Warrior General Games

Will probably never happen and yes I'm sure this has been suggested a million times for all of you suggestion forum police but....

I would love to be able to actually build a "special teams" group. Increasing the roster to 58-60 players would allow for this. I'm sure I'm not the only one that would love to have a special teams group full of STOPS rather than rotating LB's, CB's & safeties in the mix which decreases their actual playing time on defense in some cases.. (fixurbuild i no rite??)

With that being said, nobody wants to make STOPs. I feel GLB should make STOP an actual position you can make; then you can choose your archetype. In addition, this is the least desired position for people to make. Most people who make these are owners who bite the bullet and fill the spots themselves. I believe more people would make STOP's if they were 50 to 75 Flex. 50 would be my suggestions though.

STOP Archetypes: Tackler, Blocker, Kick Returner, Punt Returner (or combo like now), etc...

-1.

I dont want bigger rosters. I am ok with a 100 FP STOP....but still I know they are not a "realistic" position so that might not happen.

Originally posted by bigtisme
-1.

I dont want bigger rosters. I am ok with a 100 FP STOP....but still I know they are not a "realistic" position so that might not happen.

I can see the issue with a bigger roster. I know STOPS are needed for special teams though. I'm just giving an idea to make them more interesting and desirable to make.

Originally posted by dergillz
I can see the issue with a bigger roster. I know STOPS are needed for special teams though. I'm just giving an idea to make them more interesting and desirable to make.

I know but we can already make a OL STOP for 100 FP.

Originally posted by bigtisme
I know but we can already make a OL STOP for 100 FP.

Yeah it's cheap, but if you could make 2 for 100 flex I think more people would be willing.

If you could make 2 DE's for 100 flex there would be more of them, too

-1 on roster size increase, 55 is plenty IMO

-1 on roster size increase

Changing the costs is a long NGTH and a big NO to roster size increase.

-1

No, If anything knock the roster size back to 40 or so.
That way teams could fill their rosters.
There are a lot less agents than there used to be, this translates into a lot less available players.

-1 for no other reason than I say so.

Originally posted by toobad4u_00
-1 for no other reason than I say so.
which is to say I don't have a good reason, but I really like the way teams have to make a choice right now.

Originally posted by RiverRat2
No, If anything knock the roster size back to 40 or so.
That way teams could fill their rosters.
There are a lot less agents than there used to be, this translates into a lot less available players.



Yeah, rosters should be made smaller 24 starters, have one to two backups at all the positions 41 plus 4-5 stops, 45 max sounds good

If anything we need smaller rosters.

Originally posted by Dub J
If anything we need smaller rosters.



band-aid

the fix is to advertise

good STCs dont need a full group of STOPs to be good. there is no reason for rosters to be over 50 as is since there are no injuries ever in glb. besides, if you are using the ST archetype, you are already doing it wrong.