Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Ken1
The "less annoying" way is not to do it at all, .

like you and posting..the best for you is not to do it all

Originally posted by beenlurken
Dont lie... you are only making this suggestion because you are unable to be competitive at the Nat Pro level... you would not be making this if your team(s) was a playoff contenders.

If you would just step back and take an objective unselfish look at the game you will finally realize that the league structure is what is hurting this game at the end game level. Whether you admit it or not the game cannot support 8 competitive pro leagues.

The answer is not what you naively suggest in this thread. It will never fly.. it's a game and if users want to build every player for ther team the should be able to.. if a group of friends want to build a team they should e able to. Listen to what EVERYONE in this thread is telling you.

That said, the only way to fix parity at the end game level is to contract the Pro leagues. It Bort finally decides to market this game and it begins to grow again then the Nat Pro level can be expanded back but for now there should only be 4 leagues with higher promote/demote. It is just too easy to reach Nat Pro... it's practically a guarantee you will get there. Also it is ridicously easy for shit teams to stay in Nat Pro... you of all people should know this. The problem with that is that these teams buid a reputation of losing and will never be able to sign competitive dots (I would rather put my dots on a promising reg pro team than one of your teams yello.. and that's excluding our history).

Lastly, how did this thread make it to page 10? This is NGTH

Don't call me a liar. Thats infuriating and uncalled for. Stop projecting your self involved self serving values on others and you may see the world a tad more clearly.

Again, I make game suggestions. I made games. Sold them to people not for profit, there wasnt much, but because I like it. I play games and then I think about what could be better or more to my liking. Online games came along I do the same thing. My first suggestions about this game were posted years ago. My suggestions were posted when my team was winning championships. My suggestions in my other online games are posted when winning or losing. Heck I post suggestions in fantasy RPG MMOs where there is no such thing as winning OR losing.

As for it won't work, maybe. Maybe it would tick off everyone and the game would immediately end. Or maybe it ticks off some folks and some leave and some adapt, but meanwhile new players and players who would have left under the current system like the game more because of parity and STAY. And maybe in the long run thats better for the GLB business and those who stay than the current dwindling player base course is.

Following my analogy, yes the NFL would survive without parity. In maybe ten cities that can compete without a salary cap. But the other 22 cities would be watching tennis and sucking an egg like Los Angeles does now. Ten cities might keep the NFL afloat but I wouldnt bet on ten teams or one league being enough to keep Bort from getting another line of work, maybe a Tennis sim.

Anyway, whether it would work or not neither you nor I really can say. I just put the concept out there as a potential solution to a perceived issue. Hate it if you will.

As to league contraction, the less and less players there are the more true that argument becomes. But less is not more in terms of profits. See the ten cities/one league issue above. And in any case less teams still does not equate to parity. Those bad dot builders will still be there and those good dot builders will still go to the winning teams and the other teams will have no chance of winning generally speaking and then they will still quit. What then? MORE contraction? Till its ONLY the winning teams left? What is that? 16 WL teams, maybe that many more in all National Pro? 32 times 204,000 flex every seven months, adjusted for the 70% discount.

Thats game over time. I dont think thats what anyone wants, even LESS so than parity and real salary caps.

As for ten pages, LOL I have no idea.

Originally posted by Bane
it's not the difference.

Is it ever possible for you to admit one of your lame ass suggestions is just that, a lame ass suggestion. Just let it go man, take 10 deep breaths and think of your happy place. Let it go

I let suggestions go all the time.

I dont, however, generally like to leave replies un-answered.

As for this idea being lame, logically its not. See above.

Unpopular with this posting crew, well yes. I get that impression.

Look at which leagues are competitive

WL
Cas Pro
The Elite Minors

what is different about those leagues vs. the rest?

that is where you should look for solutions

put like talent teams in the same leagues and you have good competitiveness

really - it is that simple

Originally posted by ron2288
like you and posting..the best for you is not to do it all

You don't get to decide that just because you believe my stalker's character assassination (or are a multi of his). I'll post all I want.

Do you even disagree with me on the issue that there shouldn't be a hard salary cap to punish teams for being good? I don't think you disagree, so you shouldn't have a problem with my posts ITT anyway.

