Warrior General Games

Might be about time to just allow people to make S* players whenever they have the points for it. It would allow agents to be invested in more teams and would allow non powerhouse owners to get more S* power on their teams.

S* players are easily one of the most exciting things to build and watch in the game. Time to open the flood gates which would hopefully help teams that are recruiting players and typically struggling to do so these days.

Originally posted by Detroit Leos
Might be about time to just allow people to make S* players whenever they have the points for it. It would allow agents to be invested in more teams and would allow non powerhouse owners to get more S* power on their teams.

S* players are easily one of the most exciting things to build and watch in the game. Time to open the flood gates which would hopefully help teams that are recruiting players and typically struggling to do so these days.

So, you're saying unlimited S*'s? That would just make non-S*'s much less worthwhile. S*'s have to be scarce or there's no point to them.

Unlimited superstars or creating players at any level are going to really screw with the balance of things but we are getting to a point where it might make more sense to have one tier of players and get the competition level to something more reasonable. Having 2-4 competetive teams from rookie to pro is fairly boring and recruiting/chemistry is just a flat out nightmare.

Originally posted by Nyria
So, you're saying unlimited S*'s? That would just make non-S*'s much less worthwhile. S*'s have to be scarce or there's no point to them.

I get that, but we have countless teams struggling to fill rosters with regular players, let alone the all important S* players to make them competitive. If people are able to create more S* players, I would imagine they would also be willing to make a regular player or two in addition to help whatever team they are on be competitive.

I juat think it is a waste right now locking up an agents 3 S* slots for over a year (rookie through vet run) when they could potentially invest in another later tier. It would also make it a bit more difficult for agents to walk away as they would always have S* players developing which is exciting.

Originally posted by Detroit Leos
I get that, but we have countless teams struggling to fill rosters with regular players, let alone the all important S* players to make them competitive. If people are able to create more S* players, I would imagine they would also be willing to make a regular player or two in addition to help whatever team they are on be competitive.

I juat think it is a waste right now locking up an agents 3 S* slots for over a year (rookie through vet run) when they could potentially invest in another later tier. It would also make it a bit more difficult for agents to walk away as they would always have S* players developing which is exciting.

just make a multi and then you have 6 s* slots and the game has 1 new user lol

Originally posted by Sov.
just make a multi and then you have 6 s* slots and the game has 1 new user lol

Ugh... Not my cup of tea. Then I am building S* points on two accounts and I just dont roll like that. Too lazy to PUP out and not wanting to blow a greater wad of cash.

Originally posted by bhall43
Unlimited superstars or creating players at any level are going to really screw with the balance of things but we are getting to a point where it might make more sense to have one tier of players and get the competition level to something more reasonable. Having 2-4 competetive teams from rookie to pro is fairly boring and recruiting/chemistry is just a flat out nightmare.

Agreed 100% there.

I think that's a by-product of having variable roster size. If the roster was a mandated or rather than voluntary 43 we'd have superstars spread across more teams with veteran agents (who have the points to get to 20 on QB) spreading their team access across more novice owners.

Originally posted by Detroit Leos
I get that, but we have countless teams struggling to fill rosters with regular players, let alone the all important S* players to make them competitive. If people are able to create more S* players, I would imagine they would also be willing to make a regular player or two in addition to help whatever team they are on be competitive.

I juat think it is a waste right now locking up an agents 3 S* slots for over a year (rookie through vet run) when they could potentially invest in another later tier. It would also make it a bit more difficult for agents to walk away as they would always have S* players developing which is exciting.

i would think that you would make the cost a lil more if you didn't earn them though... make the initial cost a bit higher if you didn't earn the S*. Instead make the S*QB HB LB 200 - S* wr (etc) 150 S*DT (ETC) 100-125 just saying unless you are using your free player slot....

Teams still won't be able to have more then 10-12ish S*s, so it wont make a diference, it will help other teams that can't hire good agents/players.

Originally posted by Detroit Leos
Might be about time to just allow people to make S* players whenever they have the points for it. It would allow agents to be invested in more teams and would allow non powerhouse owners to get more S* power on their teams.

S* players are easily one of the most exciting things to build and watch in the game. Time to open the flood gates which would hopefully help teams that are recruiting players and typically struggling to do so these days.

And eliminate multis

Originally posted by jay529
i would think that you would make the cost a lil more if you didn't earn them though... make the initial cost a bit higher if you didn't earn the S*. Instead make the S*QB HB LB 200 - S* wr (etc) 150 S*DT (ETC) 100-125 just saying unless you are using your free player slot....

I think that actually might kill the game. New guys trying to sign up and see if they like it with normal players would get crushed.

Obviously I wouldn't have an issue with the higher flex burn rate but it would make the other players even more meaningless.

Only thing you could really do that would make it more equitable and still inviting to new players would be to break the current system into Stars and SuperStars with every Premium account getting a Star player. Basically anyone who buys flex gets 1 Star player. Other tiered slots could be earned the same way they are now by completing tiers but pretty much if your going to be short you just create a non-boosted player play him 1 season then retire. Boom you've got your superstar point. Then make the Superstars an actual achievement based system where it rewards a multi-season commitment effort say taking an existing player from rookie to legend status.

Give the Stars the current Superstar lifetime bonus with just a 10% (rather than 20%) reduction in the cost of all skills and reduce their cost to cap wise to a 50% bump rather than the current 150%.

Give the Superstars the old 20% and add in another 5,000 points after clearing sophomore, journeyman, pro, and veteran. Keep the cost push 150%.

