Warrior General Games

Rookie passing is more about the plays you run. Because blitzing works so well in rookie, QBs dont have any time to throw the ball, usually resulting is incomplete passes. There are only a few pass plays that work in rookie, but that doesnt stop people from trying stupid ass plays at that level.


Compared to GLB, GLB2 has done an amazing job at making it fun from rookie to vet. I like playing the same group of teams and creating rivalries with teams over the seasons.

Originally posted by MadCow420
Rookie passing is more about the plays you run. Because blitzing works so well in rookie, QBs dont have any time to throw the ball, usually resulting is incomplete passes. There are only a few pass plays that work in rookie, but that doesnt stop people from trying stupid ass plays at that level.

This is why I just posted...

Originally posted by Dee.
Making most plays useable and adding new ones is the best way to retain new agents and keep older players here IMO.

Right now I probably only use 25% of passing plays and 10% of the screens rookie-vet. That needs to change.

It was at the bottom of the page, I didn't want it to be missed. For example the 5 wide formation is a death trap for rookie offenses because there aren't any plays to combat the blitz meta out of it, but so many rookie coaches want to use it...

If new players understood that the QB will not throw the ball unless a WR has passed the LOS in rookie it would go a long way to helping rookie offenses not fail so hard.

yea Ive learned to not read your posts

Originally posted by MadCow420
yea Ive learned to not read your posts

Your avy accurately depicts the majority of yours...

Originally posted by Dee.
Making most plays useable and adding new ones is the best way to retain new agents and keep older players here IMO.

Right now I probably only use 25% of passing plays and 10% of the screens rookie-vet. That needs to change.

This.

In terms of play efficacy, Rushing is in much better shape than Passing.

There aren't enough plays that average 6+ YPA.

We all know that Short pass need a comp% bump and Long a slight nerf.

But to really expand the playbook, more Pass plays need to be at 6 YPA. Some are too much above that and most are far below.

Originally posted by Corndog
The overwhelming majority of new users log in, make a player, realize there's nothing to do, then forget about about the game.
That's because the overwhelming majority of people have the attention span of a gnat. They aren't the people you should be worried about, as they're never going to be interested in this game unless you change it beyond recognition (please don't).

One game I used to play, in order to sign up you had to correctly answer some questions from the rulebook. They wouldn't let you start playing until you had proved you had read the manual. That probably turned a lot of people away, but they would be people who weren't serious enough anyway, and that the game would be better off without.

Originally posted by Xars
This.

In terms of play efficacy, Rushing is in much better shape than Passing.

There aren't enough plays that average 6+ YPA.

We all know that Short pass need a comp% bump and Long a slight nerf.

But to really expand the playbook, more Pass plays need to be at 6 YPA. Some are too much above that and most are far below.



You buff short passes for what? Getting 1-3 yards on a comeback/drag? It has nothing to do with buffing the short routes and everything to do with the fact you can't do anything with them.

Originally posted by ThirdAndLong

That's because the overwhelming majority of people have the attention span of a gnat. They aren't the people you should be worried about, as they're never going to be interested in this game unless you change it beyond recognition (please don't).

One game I used to play, in order to sign up you had to correctly answer some questions from the rulebook. They wouldn't let you start playing until you had proved you had read the manual. That probably turned a lot of people away, but they would be people who weren't serious enough anyway, and that the game would be better off without.


This is exactly why I think the change of making skills irrelevant in certain tiers a bad idea. It only makes logging in to spend points all that much more non essential.

Originally posted by PhireHawk
Read what you just wrote tho. The Top QB's in Rookie...

Look at the bottom. The guys that just started playing the game and tried it out, and watch their receivers drop 15+ passes in a game - those are the guys this thread is aimed at. How do you keep those players interested.

By definition, some players will be below average. A great advance in GLB2 from GLB1 is there are so many considerations that every player has strengths and weaknesses, there being no one cookie cutter way to build.

I'm an advocate of less pathetic rookies, and one of my ideas was an artificial bonus for rookies' skills (with a smaller one in sophomore before it totally goes away)...but my first suggestion was 15% at the max.

I could support as high as maybe 25% at the beginning of Rookie, which is essentially like making rookies a 0-75 scale. But make it easy to avoid drops, at whatever level? No, you have to trade off some ability to get open for that. Otherwise the game is just a game of cookie cutter builds.

Originally posted by bhall43
Right there is the problem. These guys aren't seeking out help in the forums or trying to improve their player. They just want their player to be automatically good.

You say "sorry your build is bad".

I ask myself "wow, 15 drops in that game! how can i improve on that?"

step one, is it my WR, my QB, or both?

QB Pass tech could probably use some work. Conditioning is a bit low.
WR Rec Hands could use work. CIT could use work. Am i getting KL? GRip could use work. conditioning probably could be improved.

What if i am doing all i can in those categories? Maybe it is the playcalling. Let's look at what other teams are doing and see why they are doing it.

Maybe i just need to raise consistency on everyone?

Ask questions, get help. Hope for CDog to give more workable plays.

Actually, we have been asking questions and we have been getting help. Phirehawks frustration really stems from getting text messages and PMs about how bad the game sucks from agents who only have one or two players. This point brings us back to the original topic. As an owner/playcaller, I get to scout teams, game plan, etc. In short, there's a lot for me to do. The inherent problem with this game is that if you're not involved in game planning, there's nothing to do.

