solution to a problem that's quite frankly not a surprise to him (it's long term and pervasive). A specific point he summarizes here:

Originally posted by Corndog
But that's also not how the game is designed. There's 40 players on a team, and maybe 4 GMs. Not everyone can be an owner.

The pricing structure is also set up in a way that, like, teams don't pay for themselves. It costs more processing power to sim the games for a team than a team costs, so can't really just give teams to new players hoping they stick around.

To grow you need casual users that are not owners and as Leos succienctly (albeit less diplomatically) simply says "there isn't shit for them to do".

My suggestion, in my opinion addresses that in part - as I said I'm sure someone given enough time could come up with something else. It is how I wanted to solve the problem - a system generated variable output of player matchup vs. matchup scouting options does in point give each casual user something game to game to spend 10-15 minutes on. It can't be stacked so it doesn't run the risk of overpowering single agent teams and since it's system generated you can limit the amount of extra computations required to whatever amount makes sense. (IE it's not massively expensive to maintain for the game creators). 1 Choice in Rookie and 5 by Vet seems viable to me cost/expense ratio.

As for the idea that it's somehow my responsibility to recruit new players - I think not. Also that does kind of beg the previous question:
Would I recommend it to someone who is a die hard blood fueled master of the universe type football fanatic who has disposable income and digs video games - sure already have over the years - why do you think Dredgar is here? Why do you think some of the people on my current teams have come back to GLB? [Also again - not my job - money floweth from me to Bort and Corndog not the other way around - they ever want to change the direction of flow I'd consider changing that analysis but I'm guessing its not high on their wants list ]

Would I recommend it to someone with a lighter wallet or who is a football fan who somewhat sometimes likes a video game - someone who is like my neighbhor with 2 young active kids or younger brother or one the facebook friends from high school - probably not - again they simply don't have enough to do as casual level players. 36-43 players on a team only 3 people can really be involved 1 owner and 2 play callers max - perhaps a backup play caller.

Will it bother me if Corndog doesn't go out and impliment my solution - not a bit. It's Bort's Nickel and Corndog's livelyhood - Bort's creation - they can do with it what they want to do. Including opening a virtual suggestion box - making a suggestion , even a long detailed one - isn't bitching. To me being candid yet polite with someone about something they could do shows a certain amount of respect/engagement.

Thank you Kvothe27 and ND Irish for your kind words. Truth be told, (1) this is my favorite game to play, imperfections and all. (2) I love to win and I hate to lose but at the end of the day it is a game that I play to have fun. (3) I try to always learn from my wins and my losses. (4) I love making new friends through the game. (5) I learned how to play the game from great agents such as False06, jagat0r, and OSIRIS taking me under their wings since then I have learned as much from you all as I have shared through our games, the forums and our chats.
I have to say that in my opinion, even though we do not have the numbers that we had in the past, the community is the best that it has ever been...even GE makes it better

ugh i am not mad nor very negative ever ,your a good dude for sure but your kinda a windbag im jsut sick of these post that people cant figure out why they lose in rookie ball guys that are left ARE NO JOKE FOR A REASON, is all THE CHANGES U GUYS SUGGEST WILL NOT HAPPEN nothin most of u guys post is that refereshin or new at all these things have been mentioned in the past the gm is what it is , when ya get better u will be able to beat better agents whether they spam a bit or not, u newer guys think an i will also say u have NO IDEA HOW THIS GM WAS JUST A FEW YRS AGO passin sucked they added PA plays an other nuances,NONE OF U GUYS WOULD HAVE EVER STAYED AROUND JUST A FEW YRS AGO so appreciate that the gm has been opened up a bit ,i am not mad or upset just defendin this gm abit is all ,ROOKIE is a crap shooot the gm really begins in sophmore an beyond rookie is a crapshoot THIS GM IS NOT MADDEN adjust or not is on u guys most everyone in here that is a vet will help no doubt cause they love the gm , i mean dude i hang with no S* against very good agents all the time an pull a lot of upsets all the time except for a couple guys tacts builds an playbooks make the difference

