Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Ken1
You built them to be so fast so they could keep up with the receivers, and that wouldn't change with my idea (and hasn't even changed with the fall-down). I doubt you were thinking of interception returns when you were building them.

My view is the imperative that we keep real football balance in the game, and that means that we have interceptions returned for a TD no more than 10% of the time (but not "almost never" as is the case now).

I sympathize with MileHigh's view of wanting to achieve it realistically and make attributes matter a lot. However, anything with that in mind can't be added without extensive testing. It could have been done for this season (tested last season), but it wasn't, and unless you want to wait until next season it's too late to add without risking a game balance disaster. Anything tacked on this season will be "quick and dirty," and I think it's more realistic that someone who rarely carries the ball can't carry it as fast as someone used to carrying the ball could, than to have players almost always fall down when making interceptions. It also would allow for many more interception returns of some length without drowning us in Pick Sixes.

I did think (and decided not to include for reason of simplicity) of allowing the Return Specialist SA to remove the speed penalty on returns, totally if raised to 10 (essentially 1/10 per level). That would make it more something one could build their way out of if they were determined to, and give some use to something sitting in the middle of a CB tree and currently used only by KR/PRs.

So now not only do you speak for every agent here when you say we all want your NFL realism but now you are a mind reader and know what I was thinking when I built my dots. FYI I had pick sixes in mind when was building my dots, because the speed attribute works both ways. I am all for realism but what you want is just not possible and I spend too much money on this game to sit here and watch people like you ruin this game with your NFL realism ideas.

As far as the NFL factor is concerned, here is just some food for thought. One major difference between NFL and GLB is the injury factor. GLB has none and NFL does and that has to be considered in your calculations. The fact that in real football players get injured and that effects the numbers. Peyton Manning is a perfect example of that. Before he was lost for the season the Colts were a perennial playoff team and a Super Bowl caliber team. Without him they were the worst team in the NFL with all of their numbers down from previous years. In GLB there are no injuries so any team that has that caliber player will never have to deal with that so that is why GLB numbers will always be higher than NFL numbers. This concept also works on the defensive side as well, teams with elite DB's will not be lost to injury as their NFL counter parts will thus skewing the numbers. The point being that if there were no injuries in the NFL than all their stat numbers would be higher and that has to be a factor in comparing the two.

Originally posted by Ken1
it's too late to add without risking a game balance disaster

You're implying that the current state of the sim is not already a game balance disaster.

Originally posted by MileHighShoes
You're implying that the current state of the sim is not already a game balance disaster.


I don't think it is, in terms of Pick Sixes. They're being held down below real life through unrealistic means, and it would be better to get them up to realistic levels and use as realistic means as possible to keep them around realistic levels; but the lack of a Pick Six every third game or something isn't a disaster for game balance. I'm not saying it's as it should be right now, just that it's no disaster.

A bigger problem that may not still exist this season, but I didn't see anything that would have fixed it in the Changelog, is the low number of interceptions themselves. That really impacts game balance.

Having a Pick Six every game would be a game balance disaster. Having almost none of them is a bad thing, but it's not something that breaks the game.

As to CJericho's points, I definitely don't claim to speak for everybody as far as needing realism, just a hell of a lot of people as the poll I'm sure he has seen shows.

As to his point about inflated stats from no injuries, (1) there's more bench time for starters due to endurance, which balances that out; and (2) it's also why I look at rate-based stats, rather than pure counting stats, whenever possible (e.g. Pick Sixes per interception rather than raw Pick Sixes).

Originally posted by Ken1
I don't think it is, in terms of Pick Sixes. They're being held down below real life through unrealistic means, and it would be better to get them up to realistic levels and use as realistic means as possible to keep them around realistic levels; but the lack of a Pick Six every third game or something isn't a disaster for game balance. I'm not saying it's as it should be right now, just that it's no disaster.

A bigger problem that may not still exist this season, but I didn't see anything that would have fixed it in the Changelog, is the low number of interceptions themselves. That really impacts game balance.

Having a Pick Six every game would be a game balance disaster. Having almost none of them is a bad thing, but it's not something that breaks the game.

As to CJericho's points, I definitely don't claim to speak for everybody as far as needing realism, just a hell of a lot of people as the poll I'm sure he has seen shows.

