January 28, 2011 UPDATE
IML is alive and kicking despite 0 actual support from the Powers that Be.
For current results, take a look at our PeeWee league:
http://goallineblitz.com/game/league.pl?league_id=234
27 of the 32 teams in that league are playing Iron Man Football (20-man rosters)
Just sayin' ... this idea ain't dead yet as long as there are people who want to play
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHAT IS IRON MAN FOOTBALL?
Iron Man football dates back to the game's origins, where most players were forced to play on both sides of the ball because of limited roster sizes and limited substitution rules. These were the true gridiron warriors, playing with leather helmets and little padding, grinding out a whole game for paychecks that couldn't even pay their rent.
The modern version of American Football was created and developed in the Iron Man era, evolving slowly from a brutal sport that looked more like rugby at first.
HOW WOULD IRON MAN FOOTBALL WORK IN GLB?
The only change needed to the existing GLB sim is a roster restriction.
Ideally, the league would be played with 15-man roster limits. Unfortunately the only change we need turns out to be a big one. Due to the way Bort coded the game, it is currently impossible to create 15-man rosters without completely re-writing sections of the game code itself. (Bort himself said this)
It is, however, possible to play with a 20-man roster limit, a coding change which would need only minor tweaks to implement. As of the last edit on this post, we were still waiting to hear if a change to allow for 15-man rosters would ever be a reality in the near future. If a 15-man limit is not feasible, most people seem willing to accept a 20-man limit, myself included.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS:
Q: Would players have to be built specifically for Iron Man?
Ideally, yes. But there would be no distinction made between an Iron Man player and a regular GLB player. Iron Man players would not get extra attributes or higher rolls. Regular players would be allowed to come to an Iron Man league and vice versa. But it is likely that players not built for Iron Man would not fare well because of limited depth charts and a greatly increased need for endurance, not to mention the ability to play on both sides of the ball.
Q: What about the Out Of Position penalty (commonly referred to as OOP)?
There would be no change to the OOP for an Iron Man player. A WR will probably have to play CB on your Iron Man team, for example, and he won't play defense as well as he plays offense.
We consider this part of the strategy for Iron Man football. Is it better to build a WR and play him also as a CB, or build a CB and play him also as a WR? That is the part for you to decide and figure out, and part of the increased challenge that has a big appeal in the 1000+ posts that have already been made about this idea.
Q: Would this start as a Level 1 league or could I bring my Level 60 SS over to play Iron Man?
Ideally it would begin as a Level 1 league to give the league time to grow and encourage a different style of football – so no, your Level 60 SS would not be welcome until Iron Man players have themselves started to reach those upper levels. But there would be no restriction from bringing in any GLB player whose current level fits under the current cap restrictions.
Q: What are the benefits of an Iron Man League?
--First, it's a new GLB experience for long-time GLB players that uses all the existing game coding except for roster restrictions.
--Second, it will encourage unique builds and unique strategies which will theoretically be more in line with Bort's vision of player building. The cookie cutter builds of the present game would be irrelevant in Iron Man football – some players will be built to dominate on offense, some will be built to dominate on defense, some will be built to maximize endurance, some will try to be more balanced. And every shade of player in between every extreme. There could be running backs who play linebacker or nose tackles who play fullback.
--Third, it maximizes playing time for your dots. You get to see them out there all the time, playing defense and offense and special teams. In an Iron Man League, your player gets a lot of bang for his GLB buck.
--Fourth, more player creation means more money for GLB. If new ideas stimulate new player creation, which stimulates more interest, then Iron Man + League + ???? = Profit
--Lastly, it makes team coordination a lot easier. With 55-man rosters and scores of agents, it's sometimes hard to get everyone on the same page. In Iron Man, your team can easily be built, run and coordinated with just a handful of agents, or just an owner who builds the entire roster himself. For people frustrated with how much preparation time and coordination the current game needs, this will be a much-needed easing of their time commitment.
Q: What if I don't want to play Iron Man football?
Easy. Don't play. The current GLB will still exist and will always be a much larger part of the GLB experience. Nobody would be forced to change their builds or join an Iron Man league. This is just another version of GLB football that offers a different experience for those who want it. Variety is the spice of life, and being able to cater to various tastes can only help GLB continue to grow as the best simulated football game on the Internet.
Q: Wouldn't this be much easier to exploit than the current game?
There is a concern --as there is with anything new -- that it would be easy to exploit. To counter that, we are suggesting Iron Man be a casual league with basic tactics, but with the ability to edit the team playbook. Some plays just aren't going to work based on how you build your team, so having the ability to eliminate them from your playbook would be essential.