Fix the roster size so that all teams MUST carry 43. That would spread the talent pool across multiple teams and you'd certainly have some interesting tradeoffs with carrying star and superstar players.

I do not think that mandating that owners rock a 43 man roster will be helpful at all... Plenty of teams are already struggling heavily with recruiting. Increasing the required amount of bodies is only going to make this issue worse.

As McLovin said, teams can at most carry 10-12 superstars if they pinch their way roster wise and salary wise. How many superstars are currently in each tier? How many teams are running with 0-3 superstars? How many have 4-6 and so on? Increasing the Superstar pool will help filter superstar bodies to other teams and might help with filling out rosters with non-superstars as a result since there would be heightened interest in more teams.

I do not care if it is unlimited or bumped to 6-9 superstar bodies. Collecting enough S* points already takes time (especially for the 150 flex) and there are many teams that could use a boost. This proposal would also likely help out free agency as there might be more S* power available spread out across tiers.

Bottom line, I do not see how bumping up S* capacity would hurt the game. If anything, it would help it in the multiple ways that I have listed.

Originally posted by Detroit Leos
I do not think that mandating that owners rock a 43 man roster will be helpful at all... Plenty of teams are already struggling heavily with recruiting. Increasing the required amount of bodies is only going to make this issue worse.

As McLovin said, teams can at most carry 10-12 superstars if they pinch their way roster wise and salary wise. How many superstars are currently in each tier? How many teams are running with 0-3 superstars? How many have 4-6 and so on? Increasing the Superstar pool will help filter superstar bodies to other teams and might help with filling out rosters with non-superstars as a result since there would be heightened interest in more teams.

I do not care if it is unlimited or bumped to 6-9 superstar bodies. Collecting enough S* points already takes time (especially for the 150 flex) and there are many teams that could use a boost. This proposal would also likely help out free agency as there might be more S* power available spread out across tiers.

Bottom line, I do not see how bumping up S* capacity would hurt the game. If anything, it would help it in the multiple ways that I have listed.

Couldn't disagree more. You are skipping the 2nd order effect.

If the teams are fixed at 43 there is simply no way to get 10-12 superstars on the roster because of cap space. At absolute most and it would still be a struggle teams could do 4-5 and more likely 3-4 depending on if a QB or HB is present. Those additional superstars 10-12 for super teams have to get relocated elsewhere.

People are less interested in creating non-superstar players because their value has greatly diminished in terms of play experience. It's a lot less likely to have a great game from a non-superstar than it ever has been.

Also if you implement your plan I'll create 20 superstars next season no problem. Simply (marginally) raising the flex cost of them isn't going to make a difference to me. At that point your Superstar WR or whatever you've wanted to create has much less play value. He simply becomes a better than ok rather than real superstar player.

If you want to expand the player pool for those teams creating more impact for the "mortal men" is what you do not flooding the game with more superstars which is just going to cheapen their value.

And even more teams fail to fill their rosters because top coaches/owners who have less trouble will still get their 43, this burning more collective flex capital on their teams as opposed to getting some more to filter to other teams. Even with 43 man mandated rosters, other teams might get 1 more S* player, maybe 2. The commubity flex invested in known quality teams would still hurt these other squads.

I strongly disagree with the idea that 43 man rosters are going to help create a more competitive environment capable of growth. That could very well be the death kneel for the sim since recruiting is already a nightmare.

Say each team has an average of 38 players. That is 5 more players required per team. Even if it was a stupid shallow tier and there were 10 teams, it would require 50 more players needed. 20 teams is 100 obviously. How is that helping when owners are already struggling to fill a roster with human players and already lilely having tp build the whole OLine themselves already?

And hpw are you going tp create 20 superstars? Do you have 7 accounts with full S* points collected?

Originally posted by Detroit Leos
And even more teams fail to fill their rosters because top coaches/owners who have less trouble will still get their 43, this burning more collective flex capital on their teams as opposed to getting some more to filter to other teams. Even with 43 man mandated rosters, other teams might get 1 more S* player, maybe 2. The commubity flex invested in known quality teams would still hurt these other squads.

I strongly disagree with the idea that 43 man rosters are going to help create a more competitive environment capable of growth. That could very well be the death kneel for the sim since recruiting is already a nightmare.

Say each team has an average of 38 players. That is 5 more players required per team. Even if it was a stupid shallow tier and there were 10 teams, it would require 50 more players needed. 20 teams is 100 obviously. How is that helping when owners are already struggling to fill a roster with human players and already lilely having tp build the whole OLine themselves already?

Because the experience value of those mortal men goes way way up. If you have 10 superstars including QB, RB, WR1 and TE how many passes get directed to the WR2, WR3, WR4, WR5. How often do those guys "go off" for 200 yards in a game? Used to happen to mortal players long before. How many carries for the RB2 (we used to see them occasionally go off for 100+). The shorter the roster the more Superstar players you can jam on it and thus the less value for the non #1's

Where as if you have only 4 Superstars per team you have lets say QB TE DT and LB (and even thats a stretch to go to 43). WR play for mortal men becomes interesting. Regular DE's start to have a bigger impact etc.. Every position player suddenly becomes exciting again to build.

You are still looking at the effect (short group of talent) assuming its the cause and more importantly overlooking the impact of the current roster system.

On the offensive lineman I don't disagree with you at all but I think the answer is and has been dropping the flex charge for offensive lineman , moving QB and HB into their own Tier 1 (dropping LB back down to tier 2 where it should be) and creating tier 4 for offesnive lineman only since their sim value is high.