Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Dub J
Was this before or after the higher level D-leagues were added? The D-leagues were always for lvl 14 and under players until the most recent change to D-leagues. Keep in mind myself and others are not advocating getting rid of D-leagues. We are pushing to actually make the D-leagues the developmental leagues again. Not some huge shithole for people to statwhore or circumvent buying a team.

Guys sticking all 50 of their lvl 1 to 79 dots in D-leagues are not remotely "developmental". Honestly, Bort should just have rookie D-leagues. I don't care if the all D-league guys get pissed and leave. Contrary to what they believe they don't contribute anything to this game so they won't be missed.

It looks like upper level d-leagues were created in Season 22
http://goallineblitz.com/game/team.pl?team_id=2502

Originally posted by Guppy, Inc
yeah, bragging about d league stats really isnt the issue. the mvp and hof are the big reason against stat whoring. now if each league level had its own hof, and no mvp eq, then i wouldnt have an issue with statwhoring.

As for this hof stats should be viewed accordingly, being weighted by what level they got those stats in and in the case of the d-leagues should be weighted as the least important. There should no mvp equipment for d-league mvp's as well.

As for people who brag about d-league stats, just try not to let that bother you or you just remind them that those are d-league plays and ultimately don't count for anything.

If you are trying to get rid of the d-leagues to get more agents back into regular leagues to get back some competitive balance than why not try to come up with ideas for compromise. Just getting rid of upper level d-leagues will not automatically mean those players will play for human owners again.

Any other reason for getting rid of d-leagues is telling agents how they can or cannot spend their own time and money.

I would also like to point out that upper level d-leagues are far more popular than the lower level ones, just looking at the number of human agents in them. So if any level of d-league should be gotten rid of it is the lower levels based off of popularity.

You're just being ridiculous now.

DEVELOPMENTAL is the name of the league type.

popular does not mean wise. there have been dozens of ways to game the system over the years. alot of that popularity are players that should have retired many many seasons ago.

Originally posted by Guppy, Inc
popular does not mean wise. there have been dozens of ways to game the system over the years. alot of that popularity are players that should have retired many many seasons ago.

And that is what most of us have been saying along, the vast majority of d-leaguers are not worth having on anyone's team. So getting rid of upper level d-leagues will not solve any lack of player issues because signing an over the hill dot is equivalent to signing a cpu player.

Originally posted by Dub J
You're just being ridiculous now.

DEVELOPMENTAL is the name of the league type.

Then the name should be changed to something more appropriate.

Originally posted by cjericho
And that is what most of us have been saying along, the vast majority of d-leaguers are not worth having on anyone's team. So getting rid of upper level d-leagues will not solve any lack of player issues because signing an over the hill dot is equivalent to signing a cpu player..

i dont dispute that a huge percentage of players are worthless. but the non useless players can make leagues better whether they are on cpu or human owned teams. i'm not in the camp thinking that they'll run off and join human teams. the d leagues do ZERO for the game. if they at least play on cpu teams, it makes teams more competitive. thats why i proposed that teams should be safe from purchase once its a few games into the season. i honestly dont understand wasting flex on playing in the d leagues for most of their careers.

i have a friend that took a cpu team in the preseason and instead of losing every game 255-0, they were only losing by 50ish. his whole goal had been to pull an upset. we seen other teams with "bad" rosters pull the upsets, and thats a more enjoyable league. buying a team knowing that you'll be lucky to get 3-4 competitive games all seasons is just a terrible business model.

That's what seems to be lost on some. This isn't about recruiting or statwhoring. It's about making this game better overall.

