Warrior General Games

Please keep the cost of the players the same or less in the new GLB Classic universe if an agent keeps a player to plateau.

The 4-7-1 is a good plan and Wiseivian's spreadsheet shows a neutral impact vs current player cost.

Does anyone have an argument why 7 season Plateau isn't the best number?

I'm in favor, of course, but speaking for the silence/devils advocate/thinking like Bort is there a concern that 7 seasons is too long for one team to "rule"? My counter would be by the third straight season of a team dominating you could build an exact team to counter whatever they do well, but I bet some people are thinking this.

Maybe because Ryan & Mauler can support 3-4 teams each. But with lower number of seasons can't have so many farm teams to support all their teams. Personally don't care, will follow what Bort has in mind (and if my dots suck, will retire after 2nd season and repeat with my teams).

Originally posted by RyanCane26
I'm in favor, of course, but speaking for the silence/devils advocate/thinking like Bort is there a concern that 7 seasons is too long for one team to "rule"? My counter would be by the third straight season of a team dominating you could build an exact team to counter whatever they do well, but I bet some people are thinking this.

Fwiw, the shorter plateau is, the bigger the advantage that organized networks/farms have. This is why with 5 season plateau, GLB basically devolved into a distopia where WL was populated by teams from only 3-4 networks.

So while it might "seem" like longer plateau keeps new dots and new teams down, the fact is it gives those new dots and new teams more chances to be successful and makes it viable to exist with mega-organized farm teams. If we are gonna have enough teams that an independent squad must climb 2 levels in plateau to hit the top league, you are basically ass-fucking teams that aren't network/farm teams and actually need to make the climb with only 5 seasons of plateau.

7 seasons or 8 seasons plateau is so much better for the game's legacy health than 5 seasons...

So... if 5 is too short (Wise's POV) and 7 might be too long (Bort's POV)... sounds like 6 is the best number.

5 or 7, anything else is silly imo.

Originally posted by Kenshinzen
5 or 7, anything else is silly imo.

6 and silly is good.

Originally posted by Theo Wizzago
So... if 5 is too short (Wise's POV) and 7 might be too long (Bort's POV)... sounds like 6 is the best number.

If we are playing that game, I recommend 9 season plateau, so we can settle on 7...

Originally posted by WiSeIVIaN
If we are playing that game, I recommend 9 season plateau, so we can settle on 7...

9? Nine?!?!?! Ya crazy boi! TBPH, I don't think anyone's gonna talk Bort down off his ledge of "recycling players". He's been pretty much adamant about it from the very start. That said, there could be some wiggle room from 5 to 7... maybe. But, 9? Yeah... NGTH.

1

let's de-incentivize this 0 boosting, WL elitist BS.

Originally posted by TJ Spikes
1

let's de-incentivize this 0 boosting, WL elitist BS.

I agree. New meta!

Bump, 7 season (or more) plateau still sounds fun?