Warrior General Games

Originally posted by dansingingfool
Love the idea.

I believe kingjonb's example would be a strategy, not necessarily exploit. And with every dominant strategy, someone will think of a way to counter it. Plus, if you think it'll be terrible, just don't play Iron Man, stick to regular GLB. I understand how some could not be interested in this, but really how could anybody actually vote against it? Like it's going to change their regular game or something.

then what's up with SSB? Isn't that just a strategy, too?

-1 because if people want Iron Man they can just make their own special league like League Underground. Unless the idea is to also have non boosting leagues then I give it -1

I dont like this. It is just something that is going to cut into the already thin FA market and i would rather not see that.

Originally posted by Wrathius
I dont like this. It is just something that is going to cut into the already thin FA market and i would rather not see that.



While there are legitimate criticisms, this really isn't one. I don't believe either league would be pulling from the same pool of FAs

Originally posted by kingjonb
then what's up with SSB? Isn't that just a strategy, too?

-1 because if people want Iron Man they can just make their own special league like League Underground. Unless the idea is to also have non boosting leagues then I give it -1

You probably think dentists should have their own schools, too, amirite?

I seriously don't know what you're talking about here, comparing a completely separate league style with a build strategy that was designed to circumvent cap restrictions. I'd argue with you, but you're clearly either upset about something else and lashing out in this thread, or mentally unhinged and not worth the effort.

But thanks for your comments

Originally posted by haole
You probably think dentists should have their own schools, too, amirite?

I seriously don't know what you're talking about here, comparing a completely separate league style with a build strategy that was designed to circumvent cap restrictions. I'd argue with you, but you're clearly either upset about something else and lashing out in this thread, or mentally unhinged and not worth the effort.

But thanks for your comments



Actually SSB was just a strategy that people didn't like because they couldn't beat them, same with non boosters. People have those as a strategy because maybe they don't have a goal of making it to Pros/WL or just simply can't afford to boost players. Why is having different strategies and goals bad for them but ok for you? You know that by insulting me and avoiding any real counter argument you have just proven your lack of insight into the real issue, right? Thanks!

You're welcome for my comments.

Originally posted by kingjonb


Actually SSB was just a strategy that people didn't like because they couldn't beat them, same with non boosters. People have those as a strategy because maybe they don't have a goal of making it to Pros/WL or just simply can't afford to boost players. Why is having different strategies and goals bad for them but ok for you? You know that by insulting me and avoiding any real counter argument you have just proven your lack of insight into the real issue, right? Thanks!

You're welcome for my comments.

I would give you a counter-argument, if your "argument" had anything at all to do with Iron Man Leagues.

This is not a thread about using Super Slow Building to circumvent caps, or non-boosting leagues, or whatever the hell it is you're trying to get on a soap box about. Please stay on the topic of the Iron Man idea, or create your own QQ thread about whatever happened that caused your butt-hurt.

Originally posted by haole
While there are legitimate criticisms, this really isn't one. I don't believe either league would be pulling from the same pool of FAs

Agreed, a player built for Iron League would be pretty terrible in the other leagues.

Originally posted by kingjonb


Actually SSB was just a strategy that people didn't like because they couldn't beat them, same with non boosters. People have those as a strategy because maybe they don't have a goal of making it to Pros/WL or just simply can't afford to boost players. Why is having different strategies and goals bad for them but ok for you? You know that by insulting me and avoiding any real counter argument you have just proven your lack of insight into the real issue, right? Thanks!

You're welcome for my comments.

SSB player would get destroyed by a player built on the same day. Only bitches who couldn't game plan went the SSB route. GTFO please.

Sounds fun. I live in a small town and we have had some great success with our football team here. But since its so small we have guys that play both sides, they have to because there are not enough kids to fill out both sides. Still they do well and get to play about the whole game. They are exhausted when they are done, but they have lots of fun.

Originally posted by Dub J
SSB player would get destroyed by a player built on the same day. Only bitches who couldn't game plan went the SSB route. GTFO please.

same could be said about boosters, right? Only bitches who can't game plan have to boost to gain an advantage. See, that weak statement can go both ways, probably not unlike you.