+1 to OP

Originally posted by Guppy, Inc
i dont dispute that a huge percentage of players are worthless. but the non useless players can make leagues better whether they are on cpu or human owned teams. i'm not in the camp thinking that they'll run off and join human teams. the d leagues do ZERO for the game. if they at least play on cpu teams, it makes teams more competitive. thats why i proposed that teams should be safe from purchase once its a few games into the season. i honestly dont understand wasting flex on playing in the d leagues for most of their careers.

i have a friend that took a cpu team in the preseason and instead of losing every game 255-0, they were only losing by 50ish. his whole goal had been to pull an upset. we seen other teams with "bad" rosters pull the upsets, and thats a more enjoyable league. buying a team knowing that you'll be lucky to get 3-4 competitive games all seasons is just a terrible business model.



I am not opposed to making the game better but what I am opposed to is forcing people to do things that they don't or won't want to do. I respect yours and others opinons about the d-leagues but that is what they are opinoins and they should not be forced onto people who don't agree with you. You say this is not about forcing people but when you take an option like the d-league away they really have no choice. CPU teams are not really an option because again they can be bought and even if they are not 99.9 percent of the time those teams with be slaughtered by human ran teams, thus taking away from the fun of playing in the first place.

What about my idea here:

Originally posted by cjericho


The best way I think to solve the unbalanced competition issue is to come up with some kind of compromise. Here would be my idea for compromise.

-Create a Human\CPU hybrid league and place it in the lower human leagues.
-One division is all human teams or cpu teams that can be bought.
-The other division is all non purchasable cpu teams.
-When a human team plays a cpu team the human team cannot do any game planing, so as to keep the game competitive.
-The rest of the league can operate as any normal league does.
-Then at the end of the season the champion from the Human conference plays the CPU champion

This could potentially please both sides because it provides the best of both worlds.

Could this be something people could go for, because if you really want people to stop playing in the d-leagues then you have give them incentive to and not just force it upon them.

i dont see any merit in your idea because it gives success to inferior teams. this is an argument that has been around since the beginning. no one is supposed to be handed success w/o earning it. honestly, i cant comprehend at all the concept of having fun in the d leagues by beating up a bunch of inferior players. same reason that i dont watch 255-0 blowouts.

i do think that glb owes it to their customers to do a better job of getting cpu teams out of the top leagues. cpu teams should be limited to the lower leagues at each level, and offers should go out based on the quality of the player so that the best players would fill out the best cpu teams and the should have retired players fill the lowest leagues.

so if we take the reg pros, there would be no cpu teams in the top 4 leagues at the start of the season, so league #5 would send out offers to the plateaued higher leveled players, wheras league #12 would be sending the offers to the players with low ELs. that way the top leagues may not have AIs, but would have appropriate players and that would make for more competitive games. i dont believe that the d leagues were ever designed to be the enjoyment for people, but simply as temp homes until a real team could be found. remember, there used to only be a level 1-7 d league, and the higher ones were added when there were more players than teams, so some players literally couldnt find homes. those days are looooong over.

Originally posted by Guppy, Inc
i dont see any merit in your idea because it gives success to inferior teams. this is an argument that has been around since the beginning. no one is supposed to be handed success w/o earning it. honestly, i cant comprehend at all the concept of having fun in the d leagues by beating up a bunch of inferior players. same reason that i dont watch 255-0 blowouts.

i do think that glb owes it to their customers to do a better job of getting cpu teams out of the top leagues. cpu teams should be limited to the lower leagues at each level, and offers should go out based on the quality of the player so that the best players would fill out the best cpu teams and the should have retired players fill the lowest leagues.

so if we take the reg pros, there would be no cpu teams in the top 4 leagues at the start of the season, so league #5 would send out offers to the plateaued higher leveled players, wheras league #12 would be sending the offers to the players with low ELs. that way the top leagues may not have AIs, but would have appropriate players and that would make for more competitive games. i dont believe that the d leagues were ever designed to be the enjoyment for people, but simply as temp homes until a real team could be found. remember, there used to only be a level 1-7 d league, and the higher ones were added when there were more players than teams, so some players literally couldnt find homes. those days are looooong over.

You may not understand why people enjoy the d-leagues but the point I am making is that you don't have to. What is important is there are people that do like it and prefer it.