You ask how you grow the game, that's the topic. There has to be a hook to get people to log in every day and want to buy flex. If you look at any other game you play on a browser or phone there's a reason to log in every day. Sometimes it gets to the point of annoyance but you do it anyway and you spend anyway. That's how you grow the game. Get rid of the current points system and make leveling based off of mini game completion or something. Otherwise you end up with a football sim with 20-30 people playing and all having 43 players on a team by themselves.

Originally posted by Sir William PD
Actually, we have been asking questions and we have been getting help. Phirehawks frustration really stems from getting text messages and PMs about how bad the game sucks from agents who only have one or two players. This point brings us back to the original topic. As an owner/playcaller, I get to scout teams, game plan, etc. In short, there's a lot for me to do. The inherent problem with this game is that if you're not involved in game planning, there's nothing to do.

You ask how you grow the game, that's the topic. There has to be a hook to get people to log in every day and want to buy flex. If you look at any other game you play on a browser or phone there's a reason to log in every day. Sometimes it gets to the point of annoyance but you do it anyway and you spend anyway. That's how you grow the game. Get rid of the current points system and make leveling based off of mini game completion or something. Otherwise you end up with a football sim with 20-30 people playing and all having 43 players on a team by themselves.



2 out of 3 days there's a reason to log in, to watch the players you built play, see what they seem to need to improve, and spend points on it. If you have only your free player, that probably won't provide much entertainment. But they may want that, to encourage people to buy flex and make more players.

I do think providing more that agents can do to be entertained by the game is a very good idea. However, making it so you basically have to in order to improve your player isn't necessarily good either, as you put it, "sometimes it gets to the point of annoyance" if you don't want to do it that day.

Ideally, it could be set up so that anyone, not only coaches/GM's/owners, can find 6 hours worth of things to do here on any day they want to do it; but for people who aren't in a position like those, they could also go a few days without logging in and lose very little if that's what they wanted. I'm not saying it's close to adequate in that sense now for people who are agents only, but I'm saying the ideal would be if it could honestly be said, "Anyone can find 6 hours of activity a day, or can do fine with 6 hours of activity a week."

If you don't own a lot of players and don't coach, etc., 6 hours a week is the most you'll get right now, if that, and I agree that's not a good thing (though if I were Bort/Corndog thinking of revenues I might like how people have to make more players, aka spend flex, to have more)...but from my point of view just wanting to see the game grow, 6 hours a day of things to do should be available to everyone, as long as it does not become essentially mandatory.

Originally posted by Dee.
Making most plays useable and adding new ones is the best way to retain new agents and keep older players here IMO.

Right now I probably only use 25% of passing plays and 10% of the screens rookie-vet. That needs to change.

All plays are usable. Not all plays are the best plays because it's impossible for all plays to be the best plays. Even if it were possible, all plays being equally successful would make for one dull game.

Originally posted by bhall43
You buff short passes for what? Getting 1-3 yards on a comeback/drag? It has nothing to do with buffing the short routes and everything to do with the fact you can't do anything with them.

Ummm perhaps it's the math guy in me, but I talk about getting more Passing plays to a 6 yard YPA and you counter with 1-3 yard Comeback/drags?

Originally posted by Corndog
All plays are usable. Not all plays are the best plays because it's impossible for all plays to be the best plays. Even if it were possible, all plays being equally successful would make for one dull game.

Not asking for more "best" or OP plays. Asking for more "average" plays.

If you plot out Rushing YPC across all available plays, you get a better looking bell curve than you do with Passing YPA.

Originally posted by Sir William PD
Actually, we have been asking questions and we have been getting help. Phirehawks frustration really stems from getting text messages and PMs about how bad the game sucks from agents who only have one or two players. This point brings us back to the original topic. As an owner/playcaller, I get to scout teams, game plan, etc. In short, there's a lot for me to do. The inherent problem with this game is that if you're not involved in game planning, there's nothing to do.

You ask how you grow the game, that's the topic. There has to be a hook to get people to log in every day and want to buy flex. If you look at any other game you play on a browser or phone there's a reason to log in every day. Sometimes it gets to the point of annoyance but you do it anyway and you spend anyway. That's how you grow the game. Get rid of the current points system and make leveling based off of mini game completion or something. Otherwise you end up with a football sim with 20-30 people playing and all having 43 players on a team by themselves.



If you only have 1-2 players, you really aren't paying much actual cash into the game so I would hope those people are a little more patient.

I don't know of any "leveling" game, where my noob toon was particularly good at anything. Usually just surviving was considered an accomplishment.

In GLB2, there are a lot of complex elements at work. It's why plenty of us like it. There's this belief in "cookie cutter" builds but that's nonsense. In an few hours, LogZilla will play Bronx in a Vet game.

While both teams are almost all Passing, they are both built very differently. Look at the Rosters: they aren't even close in makeup. And both teams are very different from Air Raid and the other pure Passing teams before them.

GLB2 has builds, coordinators/play calling, roster makeup and Meta elements at work and there are a variety of elements at work in each layer of those.

Expecting to master all that with the first player/team someone builds/gets on with their first free player is the wrong perspective.

If I just had players I would have left a long time ago, maybe if Flex was cheaper to encourage agents to own/coach the entire team or maybe just offense or defense it would help. I've suggested it before, but Flex packages geared towards owning an entire squad. i.e. $30 a season for 20 offensive or defensive players. The catch with the steep discount is that you must have all the players on 1 team. Something along those lines should increase the amount of teams, I mean I'm at Rookie right now and ranked #95. That's how few teams there is.