Q: Why only a 15-man roster? What's wrong with 20 or 25 or 30?
After a long debate in this thread, we settled on 15 as the ideal number. This allows you to have room for 8 players who play on both offense and defense, three specialized players who play just offense, three who play just defense and one K/P. Or nine guys who play both ways, two offensive players, two defensive players and a kicker and a punter. Or whatever strategy you want to employ. The point is, the majority of your team has to play both sides of the ball, and no new rules have to be enacted to force you to do this.
Unfortunately it looks like we might have to settle for a 20-man roster (as noted above). Why might that be a problem? At a roster size of 20, you can make 5 more specialized (one-way only) players than you can at a roster size of 15. It's simple math. You sacrifice depth to do that, but you can make up for some of that with stamina, which means building out only one attribute instead of the three or four you would have to build out to make the player effective on both sides of the ball.
While the reality dictates that we're probably going to have to settle for a 20-man roster, I still feel that 15 is better in line with the spirit of the league. But a 20-man roster doesn't kill the idea, and might even make it more feasible and fun. You still have to worry about special teams energy drain and OOP.
Q: Won't this just be stupid? When players run out of energy, this game is going to be boring!
Not even remotely. The lowest energy a player can play at is 20, after which his energy no longer drains. And players in the regular game fall down to that number all the time – and they don't simply run around in circles or creep along the field. Will there be more fumbles, pancakes, etc? Yes. But it's definitely not like watching paint dry or snails fornicate or whatever cute little colloquialism someone comes up with next. A 100-speed player is still faster than an 80 speed player and a 100-strength guy is still stronger than an 80-strength guy.
Q: Why isn't this idea already in EPIC?
It was in Epic Suggestions, but was moved back to the main forum during the last phase of Project Bort. The reason for that was to un-clutter the Epic forum to make it easier to go through the suggestions there -- either to implement them, put them on the Not Going To Happen list, or because they needed more refining. Since this suggestion doesn't fall into any of those categories, it was bounced back here in what we hope will be a temporary move. This idea lives on because of all the great support and feedback it has received since it was first introduced on April 5.
This post will remain updated
IML is alive and kicking despite 0 actual support from the Powers that Be.
For current results, take a look at our PeeWee league:
http://goallineblitz.com/game/league.pl?league_id=234
27 of the 32 teams in that league are playing Iron Man Football (20-man rosters)
Just sayin' ... this idea ain't dead yet as long as there are people who want to play
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHAT IS IRON MAN FOOTBALL?
Iron Man football dates back to the game's origins, where most players were forced to play on both sides of the ball because of limited roster sizes and limited substitution rules. These were the true gridiron warriors, playing with leather helmets and little padding, grinding out a whole game for paychecks that couldn't even pay their rent.
The modern version of American Football was created and developed in the Iron Man era, evolving slowly from a brutal sport that looked more like rugby at first.
HOW WOULD IRON MAN FOOTBALL WORK IN GLB?
The only change needed to the existing GLB sim is a roster restriction.
Ideally, the league would be played with 15-man roster limits. Unfortunately the only change we need turns out to be a big one. Due to the way Bort coded the game, it is currently impossible to create 15-man rosters without completely re-writing sections of the game code itself. (Bort himself said this)
It is, however, possible to play with a 20-man roster limit, a coding change which would need only minor tweaks to implement. As of the last edit on this post, we were still waiting to hear if a change to allow for 15-man rosters would ever be a reality in the near future. If a 15-man limit is not feasible, most people seem willing to accept a 20-man limit, myself included.
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS:
Q: Would players have to be built specifically for Iron Man?
Ideally, yes. But there would be no distinction made between an Iron Man player and a regular GLB player. Iron Man players would not get extra attributes or higher rolls. Regular players would be allowed to come to an Iron Man league and vice versa. But it is likely that players not built for Iron Man would not fare well because of limited depth charts and a greatly increased need for endurance, not to mention the ability to play on both sides of the ball.
Q: What about the Out Of Position penalty (commonly referred to as OOP)?
There would be no change to the OOP for an Iron Man player. A WR will probably have to play CB on your Iron Man team, for example, and he won't play defense as well as he plays offense.
We consider this part of the strategy for Iron Man football. Is it better to build a WR and play him also as a CB, or build a CB and play him also as a WR? That is the part for you to decide and figure out, and part of the increased challenge that has a big appeal in the 1000+ posts that have already been made about this idea.
Q: Would this start as a Level 1 league or could I bring my Level 60 SS over to play Iron Man?
