Warrior General Games

Here's my Question:

My CB has these 2 pieces of AEQ:

Superior Purple Gloves
+1 agility, +8 speed, Catch ball chance +15%

and

Superior Purple Shirt
+4 agility, Intercept chance +7%

Will they still stack?

Originally posted by stengy


You misinterpret me, I'm not crying, just stating a fact. I've passed the point of caring what goes on TBPH, I stated my case and either people will listen or they won't.

I'll be playing GLB until my flex runs out (about 5 seasons from now with future retirements). If the game isn't to my liking at that time, I will just walk away without a word (well maybe a "I told you so" post on the way out, if things go like I foresee them going).

Originally posted by dviss1
Here's my Question:

My CB has these 2 pieces of AEQ:

Superior Purple Gloves
+1 agility, +8 speed, Catch ball chance +15%

and

Superior Purple Shirt
+4 agility, Intercept chance +7%

Will they still stack?



Did they stack before? I thought the intercept and catch ball rolls were separate, not asserting this, just asking if anyone else was operating under this assumption.

I do not know the answer to that -

in tomorrow's Q&A session - that would probably be a good question to ask.

Did anyone really have equipment stacked to 75%?

That would've taken 3 +5% pieces, each upgraded with 80 BTs.

I can't believe stacking 3 pieces to 75% was happening with much frequency.



That said, I support this endeavor.

I think I'm a part of PP's fan club now (fwiw).

Originally posted by Theo Wizzago
Look, while I'm basically new to >this< game, I'm not a newb gamer and know my football. What I'm wondering (mostly to the devs) is why you simply don't make the equipment bonus speific to what it is? Examples; shoes would give boosts to agility, speed, jumping, kicking, punting... any headgear would be for vision, confidence... shirts for strength, stamina, blocking... gloves for throwing, catching, carrying, tackling... you get the idea. Then you could make the better pieces cost more based on what they can do for you... not much unlike equiping a knight for fighting in RPG games. This would prevent almost any 'stacking' as overlaps of specific 'bonuses' would be severely minimized. It would still allow for folks to 'freelance' in their builds and even carry up to 3 items for each slot, allowing them to change equipment according to individual desires for speific games, or game plans by the coaches.
Make resale value of items 50% of original costs and allow for trades and set up a market for purchases where anyone could post an item for sale and others could bid for it. I would think that would surely boost a lot of players fun in the game and cut down on a lot of stuff you feel is wrong with it now. Just my take on this.

That's how I set up my first players EQ tbh.

Not a bad idea. Don't really see how gloves make me faster.

Originally posted by WiSeIVIaN
I think I'm a part of PP's fan club now (fwiw).

Yeah, that post was chocked full of kicked ass.

Originally posted by HULK
Did anyone really have equipment stacked to 75%?

That would've taken 3 +5% pieces, each upgraded with 80 BTs.

I can't believe stacking 3 pieces to 75% was happening with much frequency.

Doubtful, but I know some older dots that were working on their 3rd piece. The dots old enough to hit 75 didn't have the advantage of building BTs their entire careers. So, they couldn't hit it. The 75%+ stuff is what was brewing with the youngsters and coming in force in the ssns to come, as they aged. We're actually trying to be proactive...I'd have hated to see the bitch fest that would have occurred if this hadn't been dealt with this early.

Last thing I'm going to say about this before I leave the thread for good...I do seriously understand why this frustrates players. I'm just a little surprised why more of those same players can't see why it had to be done, be it a nerf to the effectiveness of the % gear (far worse option, IMO), a cap of only one piece (recommended by several) or this option.

Not that anyone will read this.... but after being here since season 1 and focussing on player building, these last two announcements have me confused.O_o

I am one of the guys my teams come to for player building and efficiency advice, and right now I just can't give them any.


I'm not saying I don't like the decision, but to me, the last two announcements look like:

"We need to encourage people to diversify their player builds to have more variety!"
Solution: Player archetypes, which allow people to build a player with more attribute points where it counts, to a pretty big advantage late in their career.

"We can't have people using the system we designed in this way, because they are building players that are too focussed and therefore too good at one thing!"
Solution: Change AE bonuses so they are so confusing that nobody understands what is going to happen with their players. In the long run, it will encourage more balanced building (+25% break tackle, +25% chance to not fumble vs +50% break tackle).


Does anyone else see these two solutions as contradictory?

Perhaps not. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say that AE % bonuses were flawed from the beginning. Let's say that flaw is giving advantage to those who are lucky enough to roll 3 identical % chance pieces, which results in some players being too 'specialized' which is ruining the game.

Isn't that exactly what we are planning on encouraging through player archetypes?

I just don't get what the goal is. What direction do Bort and the admins want the game to go in? More specialization or less?

Are we trying to give more advantage to people who think, read, and spend time on the game or less? Ultimately the only way to take the advantage away from those who are willing to spend the time to find the best way to build players is to make the system either more simple (player quality evenly distributed through agents), more random (player quality so random that better agents don't have statistically better players), or continually changing (what we've done for the past few seasons), so that nobody can retain an advantage for the entire career of a single player.


Normally I completely ignore whining masses. But in this case, the juxtaposition of these two changes is a prime example of a band-aid fix over two things that look like problems, when the real question is:

How do you want to encourage player building? Specialized, or well-rounded? Advantage to knowledgeable agents or not? Random or predictable?


I repeat, I'm not necessarily against this move. It just seems to me like you're encouraging more rounded player building by doing this, since % chance pieces are still valuable, but only if you have different ones now. If the goal is to reduce % off pieces from being so powerful in relation to other equipment, then just reduce their effectiveness (+1% per upgrade instead of 2%).

Be weary though, if you do that, the math starts to teeter back the other direction where it may be better (at least during the first 4 seasons) to use bonus tokens to get skill points, and completely forego the entire advanced equipment saga. Does Bort really want that?


Again, I really don't care that much. I just care that the REAL questions get asked instead of responding to possible causes of things we haven't even identified as problems with knee-jerk solutions (or at least what seems like that to those of us not on the test server every day). Good luck Bort, et al. It's a rough job and it will only get harder, just make sure you think through the effects of these moves before you actually make them.

it's been discussed at length in this thread -

my advice to you would be to skim through the last 10-15 pages and read posts by PP which explain his view (which I happen to agree with)

Maybe if the % adv eqp level went up 1% with each upgrade instead of 2%. Problem fixed imo.

Originally posted by TxSteve
it's been discussed at length in this thread -

my advice to you would be to skim through the last 10-15 pages and read posts by PP which explain his view (which I happen to agree with)

Thanks for narrowing it down from 71 pages to 15 for me, that saves me about 3 hours. ...this forum system doesn't really scale very well to this type of large community, does it?

Off topic, I would seriously suggest implementing something using a hybrid of stackoverflow and uservoice / getsatisfaction. Not using those sites per se, just using something other than a 145 page forum thread to disseminate information.


Good luck to you guys, you have a tough job.

Originally posted by HULK
Did anyone really have equipment stacked to 75%?

That would've taken 3 +5% pieces, each upgraded with 80 BTs.

I can't believe stacking 3 pieces to 75% was happening with much frequency.

That said, I support this endeavor.

I know of at least one player with +67%...so I don't think +75% is out of the realm of possibility (if not this season, then next)

Can someone maybe go a bit more in-depth on the logic behind "We have to do this because if we don't everyone will be forced to use the counter to it and it's no fun when you're required to do certain things to be any good"? I don't really get how that's a problem exclusive to % AEQ. It's pretty much a fundamental tenet of player building.