Originally posted by agerm73
Thank you Kvothe27 and ND Irish for your kind words. Truth be told, (1) this is my favorite game to play, imperfections and all. (2) I love to win and I hate to lose but at the end of the day it is a game that I play to have fun. (3) I try to always learn from my wins and my losses. (4) I love making new friends through the game. (5) I learned how to play the game from great agents such as False06, jagat0r, and OSIRIS taking me under their wings since then I have learned as much from you all as I have shared through our games, the forums and our chats.
I have to say that in my opinion, even though we do not have the numbers that we had in the past, the community is the best that it has ever been...even GE makes it better

agrees so glad that dude came back for real he can be a butthead but one of the true zine def master when everyone was runnin man MAD respect for that dude

Originally posted by ND Irish1
ugh i am not mad nor very negative ever ,your a good dude for sure but your kinda a windbag im jsut sick of these post that people cant figure out why they lose in rookie ball guys that are left ARE NO JOKE FOR A REASON, is all THE CHANGES U GUYS SUGGEST WILL NOT HAPPEN nothin most of u guys post is that refereshin or new at all these things have been mentioned in the past the gm is what it is , when ya get better u will be able to beat better agents whether they spam a bit or not, u newer guys think an i will also say u have NO IDEA HOW THIS GM WAS JUST A FEW YRS AGO passin sucked they added PA plays an other nuances,NONE OF U GUYS WOULD HAVE EVER STAYED AROUND JUST A FEW YRS AGO so appreciate that the gm has been opened up a bit ,i am not mad or upset just defendin this gm abit is all ,ROOKIE is a crap shooot the gm really begins in sophmore an beyond rookie is a crapshoot THIS GM IS NOT MADDEN adjust or not is on u guys most everyone in here that is a vet will help no doubt cause they love the gm , i mean dude i hang with no S* against very good agents all the time an pull a lot of upsets all the time except for a couple guys tacts builds an playbooks make the difference

I have a radical suggestion if my posts upset you - don't read them.

There is quite exactly nothing about you in them - nor anything remotely related to anything you wrote here(and quite divorced from reality) - plus the name calling is just low rent.

Originally posted by william78
My suggestion, in my opinion addresses that in part - as I said I'm sure someone given enough time could come up with something else. It is how I wanted to solve the problem - a system generated variable output of player matchup vs. matchup scouting options does in point give each casual user something game to game to spend 10-15 minutes on. It can't be stacked so it doesn't run the risk of overpowering single agent teams and since it's system generated you can limit the amount of extra computations required to whatever amount makes sense. (IE it's not massively expensive to maintain for the game creators). 1 Choice in Rookie and 5 by Vet seems viable to me cost/expense ratio.

I do have to admit, it's fascinating to me what you think takes processing power and what doesn't. Small bonuses to attributes, and giving players an option of 3-4, uses what is essentially zero processing power. Like, your concern for it is cute, but sims are what take processing, considering its doing like thousands of physics calculations every tick of a play. Letting a player choose between +5 break block and +5 power tackling has less impact than pissing in the ocean.

I also still don't see how that adds a whole lot of gameplay and engagement for player agents. I don't see people agonizing over whether they want +5 break block or +5 power tackle just for the next game. Whether they are marginally better for the next game doesn't really matter for their player...if they win or lose, do slightly better or slightly worse, it doesn't really impact their player at all.

That, really, leads us to dilemma. Perhaps the primary dilemma in this topic. Owners and power users want players to be normalized, so they are always guaranteed to have the best players. What makes player owning fun, though, is being able to create a stand out star, and you can't really do that when every player is always allocated the same amount of points. Even superstars are the same as all other superstars. Any kind of system that, for example, gives 500SP for hitting a randomly generated milestone makes it interesting for player agents to try to hit that milestone, whether it's catching X number of passes or getting pancakes, then moving on to the next milestone. That gives them reason to be invested in games and their teams, and to try to get marginally better.

The problem with this, of course, is that the power users hate the idea that their 40 custom built players might not be perfect. You can look at the thread in FAQs, where people feel like chemistry is a penalty, because if they aren't playing as good as they possibly can, then they feel "punished".

For players to feel individually meaningful they have to feel unique to some degree, but uniqueness means some won't be as good as others, and that's a pill that a large part of the userbase refuses to swallow.

Originally posted by Corndog
I do have to admit, it's fascinating to me what you think takes processing power and what doesn't. Small bonuses to attributes, and giving players an option of 3-4, uses what is essentially zero processing power. Like, your concern for it is cute, but sims are what take processing, considering it doing like thousands of physics calculations every tick of a play. Letting a player choose between +5 break block and +5 power tackling has less impact than pissing in the ocean.