As to his point about inflated stats from no injuries, (1) there's more bench time for starters due to endurance, which balances that out; and (2) it's also why I look at rate-based stats, rather than pure counting stats, whenever possible (e.g. Pick Sixes per interception rather than raw Pick Sixes).

So you are still referring to the year old poll that you were before which is invalid now.

Also it doesn't matter how you look at the stats, the more time a player plays the bigger the numbers, again if Manning had played last season the offensive numbers would be bigger for the Colts thus inflating the overall numbers for the NFL.

Originally posted by Ken1
I did think (and decided not to include for reason of simplicity) of allowing the Return Specialist SA to remove the speed penalty on returns, totally if raised to 10 (essentially 1/10 per level). That would make it more something one could build their way out of if they were determined to, and give some use to something sitting in the middle of a CB tree and currently used only by KR/PRs.

This is also a horrible suggestion. Speed is Speed, and when you add Speed to a build, it should increase speed in all non-scripted events.

There shouldn't be an SA that when invested in fully gets you "back to normal." That's just so prejudiced and backwards. In the NFL a player is just as fast running both ways. In the NFL there are CB's who practice interception returns and are perfectly capable of running with the ball. You keep calling for realism, but then everything you say flies in the face of what actually happens in the NFL. An SA should only make a player better, or give a benefit to a player, it shouldn't simply undo an artificial imposition.

You say you agree with me, and then you say completely stupid off the wall stuff that flies against the very ethos of my core argument. BTW I have been saying the same thing across all 5 threads this argument has spanned and interestingly enough it took nearly 3 weeks before you even appeared to have read anything I said to which you "claimed" to agree. Admit it, you don't agree at all, you just wish Defense wouldn't do anything even slightly realistic.

Defense should be able to score points in a realistic manner, that should be the end of the argument, the less artificial game mechanics imposed the better, as we've all seen every single artificial game mechanic that has been imposed has become MORE of a hindrance and a problem than they've helped.

Kickoff gunners stopping at the 30.
Auto-fall down on fumble recoveries
Excessive rev-caking to increase d-line penetration
Auto-fall down on interceptions.

etc. etc. etc.








Sorry chysil, I didn't read both of your posts fully and missed that.


Originally posted by Ken1
As to his point about inflated stats from no injuries, (1) there's more bench time for starters due to endurance, which balances that out; and (2) it's also why I look at rate-based stats, rather than pure counting stats, whenever possible (e.g. Pick Sixes per interception rather than raw Pick Sixes).

There's almost no difference between starters and backups in GLB. So it does not balance that out at all.
When I run a 2QB offense, either one is a scrambler/rusher, or they both are near identical passer builds.

http://goallineblitz.com/game/player.pl?player_id=2303485
http://goallineblitz.com/game/player.pl?player_id=2321331

Look at their S26 stats, nearly identical, one was starter and another backup but it really didn't matter. In the NFL backups are typically inferior to the starters and also lack the chemistry with the other starters that a starter would have.
Two DE builds are both just as good and able to perform at the same level and yet one will start and the other backup, it means nothing, as both builds can usually perform at the same level.

I fully believe that having dots fall down when they should have an attempt to return the ball is a game disaster as it completely under-writes defense's ability to put points on the board and do things. It may not seem like anything is missing to you, because you seem to hold no favor in having defensive return, but a LARGE portion of the game of football that we all love is missing. There is no Detroit scoring 21 points on defense against Dallas and winning the game in an unlikely turnaround. There is no BJ Raji returning a fumble to seal the conference championship. There is no incentive to build a Patrick Peterson style player who can turn nothing into something on a return. There is no incentive to build an Ed Reed style player who has hands that can actually catch a ball. Defenses are almost completely cookie cutter because of what we're missing. You just make dots who are fast an can react to a play in time to swat the ball. Don't invest in catching, sticky hands, or intercept % as you only build to stop the pass, not return it. Don't bother chasing fumbles as it makes you a liability in the pass game and does not result in points on the board.

If you can't see how toxic this is to the game then I'm done here, as it's the ONLY thing I care about when I make this argument. Dots need to be rewarded for building differently, there NEEDS to be incentives for build differentiation which is why everything should be a roll based on dots attributes. Introducing automatic game mechanics is the equivalent of inserting a cut-scene into a boss fight. We stop playing games and start watching cinema at that point, and I'll be damned if I've paid this much money to watch a shadow of the game I'm being sold.