Originally posted by Ken1
The "less annoying" way is not to do it at all, because just about all of us want free choice over the teams our players play for.

Originally posted by yello1
I know, but...if its the difference between having the game or not?

It isn't. Simple as that. People who don't have good enough teams or players lose. That's the way it's supposed to be. And never should anyone ever be forced off a team to "spread the talent around."

Rather than all this... complication, surely the best way towards (greater) parity is just to learn the best dot building methods you can and then pass those onto your agents? More people do this, the better dot builders there are around.

Ideally, new users would get some very simple do and don't do instructions upon joining up (and I don't mean the FAQ videos), but failing that, the only way to improve the userbase and thus create more competitive teams is to learn to build as well as you can - from the experts - and then pass it on. Some will listen, some won't, but overall the level should rise.

Originally posted by Ken1
Originally posted by Ken1

The "less annoying" way is not to do it at all, because just about all of us want free choice over the teams our players play for.

Originally posted by yello1

I know, but...if its the difference between having the game or not?

It isn't. Simple as that. People who don't have good enough teams or players lose. That's the way it's supposed to be. And never should anyone ever be forced off a team to "spread the talent around."

Even if they did put this into play, the shitty owners, shitty coordinators, and shitty builders would not be able to be saved by one or two good builds being forced onto their team. Make people accountable for putting crap out on the field then maybe you would get more parity.

-1 this is just an awful suggestion.

(Although I would lol if Tautology/A.N. Other had to break up his team because he built his players too well).

the concept of getting together with a group of guys and agreeing to build a team from the ground up is one of the core fundamentals of this game, and one of the things that makes it the most fun. Taking that away would be seriously detrimental.

Best idea I saw was to put it in an optional league like casual and see if there was interest, but I doubt there would be enough interest to get it off the ground. the concept is intriguing but really more of a curiousity than a real suggestion.

plus, with all of the bad teams out there, it's easy to start the snowball effect. learn to be top-notch at coordinating, you'll start winning lower-tier championships and attracting more players...who will then form a loyal group of guys, and before you know it, you'll have guys building players specifically for your team.

Originally posted by Antonine
Rather than all this... complication, surely the best way towards (greater) parity is just to learn the best dot building methods you can and then pass those onto your agents? More people do this, the better dot builders there are around.

Ideally, new users would get some very simple do and don't do instructions upon joining up (and I don't mean the FAQ videos), but failing that, the only way to improve the userbase and thus create more competitive teams is to learn to build as well as you can - from the experts - and then pass it on. Some will listen, some won't, but overall the level should rise.

Better documentation is probably this games primary number one need.

Not just compiling and making accessible all of Borts nuggets dropped over the years here and there, but enough details about the mechanics that people are not forced to guess and presume.

Originally posted by Ken1
It isn't. Simple as that. People who don't have good enough teams or players lose. That's the way it's supposed to be. And never should anyone ever be forced off a team to "spread the talent around."

I've addressed this before. Yes losing is a part of a game, but as a function of screwing up now. Not having screwed up in the past so that you are impaired from improving by losing quality dots.

Originally posted by yello1
Better documentation is probably this games primary number one need.

Not just compiling and making accessible all of Borts nuggets dropped over the years here and there, but enough details about the mechanics that people are not forced to guess and presume.



I can agree with you on the above quote, although it should also avoid giving so much away that the game gets "figured out" and there is one optimal way to do things.

Originally posted by nexill
the concept of getting together with a group of guys and agreeing to build a team from the ground up is one of the core fundamentals of this game, and one of the things that makes it the most fun. Taking that away would be seriously detrimental.

Best idea I saw was to put it in an optional league like casual and see if there was interest, but I doubt there would be enough interest to get it off the ground. the concept is intriguing but really more of a curiousity than a real suggestion.

plus, with all of the bad teams out there, it's easy to start the snowball effect. learn to be top-notch at coordinating, you'll start winning lower-tier championships and attracting more players...who will then form a loyal group of guys, and before you know it, you'll have guys building players specifically for your team.

Hmmm well 'core fundamentals" does ring true, doesn't it. Others have said it but that really sold it to me.

Okay, you all win.

Bad idea.

Originally posted by ron2288
like you and posting..the best for you is not to do it all

I was about to post the same thing about you and your BFFmerenoise.