I'm always concerned by the feasibility of a suggestion - moving the bonus out of pre-game or pre-load into an actual sim condition would take up more resources. Otherwise there alot of things I could suggest that would just be pie in the sky - I mean it would be cool if you had pre-game commentary from ESPN describing the key players of the game - not very realistic though. That said - wouldn't be the first time I made a suggestion to a team developers that I thought would be terribly complicated and they told me it was easy or terribly easy and was told how complex/expensive it actually was by an architect.

As far as the actual impact - you've got access to the game mechanics. I would generally suggest that low level options be not very powerful but your certainly not limited to +5 this or +5 that (though at rookie that may have some impact depending on where). Just for exmaple on a HB:

Bob's Burgers Team is your opponent they have a bunch of hard hitters your drop down options contain
Work on Ball Security (A Bonus to Carrying Grip)
Visit the Zen Master, ok that's kinda goofy (A bonus to heart)
Work on your receiving skills (a doubling of the base chance to catch a pass by the player)

If you add say 1 option per level and expand them to a total 5 - deciding on bonuses tradeoffs it does give them something to do for them individually as opposed to the team level. I even remember the temp boosts we had on GLB1 though the idea was basically everyone do that at the same time and magnify and that kinda defeats the indiviudal purpose.


Originally posted by Corndog

That, really, leads us to dilemma. Perhaps the primary dilemma in this topic. Owners and power users want players to be normalized, so they are always guaranteed to have the best players. What makes player owning fun, though, is being able to create a stand out star, and you can't really do that when every player is always allocated the same amount of points. Even superstars are the same as all other superstars. Any kind of system that, for example, gives 500SP for hitting a randomly generated milestone makes it interesting for player agents to try to hit that milestone, whether it's catching X number of passes or getting pancakes, then moving on to the next milestone. That gives them reason to be invested in games and their teams, and to try to get marginally better.


- I'm not sure that's everyone motivation. I know its not mine though it may well be true for the current majority.
There are alot of people that enjoy collaboration with others on their team and contributing to success (however that team defines success for some its a winning record, some its playoffs, some will only accept champions) - but as an owner I dont' have a way for them to contribute to team success via action, other than build advice which is a marathon not a sprint.
- Like I said I'm sure there are other ways to give people actions and awards that make it more than I assign points and watch my game - I just can't think of what they might be, but I do know there are more than stat mongers/achievment driven players out there who would be interested but don't have enough to do unless they sign up for too much for them to do.

Originally posted by Corndog

As far as line play...yeah I realize there is more to it, considering I played on the line for 8 years. There's really only so much you can do with the simulation in that regard, though. The interactions are hard to get right, and either way they still end up mostly just looking like two players bumping into each other. Things like lead steps and leverage are mostly lost in the "bumping into each other". Zone blocks, trap blocks, nothing really comes through.


If you guys ever decide to do GLB3 - you should lobby for it. When I got told to find a hobby that wasn't work related I did actually look at other than GLB2 and this was complaint (lack of realistic lineplay) was in the comments on every football sim I looked at.

Originally posted by william78
I'm not sure that's everyone motivation. I know its not mine though it may well be true for the current majority.
There are alot of people that enjoy collaboration with others on their team and contributing to success

Sure, but people still like feeling special.

The appeal of MMOs is the promise of being someone. Owners of teams do that by winning their league, winning championships, winning the ladder. There's enough to differentiate teams and make them largely unique. You know certain users for the teams they run and the success they have had. However, you basically know nobody for their player building skills. Anyone can fully duplicate any other player with minimal effort. There's no difference between a Raid HB and a william78 HB with the same build.

Choosing between a couple different bonuses before a game isn't going to change that. Raid and william78 will get the same options, and can just select the same thing. Raid isn't going to become known as the user that really knows how to select one of the three options really well. There's still nothing to really strive for, and you're still just cog 32 in the machine. Owners could just as easily make a player and do exactly as you're doing.

People seek out and want to collaborate and contribute to success with stand out owners, nobody is lining up to join November's rookie team that's half full of CPU. The problem is this doesn't really go both ways...nobody is seeking out the best player builders to make their teams better, because there's no such thing as a best player builder. There's nothing to strive for as a player agentr, no real goal besides being associated with a winning team.

