Warrior General Games

Suggestions: Revamp Ability Points

One of the things I miss the most about GLB1 is how much more mix-and-match the Veteran Abilities were than the Skill Abilities have been in GLB2. With so many of them being situational, it allowed for a LOT more customization to address other build shortcomings. Since most of the abilities aren't even worth getting at bronze, and most really kick in at a decent fire rate at gold, most dots only have three or maybe four abilities now.

Some possibilities for addressing this:

- Give more points, over time, but make each point worth less than it is now, whether in terms of fire rate or power of effect.

- To avoid balance issues, this can be started only with new rookies for upcoming season.

- Introduce more % skill bonuses (ie +3% to base break tackle rate behind LOS; +0.3% total Carry Grip), alongside the "chance abilities" that control the game now (like Monster Hit, Closing Speed, etc.). The skill bonuses may produce less per point than the chance abilities, but they're more consistent, applying to all rolls and the base skill levels. This would really introduce a wrinkle toward demolishing 'meta builds' and reintroduce creativity.

Originally posted by Oofty
- Introduce more % skill bonuses (ie +3% to base break tackle rate behind LOS; +0.3% total Carry Grip), alongside the "chance abilities" that control the game now (like Monster Hit, Closing Speed, etc.). The skill bonuses may produce less per point than the chance abilities, but they're more consistent, applying to all rolls and the base skill levels. This would really introduce a wrinkle toward demolishing 'meta builds' and reintroduce creativity.

Honestly, equipment would be cool to see

There really aren't a lot of abilities or at least ones that are effective

Originally posted by Bretto007
There really aren't a lot of abilities or at least ones that are effective

This is really at the heart of why I think more customization would be a good approach. Of the 20 abilities available to HBs, only 4-5 are used, regardless of the type or tactical layout.

Sure, we can talk about whether or not skills need a buff, nerf, etc, but diversifying them and giving people more points to work with would increase the diversity of build types SUBSTANTIALLY. Nowhere would it be more evident than for the o-line, where dots have some great abilities but too few points to be anything more than one-hit wonders. Similar story for QBs.

Mixing and matching certain combinations of abilities isn't possible at this point--at least not among really good dots. For example: I want to see what gold Surge, gold Juke, and gold Sure-footed looks like. No one even uses Surge anymore, because there's always something more important to have. Some of it has to do with over-emphasizing the "chance" abilities and the doing-away with the flat percentage bonus ones from GLB1.

There just aren't enough points to make risky, more experimental combinations worth trying, especially after saving up for a new S* dot. The best feature of GLB1 was just how diverse builds were, and part of what made it so fun was being able to continue customizing on-the-fly to match your dot to team shortcomings, etc. As it is now, unless your teamwide strategy was planned since rookie league, the only adjustments that can be made are with scheme, unless you want to plan out a team-wide respec..

I really think some changes could:
1. Make GLB2 a lot more fun for more casual players.
2. Introduce a little more balance and kill the stupid, boring min/maxing of so many unimaginative builds..
3. Drastically increase the flexibility of coordinators to adjust game plans, even if the entire team's builds weren't planned out to maximize a particular scheme.

I mean, I'm not entirely sure +10% speed is diverse and exciting. Let's be honest, there's about three or four skills, dependent on position, that would always be picked and then everything else ignored. How many people are going to waste a chunk of their AP on an extra 3 Vertical or Snap Reaction? Traits already exist, those are where you get the bonuses and penalties to certain skills to help define a build. SAs are supposed to be a thing that actively happens, not just make you generally faster and stronger.

The passive SAs in GLB Classic mostly existed to help fill specialization gaps in the simplistic attribute system. There's no need for a Pass Block SA when Pass Block is already a skill. Admittedly equipment was added later that helped with that specialization, which I would enjoy in this game but I'm not sure of the likelihood of that happening at this point.

New SAs and revamp/balancing of current SAs is something that could definitely happen sometime, but +10% speed SAs aren't going to be a thing. And nothing is going to "kill the stupid min/maxing"...that's just the inherent nature of competitive games. Until people are satisfied having a 15-15 season, they aren't going to diverge from what wins games.

Originally posted by Corndog
I mean, I'm not entirely sure +10% speed is diverse and exciting. Let's be honest, there's about three or four skills, dependent on position, that would always be picked and then everything else ignored. How many people are going to waste a chunk of their AP on an extra 3 Vertical or Snap Reaction? Traits already exist, those are where you get the bonuses and penalties to certain skills to help define a build. SAs are supposed to be a thing that actively happens, not just make you generally faster and stronger.

