Warrior General Games

Originally posted by TxSteve

Ah.

Peeti, I genuinely apologize. I tossed that out there as a joking comment and honestly didn't even mean it in the smallest way. I've always thought you were a pretty funny guy.

I'm sorry. I meant it as a joke. I wouldn't have done it if I thought it would be taken seriously by you.


Dunno how this could have been understood as a "joke", but I appreciate your apology. Still think it was serious but I can blame that on my bad english

Originally posted by AirMcMVP
Take it to PMs or, worst case, use the Ignore function to keep stuff like this from flaring up in the future.


Got Mod'ed. kk

Originally posted by Corndog
Bort said the playoff tiebreaker is working as he intended it to work. It's a three way tie.

And I've looked at tactics code numerous times and it's such a clusterfuck that I usually just end up throwing my hands in the air. I think a lot of it is just straight imported from early seasons of GLB or something and it's not pretty. I've also brought it up with Bort and his response was something like "there's no clear concise reason that it's broken". If you want to make a list of improvements I can pass it on to him at the meeting tomorrow.

Posted this in the bugs section. But I'm guessing since you didn't read it:

The common misconception of this is that it's not a three way tie. Let's put this into NFL perspective since a lot of people aren't understanding.

For example,

AFC West:
The Broncos are 10-6, they split with the Chiefs 1-1, but also beat the Ravens
The Chiefs are 10-6, they split with the Broncos 1-1, but have lost to the Ravens.

AFC North:
The Steelers are 16-0 and won the AFC north division.
The Ravens are 10-6. They have beat the Chiefs in the regular season.


How is that a three way tie? Do the ravens now have a chance to win to the AFC West now JUST because they are also 10-6 like the Broncos and Chiefs? No.
So can someone please explain how the situation is a "three way tie"

Originally posted by Corndog
Since my server is exhausted from running sims, I'll go ahead and finish this discussion up so I can get some sleep before the meeting in like 4 hours.

Division winners looks at everyone in the division, then selects the winner. Wild card looks at everyone in the league, then picks the highest team that didn't win their division.

It does not arbitrarily remove teams from the league rankings. The only thing that would accomplish is, in rare instances, one team would win a tie breaker with a smaller scope than they would in a larger scope. I don't see the benefit of narrowing the scope, besides to make one team feel better and for the better wild card choice to miss the playoffs. I'm just not convinced changing it is for the better.


And going on what you said here. Denver had the regular season win over D'Haran, but was still denied the wildcard spot to them.

Originally posted by Corndog
I'd guess losing balance like a mofo

You're telling me that a CB that hasn't been touched by another player can lose balance so bad that he just turns back and forth in place like he doesn't know whether to play run or pass? If that's the case, balance is screwed up and you need to change it so that Footwork and Quickness play a much larger role in non-contact cuts. I can see balance screwing up a player if he actually gets hit and 'knocked off balance,' but not just making a turn. That doesn't even make sense logically in terms of the descriptions or real life.

Originally posted by Longhornfan1024
You're telling me that a CB that hasn't been touched by another player can lose balance so bad that he just turns back and forth in place like he doesn't know whether to play run or pass? If that's the case, balance is screwed up and you need to change it so that Footwork and Quickness play a much larger role in non-contact cuts. I can see balance screwing up a player if he actually gets hit and 'knocked off balance,' but not just making a turn. That doesn't even make sense logically in terms of the descriptions or real life.

Corn is obviously bluffing. I've never seen that reaction from a CB happen before, and there are CBs with less bal than yours not doing it.

I almost totally ignore balance on my CBs and they seem to be performing just fine

Originally posted by TDiddy8701
I almost totally ignore balance on my CBs and they seem to be performing just fine

Pity Yorick is a tier behind. So. Many. Pancakes.

GG Generals. At the very least ya held down SF's offense alright.

Originally posted by bhall43
GG Generals. At the very least ya held down SF's offense alright.

GG man. Figured I'd try mostly coverage to slow down that attack. Wrong approach I guess.