Originally posted by Corndog
That, really, leads us to dilemma. Perhaps the primary dilemma in this topic. Owners and power users want players to be normalized, so they are always guaranteed to have the best players. What makes player owning fun, though, is being able to create a stand out star, and you can't really do that when every player is always allocated the same amount of points. Even superstars are the same as all other superstars. Any kind of system that, for example, gives 500SP for hitting a randomly generated milestone makes it interesting for player agents to try to hit that milestone, whether it's catching X number of passes or getting pancakes, then moving on to the next milestone. That gives them reason to be invested in games and their teams, and to try to get marginally better.

The problem with this, of course, is that the power users hate the idea that their 40 custom built players might not be perfect. You can look at the thread in FAQs, where people feel like chemistry is a penalty, because if they aren't playing as good as they possibly can, then they feel "punished".

For players to feel individually meaningful they have to feel unique to some degree, but uniqueness means some won't be as good as others, and that's a pill that a large part of the userbase refuses to swallow.

Very much so. As a GM you have a tough decision about who to reward and what for, and the answers are absolutely mutually exclusive. Should it be more arcadey, where the focus is on owning and creating the most famous, powerful players? If so, that positive feedback loop of rewards tied to achievement leading to more rewards sounds like a blast. You could even have increasingly powerful levels of S* that are only unlocked through having previously successful S* that reached certain legendary benchmarks. But if you do that, you're right that power users will most likely find it disagreeable, because for an owner the most important thing is absolutely the team win and the teamwork required to achieve it. In an arcadey meta focused on stats and individual success, no agent would want to create a Trash Talk pass rusher designed to maximize pressure at the expense of sack production just so the coverage can profit off of bad passes. To create a maximally competitive, balanced, and team-centric environment, then, you would have to reward good cooperation, gameplanning, and synergy, which is obviously a stark contrast to the arcade style.

So, why not do both? You only have one game mode and it's meant to represent everyone, but if there are enough directly competing interests (that can't be reconciled) you may be best served by splitting them up. The way I see it, you could have what are the equivalent of "solo-queue," "team-queue," and "arcade" modes, which so many other major games have shown is probably the best solution to address the exact same problems you're facing. Team Queue would presumably be just GLB2 as we know it. Solo Queue would equate maybe to a draft-based league, perhaps without human owners at all and with deep, specially designed playbooks and rules meant to maximize parity between players rather than teams. The balancing aim would be to appropriately reward well built players and nothing else, so agents can focus their attention on "creating a stand out star," as you said. Perhaps agents could even have some say over the kinds of plays called, as the owner of a blitzing LB could input a preference for his player to be used in blitzes, or a power HB could request for more runs up the middle. As for the last mode, Arcade would maybe be leagues with crazy rules, randomization, and so much unpredictability that it would be too unrewarding for the competitive agents of team league or solo queue, at least most of the time. Though it seems niche, this league would be ideally meant for people who don't have the time, the energy, or the interest for competition - it's the casual mode and it's designed for everyone to have a good time, no matter who you are. Basically the "backyard football" mode (which for some is the entire draw of a video game).

Thoughts?

Originally posted by Kvothe27
Thoughts?

Hot take is that the game has far too few users to split them up even further with different game modes without significant alterations to the foundation of the game to keep the current format functional.

The biggest thing I would want is an expedited league that doesn't have down days or participate in the ladder. It's a league game every day. It speeds up the season and lets us get to full builds faster to try things.

Originally posted by Corndog
Sure, but people still like feeling special.


I'm not really sure how to say this except special is not necessarily synonymous with important. I could be wrong but I do tend to perceive that it's a general point you recognize that desire to special, to stand out and tend to start most game aspects from that viewpoint.

What I'm suggesting to you is that some people approaching the same game want to be important - not unique but valued. In order for someone to feel valued though they have to be able to contribute even if their individual effort to do so isn't as large as others.

That's kinda of 1 over 10,000,000 scale of the philosophy but certainly there really is no way to be valued for doing anything as a player (or minimal early on) and nothing by Vet that contributes to overall team succes. Ok at Vet its yes I signed my contract perhaps I'll see you in 40 days