Right. I was just using those as general examples. I never seriously thought +10 sprinting was even an option. One of the cooler niche abilities I remember was Short Yardage Monster. The one giving flat percentage bonuses to KLs is another interesting idea that is kind of a general principle, since it's not like a flat point boost, but again, activates in very specific situations. Something like Stone Wall would be interesting to reintroduce, too. The flat percentage bonus to a very particular roll allows for a lot of specialization and more unique builds possibilities.

Could be super dope.

Originally posted by Corndog
New SAs and revamp/balancing of current SAs is something that could definitely happen sometime, but +10% speed SAs aren't going to be a thing. And nothing is going to "kill the stupid min/maxing"...that's just the inherent nature of competitive games. Until people are satisfied having a 15-15 season, they aren't going to diverge from what wins games.

At some positions, maybe. But I've built some damn successful dots by **not** min-maxing.

Originally posted by Oofty
At some positions, maybe. But I've built some damn successful dots by **not** min-maxing.

I'm not denying that, but they would have been better players if they were minmaxed, that's just the nature of minmaxing. Making things as best as they possibly can be while cutting as many corners as possible.

Speed is off for some positions, it just is and you guys have to know it. For a HB 95 and 100 speed are literally indistinguishable, no gain whatsoever at all, and those both are only about equivalent to a defender with 75 speed.

The 'angles' defenders can take and suddenly travel 1.5 times the distance in less time than a 100 sprint HB is just amazing. It's why I have abandoned quickness nearly entirely, it doesn't matter how fast you accelerate to the outside when the MLB can react a full second after the pitch and still get to the sideline in the backfield faster than the HB.

Originally posted by Raid
Speed is off for some positions, it just is and you guys have to know it.

The same function is literally used for every player. There's literally 1% velocity difference between 95 Sprinting and 100 Sprinting. Not overly surprised you can't distinguish the difference.

It is admittedly a bit weird of a conclusion to come to, though...maxing out Sprinting isn't worth it, so you stop investing in Quickness?

Honestly it blows my mind that people are still regularly taking sprinting to 100. Surely those 20,000 points could be spent better elsewhere.

Originally posted by Corndog
The same function is literally used for every player. There's literally 1% velocity difference between 95 Sprinting and 100 Sprinting. Not overly surprised you can't distinguish the difference.

It is admittedly a bit weird of a conclusion to come to, though...maxing out Sprinting isn't worth it, so you stop investing in Quickness?

Quickness just increases how fast I get up to the speed that a 75 speed LB chases me down from behind at.

And I've heard the same thing from you before, but you can literally watch a LB cover more ground to get to the outside than a faster HB who is sprinting in a straight line outwards, and it started happening right after the 100 conditioning/sprinting backs started becoming a huge problem.


And even with 100 sprint, CBs don't 'lose ground' when chasing you down from behind though they ALL have 75 sprint, a guy who is at the same yardage at midfield while you are at the sideline can stride for stride keep up while moving to the sideline at the same time, never losing a step of distance - and again these guys have 75 sprint while my HB has 100.

Perhaps there is a serendipitous bug that allows defenders to just move faster that you are unaware of. To me it seems like they can have maximum speed north south while also exerting movement east-west for free while my HB has to keep trying to 'fade' to the sideline to avoid their angle of attack more.


I'd say it's just that the difference between 75 and 100 isn't enough, aside from if you make a 75 sprint HB you can see just how slow that is at the position.

And as I said those other times, there's a lot more going on than "I have 20 more sprinting so I should always win"

Originally posted by Corndog
The same function is literally used for every player. There's literally 1% velocity difference between 95 Sprinting and 100 Sprinting. Not overly surprised you can't distinguish the difference.

It is admittedly a bit weird of a conclusion to come to, though...maxing out Sprinting isn't worth it, so you stop investing in Quickness?


I might be reading this wrong but are you saying a player only runs 1% faster from 95 to 100?

Originally posted by Corndog
And as I said those other times, there's a lot more going on than "I have 20 more sprinting so I should always win"

Doesn't mean a guy with lower sprinting should be able to cover more distance when you are in a dead sprint. It's not like quickness matters that much on a sweep when you are accelerated by the script and hit top speed a step past when you are released from hard-coded movement. And I take footwork to 75 on my backs so it's not that they are just way better at that than me.

Originally posted by Bretto007

I might be reading this wrong but are you saying a player only runs 1% faster from 95 to 100?

Yeah, I wanted to make absolute sure this season so I took my S* up to 100 and left the reg back at 95, they are identical in speed.

94 is a noticable drop off, not by a lot - but you can see it. 93 is slow af.