Originally posted by MileHighShoes
There's almost no difference between starters and backups in GLB. So it does not balance that out at all.
When I run a 2QB offense, either one is a scrambler/rusher, or they both are near identical passer builds.

http://goallineblitz.com/game/player.pl?player_id=2303485
http://goallineblitz.com/game/player.pl?player_id=2321331

Look at their S26 stats, nearly identical, one was starter and another backup but it really didn't matter. In the NFL backups are typically inferior to the starters and also lack the chemistry with the other starters that a starter would have.
Two DE builds are both just as good and able to perform at the same level and yet one will start and the other backup, it means nothing, as both builds can usually perform at the same level.

I fully believe that having dots fall down when they should have an attempt to return the ball is a game disaster as it completely under-writes defense's ability to put points on the board and do things. It may not seem like anything is missing to you, because you seem to hold no favor in having defensive return, but a LARGE portion of the game of football that we all love is missing. There is no Detroit scoring 21 points on defense against Dallas and winning the game in an unlikely turnaround. There is no BJ Raji returning a fumble to seal the conference championship. There is no incentive to build a Patrick Peterson style player who can turn nothing into something on a return. There is no incentive to build an Ed Reed style player who has hands that can actually catch a ball. Defenses are almost completely cookie cutter because of what we're missing. You just make dots who are fast an can react to a play in time to swat the ball. Don't invest in catching, sticky hands, or intercept % as you only build to stop the pass, not return it. Don't bother chasing fumbles as it makes you a liability in the pass game and does not result in points on the board.

If you can't see how toxic this is to the game then I'm done here, as it's the ONLY thing I care about when I make this argument. Dots need to be rewarded for building differently, there NEEDS to be incentives for build differentiation which is why everything should be a roll based on dots attributes. Introducing automatic game mechanics is the equivalent of inserting a cut-scene into a boss fight. We stop playing games and start watching cinema at that point, and I'll be damned if I've paid this much money to watch a shadow of the game I'm being sold.

+1 to this

Originally posted by cjericho
So now not only do you speak for every agent here when you say we all want your NFL realism but now you are a mind reader and know what I was thinking when I built my dots.
Originally posted by MileHighShoes
You say you agree with me, and then you say completely stupid off the wall stuff that flies against the very ethos of my core argument. BTW I have been saying the same thing across all 5 threads this argument has spanned and interestingly enough it took nearly 3 weeks before you even appeared to have read anything I said to which you "claimed" to agree. Admit it, you don't agree at all, you just wish Defense wouldn't do anything even slightly realistic.

Ken1 101. He knows what is best for everyone playing the game and cannot abide by any idea that doesn't conform to his very narrow view of what the game should be, even in the face of EVERYONE disagreeing with that narrow view. He spews walls of text and makes up stats to obfuscate the fact that no one is agreeing with him.

Originally posted by MileHighShoes
I fully believe that having dots fall down when they should have an attempt to return the ball is a game disaster as it completely under-writes defense's ability to put points on the board and do things. It may not seem like anything is missing to you, because you seem to hold no favor in having defensive return, but a LARGE portion of the game of football that we all love is missing. There is no Detroit scoring 21 points on defense against Dallas and winning the game in an unlikely turnaround. There is no BJ Raji returning a fumble to seal the conference championship. There is no incentive to build a Patrick Peterson style player who can turn nothing into something on a return. There is no incentive to build an Ed Reed style player who has hands that can actually catch a ball. Defenses are almost completely cookie cutter because of what we're missing. You just make dots who are fast an can react to a play in time to swat the ball. Don't invest in catching, sticky hands, or intercept % as you only build to stop the pass, not return it. Don't bother chasing fumbles as it makes you a liability in the pass game and does not result in points on the board.

If you can't see how toxic this is to the game then I'm done here, as it's the ONLY thing I care about when I make this argument. Dots need to be rewarded for building differently, there NEEDS to be incentives for build differentiation which is why everything should be a roll based on dots attributes. Introducing automatic game mechanics is the equivalent of inserting a cut-scene into a boss fight. We stop playing games and start watching cinema at that point, and I'll be damned if I've paid this much money to watch a shadow of the game I'm being sold.

This post hits the nail on the head. The current way GLB handles turnovers is about as unrealistic as possible.

Originally posted by Ken1
As to CJericho's points, I definitely don't claim to speak for everybody as far as needing realism, just a hell of a lot of people as the poll I'm sure he has seen shows.