As far as my idea, these kind of leagues should be put into the lowest possible leagues they can go at each level. That way teams that try to take advantage will not benefit as much from winning there. But again, gaming the system is happening right now so it wouldn't be any different if some team tried it in a league like that.

Originally posted by cjericho
You may not understand why people enjoy the d-leagues but the point I am making is that you don't have to. What is important is there are people that do like it and prefer it.

As far as my idea, these kind of leagues should be put into the lowest possible leagues they can go at each level. That way teams that try to take advantage will not benefit as much from winning there. But again, gaming the system is happening right now so it wouldn't be any different if some team tried it in a league like that.

He's just going to say "We need to do this for the better of the game" in his response. When in reality, if you need to do something like pull players away from D league in order to make the game "better", there are other problems out there.

I guarantee you these people are spending some money on flex too, so Bort doesnt want to see them gone. He will never see this as "better" by losing money.

Originally posted by KingPB
He's just going to say "We need to do this for the better of the game" in his response. When in reality, if you need to do something like pull players away from D league in order to make the game "better", there are other problems out there.

I guarantee you these people are spending some money on flex too, so Bort doesnt want to see them gone. He will never see this as "better" by losing money.

ok, then answer how having 461 level 70+ players sitting in the d leagues is good for the game? and i dont mean financially because i concede that the upper level d leagues are a money grab. every person that i know that has quit has said its because the game is boring, and a huge part of that is that we are lucky to get 4 or 5 competitive games per season in most leagues.

2nd, explain how beating up on inferior players is good for the game.

3rd, yes, i believe that glb has a ton of issues, including the weakness of the whole player building process

4th, this is specifically to cjericho since we've played together b4. what was more fun, our season together, or playing in the d leagues?

Originally posted by Guppy, Inc
ok, then answer how having 461 level 70+ players sitting in the d leagues is good for the game? and i dont mean financially because i concede that the upper level d leagues are a money grab. every person that i know that has quit has said its because the game is boring, and a huge part of that is that we are lucky to get 4 or 5 competitive games per season in most leagues.

2nd, explain how beating up on inferior players is good for the game.

3rd, yes, i believe that glb has a ton of issues, including the weakness of the whole player building process

4th, this is specifically to cjericho since we've played together b4. what was more fun, our season together, or playing in the d leagues?

To answer your question I enjoyed both experiences because part of me enjoyed beating up on weaker competition. That being said though I do prefer playing on human teams but I'm not just going to play for anyone who sends me an offer. When I played for you i liked it because you had a very specific game plan in mind and knew what you were doing. The problem with most human teams is that there are many owners that don't know what they are doing and when you play for them the team just turns out to be terrible and your player has just wasted a season. So d-leagues provide a way of avoiding those types of situations and I can say that because when I started I would literally sign just about any offer I got. I eventually wised up and realized that I should look for the best possible offer before signing and I was able to do that by playing in the d-leagues. Now I have found a solid network of owners to play for and don't really need to be in the d-leagues any more but part of wants to have one or two in there to stat whore. So knowing how I used the d-leagues, I don't want that option taken away from someone else.

Originally posted by Guppy, Inc
ok, then answer how having 461 level 70+ players sitting in the d leagues is good for the game? and i dont mean financially because i concede that the upper level d leagues are a money grab. every person that i know that has quit has said its because the game is boring, and a huge part of that is that we are lucky to get 4 or 5 competitive games per season in most leagues.

2nd, explain how beating up on inferior players is good for the game.

3rd, yes, i believe that glb has a ton of issues, including the weakness of the whole player building process

4th, this is specifically to cjericho since we've played together b4. what was more fun, our season together, or playing in the d leagues?

Those D League players wouldnt be here or wouldnt exist if it werent for D league.

Once again... there has to be ANOTHER WAY TO GET PEOPLE TO JOIN THIS GAME

I agree, I like playing with others. But telling those who dont like playing with others that they must now play with others, is not a good idea