Warrior General Games

Originally posted by TxSteve

3) Players' starting/max in-game Morale is based off of team possessions and his annual salary (measured as an average salary, season-to-date, so a team can't just give everyone a max salary for 1 big game then go back to min salaries for the rest of the season) and Energy is based off of team possessions.



doesn't this further the problem of players only wanting to sign with contenders ??

meanwhile the shitty teams fall further behind until they either gut or become content with 1st round playoff exits (if they even finish top 8 in conference).

yes no maybe??

Originally posted by Sal Basss


It's not even close to what it could become. Right now the thing everyone wants to do is to win. There are a few who like to exploit MVP awards by going 0-16 and have a RB have 200+ receptions and 200+ TDs in a season, but for the most part, everyone just wants to win. The way the game works right now, winning is basically synonomous with your dot performing the as good as possible.

But think about what happens if you introduce the fact that salary could decide how high morale/energy you start a game with. Do you really not see players demanding more money than the next guy so their dot performs better? How is that not a problem?

And yes, I know that "that is part of the strategy." That doesn't mean it's a good idea. This adds an enormous headache to owners and recruiters everywhere to not only find recruits that will commit, but then juggle how much money they are supposed to get versus everyone else (because that will in part determine how they perform).

Fwiw i'm against Steve's idea as well. In a perfect world there should be no back ups , a team would consist of 22 starters O and D , 10 ST's , 1 K , 1 P , now the problem would come with the ST's but they could also be back ups ? far fetched but an idea none the same and nothing crazier than what's being proposed from season to season in the end.

Originally posted by Hikariu
That's what were looking to fix. Let me know if you have any solid ideas. Sim Stadium if you will.

I already posted my idea.

I don't like the idea of my dot being a money whore .

But great stuff here.

Originally posted by Sal Basss
So neither of you see a problem with making this an "individual-first" type of game?

I believe it could, I think you (and most others here) are taking the idea in the OP as being the way it WILL happen. On the test server, RARELY is an idea taken in its original form and instituted. For better or worse, details get ironed out 1st. The OP is missing the details and they aren't all ironed out yet anyway.

On thing I will say, though, is I don't see how this can be pinped, as some have suggested. So long as you get rid of player trades for cash, there's really no way to pimp it for an unfair advantage. I like that very much.

Another point that was brought up was to have teams own the EQ, not the players...Hate that idea. The team shouldn't control a dot's build, even if it is only through EQ. Agent only players already don't have enough fun things to do in this game. At least letting them control their own EQ gives them something to look forward to.

Originally posted by PP
Another point that was brought up was to have teams own the EQ, not the players...Hate that idea. The team shouldn't control a dot's build, even if it is only through EQ. Agent only players already don't have enough fun things to do in this game. At least letting them control their own EQ gives them something to look forward to.

Right now it is kinda like that. If a team doesn't issue cash to you, you don't have EQ.

Originally posted by itsme4
doesn't this further the problem of players only wanting to sign with contenders ??

meanwhile the shitty teams fall further behind until they either gut or become content with 1st round playoff exits (if they even finish top 8 in conference).

yes no maybe??

I brought up this same point on the test server last night...Not sure how that will shake out yet. Honestly, even as is, I don't think it would be as bad as the current situation. If you're a lvl 57 dot missing his lvl 56 EQ and don't have a "friends" team to go to, any chance you're going to sigm with a team that can't cover your EQ needs? Few if any will.

Originally posted by PP
Originally posted by Sal Basss

So neither of you see a problem with making this an "individual-first" type of game?

I believe it could, I think you (and most others here) are taking the idea in the OP as being the way it WILL happen. On the test server, RARELY is an idea taken in its original form and instituted. For better or worse, details get ironed out 1st. The OP is missing the details and they aren't all ironed out yet anyway.

Well of course the details aren't ironed out yet - but the details (or lack thereof) in the OP are all we have to work with right now. I'm just trying to give my input & opinions.

Here's how I see it working on a very high level. Under the proposed system, there are basically three factors that influence player performance related to energy and morale. One is controlled by the player/agent (build), another is controlled by the owner (team items) and the last is controlled by both (salary). That seems like an ideal system and I actually love it in principal.

The biggest issue with that is that in game cash is scarce, so not everyone can optimize their build, which is a MAJOR change from how things work right now. The only thing that you have to do to optimize your build's potential right now is build your dot right, but if you need other parts to get your dot to perform better, it will be a constant battle of "why does he get a higher salary?" I admit that's not a game-breaker. However, if you start introducing "vanity items" that players can purchase that serve no purpose in the sim, that will make a good deal of players much greedier.