Ideally it would begin as a Level 1 league to give the league time to grow and encourage a different style of football – so no, your Level 60 SS would not be welcome until Iron Man players have themselves started to reach those upper levels. But there would be no restriction from bringing in any GLB player whose current level fits under the current cap restrictions.
Q: What are the benefits of an Iron Man League?
--First, it's a new GLB experience for long-time GLB players that uses all the existing game coding except for roster restrictions.
--Second, it will encourage unique builds and unique strategies which will theoretically be more in line with Bort's vision of player building. The cookie cutter builds of the present game would be irrelevant in Iron Man football – some players will be built to dominate on offense, some will be built to dominate on defense, some will be built to maximize endurance, some will try to be more balanced. And every shade of player in between every extreme. There could be running backs who play linebacker or nose tackles who play fullback.
--Third, it maximizes playing time for your dots. You get to see them out there all the time, playing defense and offense and special teams. In an Iron Man League, your player gets a lot of bang for his GLB buck.
--Fourth, more player creation means more money for GLB. If new ideas stimulate new player creation, which stimulates more interest, then Iron Man + League + ???? = Profit
--Lastly, it makes team coordination a lot easier. With 55-man rosters and scores of agents, it's sometimes hard to get everyone on the same page. In Iron Man, your team can easily be built, run and coordinated with just a handful of agents, or just an owner who builds the entire roster himself. For people frustrated with how much preparation time and coordination the current game needs, this will be a much-needed easing of their time commitment.
Q: What if I don't want to play Iron Man football?
Easy. Don't play. The current GLB will still exist and will always be a much larger part of the GLB experience. Nobody would be forced to change their builds or join an Iron Man league. This is just another version of GLB football that offers a different experience for those who want it. Variety is the spice of life, and being able to cater to various tastes can only help GLB continue to grow as the best simulated football game on the Internet.
Q: Wouldn't this be much easier to exploit than the current game?
There is a concern --as there is with anything new -- that it would be easy to exploit. To counter that, we are suggesting Iron Man be a casual league with basic tactics, but with the ability to edit the team playbook. Some plays just aren't going to work based on how you build your team, so having the ability to eliminate them from your playbook would be essential.
Q: Why only a 15-man roster? What's wrong with 20 or 25 or 30?
After a long debate in this thread, we settled on 15 as the ideal number. This allows you to have room for 8 players who play on both offense and defense, three specialized players who play just offense, three who play just defense and one K/P. Or nine guys who play both ways, two offensive players, two defensive players and a kicker and a punter. Or whatever strategy you want to employ. The point is, the majority of your team has to play both sides of the ball, and no new rules have to be enacted to force you to do this.
Unfortunately it looks like we might have to settle for a 20-man roster (as noted above). Why might that be a problem? At a roster size of 20, you can make 5 more specialized (one-way only) players than you can at a roster size of 15. It's simple math. You sacrifice depth to do that, but you can make up for some of that with stamina, which means building out only one attribute instead of the three or four you would have to build out to make the player effective on both sides of the ball.
While the reality dictates that we're probably going to have to settle for a 20-man roster, I still feel that 15 is better in line with the spirit of the league. But a 20-man roster doesn't kill the idea, and might even make it more feasible and fun. You still have to worry about special teams energy drain and OOP.
Q: Won't this just be stupid? When players run out of energy, this game is going to be boring!
Not even remotely. The lowest energy a player can play at is 20, after which his energy no longer drains. And players in the regular game fall down to that number all the time – and they don't simply run around in circles or creep along the field. Will there be more fumbles, pancakes, etc? Yes. But it's definitely not like watching paint dry or snails fornicate or whatever cute little colloquialism someone comes up with next. A 100-speed player is still faster than an 80 speed player and a 100-strength guy is still stronger than an 80-strength guy.
Q: Why isn't this idea already in EPIC?
It was in Epic Suggestions, but was moved back to the main forum during the last phase of Project Bort. The reason for that was to un-clutter the Epic forum to make it easier to go through the suggestions there -- either to implement them, put them on the Not Going To Happen list, or because they needed more refining. Since this suggestion doesn't fall into any of those categories, it was bounced back here in what we hope will be a temporary move. This idea lives on because of all the great support and feedback it has received since it was first introduced on April 5.
This post will remain updated
Edited by haole on Jan 28, 2011 11:27:19
Edited by haole on Oct 20, 2010 10:33:11
Edited by haole on Aug 20, 2010 12:19:29
Edited by haole on Jul 2, 2010 18:23:35
Edited by haole on Mar 19, 2010 02:03:52