The majority of the people in that extremely old poll voted for something other than your vaunted realism though, which completely undercuts your BS argument. Most people did not want to see GLB make the game killing mistake of being so beholden to what NFL stats are that the game has to be broken to fit those stats.

Originally posted by MileHighShoes

You say you agree with me, and then you say completely stupid off the wall stuff that flies against the very ethos of my core argument.


Maybe I misunderstand your core argument then. I thought it was, "i'm all for realistic outcomes, but those should be achieved in realistic ways." If that's your argument, I agree in principle, although I'll admit that I value the realistic outcomes above all and that's a difference in our views.

I'll also admit that many of those who voted for realism in the poll would disagree with me about keeping outcomes realistic using highly unrealistic mechanics if necessary. I do prefer more realistic mechanics if they're available, but I'm trying to recognize what is possible at the level of testing it's likely to get.

When there are unrealistic outcomes, there's already something unrealistic in the sim, whether or not we can identify it and fix it realistically. So the ideal solution is to fix it realistically, but to me the worst solution is not to fix it at all.

Originally posted by Ken1
Maybe I misunderstand your core argument then. I thought it was, "i'm all for realistic outcomes, but those should be achieved in realistic ways." If that's your argument, I agree in principle, although I'll admit that I value the realistic outcomes above all and that's a difference in our views.

I'll also admit that many of those who voted for realism in the poll would disagree with me about keeping outcomes realistic using highly unrealistic mechanics if necessary. I do prefer more realistic mechanics if they're available, but I'm trying to recognize what is possible at the level of testing it's likely to get.

When there are unrealistic outcomes, there's already something unrealistic in the sim, whether or not we can identify it and fix it realistically. So the ideal solution is to fix it realistically, but to me the worst solution is not to fix it at all.

So your solution to all these issues is to institute unrealistic fixes, like falling down, and forced unnatural slow downs of players. As far as all the people that go along with your line of thinking where are they now and why are they not defending you?

Originally posted by Ken1
When there are unrealistic outcomes, there's already something unrealistic in the sim, whether or not we can identify it and fix it realistically. So the ideal solution is to fix it realistically, but to me the worst solution is not to fix it at all.

The unrealistic problems present in the sim are the lack of parity between builds and the abilities of agents to build extreme builds.

The difference between 80 speed and 165 speed is monumenal in thsi game, whereas in the NFL it's maybe a second at most in the 40 yard dash. That's an ingrained part of this gmae and as long as the game is based around this facet of dot-buildign we will never reach realistic outcomes.

I for the most part do not support realistic outcomes because of these differences in build parity. I would just like for us to put these builds through realistic mechanics That's what I'd really like to see out of this game. I don't actually care about achieving realistic stats, I want whatever comes out of the sim when you put the builds through the paces. However, if we want to achieve realistic stats with as little artificial game mechanics inolved we'll actually have to increase parity among builds by making builds matter less.

We'd have to create a baseline for NFL quality by severely dampening the effects that a point in speed, or a point in strength gave. It's really the only way to actually achieve NFL realism without implementing numerous bandaids, as the reason for realism in the NFL is that nearly all of them can run a 40 in 5 seconds or less. Nearly all of them can bench press 250 pounds. Nearly all of them can catch a ball that hits them in the chest. Nearly all of them have the stamina to run 2 or 3 miles at a decently fast pace.
Our dots don't have that, they really don't have any of that until we assign points.

This sim should really decide what it is it wants to be an then code for that. We're too schizophrenic. We want realism but we don't want realistic difference between builds. We want to mimic football, but we create un-realistic game mechanics as part of the game.

This has always been the source of un-realistic outcomes in the game, the base of the entire sim is unrealistic in regards to the NFL. I think we should embrace that and actually turn this into a game to be played an give players more control of what their dot can and can't do by incentivizing build differntiation and allowing the builds to actually matter rather than implementing infallible game mechanics.

After all, we are here to play a game.

Originally posted by MileHighShoes
This has always been the source of un-realistic outcomes in the game, the base of the entire sim is unrealistic in regards to the NFL. I think we should embrace that and actually turn this into a game to be played an give players more control of what their dot can and can't do by incentivizing build differntiation and allowing the builds to actually matter rather than implementing infallible game mechanics.

After all, we are here to play a game.

Nicely put....