So here's what I propose if this is the road we're going down:

- If you're going with this system, don't bother with "extra things for players to spend money on." Just eliminate player cash altogether. Yes, a player has to agree to a salary, but that only affects in game morale and energy, and once it comes out of the team's account, it "disappears."
- If you want to train, you must be on a team. It still costs training points, but not money.
- Player equipment is free with whatever boundaries you decide (an ongoing debate, right?)

However, what I would personally really like... is for a dot's ability to perform to his build's maximum potential to be ONLY affected by his build, like we have now. I don't know how to do that short of keeping things the way they are now (and therefore changing equipment in some other way).

Originally posted by Iron Maiden
I don't like the idea of my dot being a money whore .

But great stuff here.

exactly. This is what I'm afraid of. All dots could be forced to be money whores. Bad for competitive balance, bad for the culture of the game.

otherwise, I'm in favor of the other suggestions.

Make equipment less about "player progression" and more about "player customization" imo

Instead of equipment giving bonuses to attributes, have equipment give bonuses to specific actions. To prevent people from stacking up on one bonus, make them "slot specific".

Helmets would give bonuses to avoiding fakes, reducing morale loss, seeing plays develop, noticing blitzers. Basically, Vision and Confidence related bonuses without actually giving flat bonuses to vision and confidence.

Shoes could give bonuses to top speed, bonuses to acceleration, bonuses to lateral movement, reduce speed lost by changing direction, bonuses to pushing and being pushed on the line.

etc

It's very easy to come up with a laundry list of this stuff, with bonuses for pretty much any position for each piece.

Make a list of pieces big enough that certain players would rather have Bonus A than Bonus B. Result? Variety without people being able to get +10,000% Break Block or something, because the only piece they'd have to breaking blocks would be their hands most likely.

This would also make CEQ a bit more "special", since flat bonuses to attributes would be more difficult to come by.

Originally posted by Maddoc
Make equipment less about "player progression" and more about "player customization" imo

Instead of equipment giving bonuses to attributes, have equipment give bonuses to specific actions. To prevent people from stacking up on one bonus, make them "slot specific".

Helmets would give bonuses to avoiding fakes, reducing morale loss, seeing plays develop, noticing blitzers. Basically, Vision and Confidence related bonuses without actually giving flat bonuses to vision and confidence.

Shoes could give bonuses to top speed, bonuses to acceleration, bonuses to lateral movement, reduce speed lost by changing direction, bonuses to pushing and being pushed on the line.

etc

It's very easy to come up with a laundry list of this stuff, with bonuses for pretty much any position for each piece.

Make a list of pieces big enough that certain players would rather have Bonus A than Bonus B. Result? Variety without people being able to get +10,000% Break Block or something, because the only piece they'd have to breaking blocks would be their hands most likely.

This would also make CEQ a bit more "special", since flat bonuses to attributes would be more difficult to come by.

Eh... that's pretty radical. I don't think people have a problem with EQ, they/we just have a problem with how it's acquired and how it ties into the recent updates with enforcing money farms.

Originally posted by Sal Basss
Eh... that's pretty radical. I don't think people have a problem with EQ, they/we just have a problem with how it's acquired and how it ties into the recent updates with enforcing money farms.

Technically I guess that post could fit both in here (if equipment isn't about character progression, that removes the "need" for it to be upgraded constantly, just have it scale with the player or something), and in the uber high attribute thread. (Equipment at high levels is worth well over a hundred levels worth of SP, and people with more than one set of equipment are able to drastically alter the ability of their dot at a moments notice by swinging those hundreds and hundreds of SP from one attribute to another at will)

tbh I know quite a few people would rather just see equipment in its current form gone due to the way in which it completely warps game balance.

Originally posted by lemdog
Yeah I don't like limiting 1 swap per season, the more you allow the player to change due to sim changes the better and I don't think it should cost BT's or anything thing else for the matter.

Nor do I think you should need to make the change in the offseason either.

Also, I don't love the idea, but I do not hate it either. I am strongly against making salary amount determining how effective they can be though, as this will actually cause more bitching than players not getting equipment currently imo.

Originally posted by Sal Basss


- If you're going with this system, don't bother with "extra things for players to spend money on." Just eliminate player cash altogether. Yes, a player has to agree to a salary, but that only affects in game morale and energy, and once it comes out of the team's account, it "disappears."
- If you want to train, you must be on a team. It still costs training points, but not money.
- Player equipment is free with whatever boundaries you decide (an ongoing debate, right?)



I like this and would like to add that a good way to make money matter (still keep the financial part of the game) but still give agents control of building their players is make teams operate under a salary cap. This will force team owners to make hard decisions as to where their $$ go, and level the competition for FAs a bit, assuming more $$ for the FA = more performance.