Thanks for playing

Originally posted by haole
I would give you a counter-argument, if your "argument" had anything at all to do with Iron Man Leagues.

This is not a thread about using Super Slow Building to circumvent caps, or non-boosting leagues, or whatever the hell it is you're trying to get on a soap box about. Please stay on the topic of the Iron Man idea, or create your own QQ thread about whatever happened that caused your butt-hurt.

maybe you should read my original argument then. The fact that the only atts that would matter would be strength and stamina and all the stamina based VAs. I also just don't think this would help the game out in anyway. It would just make it congested.

It would also cut into the thin FA market drastically. If you think it's hard finding a decent level 40 player now when you just have to compete with non boosting players to fit your needs, imagine how hard it would be to find the right player when a lot of those players are geared towards iron man. This would not create more regular league boosting players to choose from, but less, unless you actually think this would make people create more regular players.

Originally posted by kingjonb
maybe you should read my original argument then. The fact that the only atts that would matter would be strength and stamina and all the stamina based VAs. I also just don't think this would help the game out in anyway. It would just make it congested.

It would also cut into the thin FA market drastically. If you think it's hard finding a decent level 40 player now when you just have to compete with non boosting players to fit your needs, imagine how hard it would be to find the right player when a lot of those players are geared towards iron man. This would not create more regular league boosting players to choose from, but less, unless you actually think this would make people create more regular players.

The argument against a variety of build strategies assumes that you have created an Iron Man team in an Iron Man League, and based on your experiments (which you can verify by providing examples and evidence) there is only one kind of Iron Man team that is successful. I would very much look forward to your examples and evidence. Otherwise, it kind of comes off like you're just talking out your ass based on assumptions that are not rooted in any facts.

The FA argument makes no sense since Iron Man players would be terrible in regular leagues and vice versa. I imagine finding FAs would be exactly the same with or without Iron Man players.

The argument that it would make the game "congested" also makes no sense ... are you saying it would be too popular and bring in too many new people? Are you sure you know what "congested" means? I've heard arguments against further fragmenting the user base, which are rational and intelligent, but this is not that argument.

The argument that this would create fewer regular league boosting players to choose from seems more of an indictment on player satisfaction with the regular league boosting format than an indictment against offering options to people who are unhappy with the current regular league boosting format.

Again, thank you for your input.

Originally posted by haole
The argument against a variety of build strategies assumes that you have created an Iron Man team in an Iron Man League, and based on your experiments (which you can verify by providing examples and evidence) there is only one kind of Iron Man team that is successful. I would very much look forward to your examples and evidence. Otherwise, it kind of comes off like you're just talking out your ass based on assumptions that are not rooted in any facts.

The FA argument makes no sense since Iron Man players would be terrible in regular leagues and vice versa. I imagine finding FAs would be exactly the same with or without Iron Man players.

The argument that it would make the game "congested" also makes no sense ... are you saying it would be too popular and bring in too many new people? Are you sure you know what "congested" means? I've heard arguments against further fragmenting the user base, which are rational and intelligent, but this is not that argument.

The argument that this would create fewer regular league boosting players to choose from seems more of an indictment on player satisfaction with the regular league boosting format than an indictment against offering options to people who are unhappy with the current regular league boosting format.

Again, thank you for your input.

http://s116895246.onlinehome.us/public/glb/staminatest/

the coding would not change for this league so it's safe to assume that the stamina effects now would be the same in an iron man league.

you just helped my case about the FA issue. Iron man players could not be used in regular leagues so if a person is going to create 5 players and decides that 2 of them will be for iron man, you now have 2 less players to recruit for regular teams. These leagues would not increase the amount of regular players to recruit, but decrease it.

congest: To overfill or overcrowd
nowhere does it say popular. The game would be overflowing with builds that nobody can use.

There does seem to be a decreasing amount of customer satisfaction going on, but regardless of that, if leagues were created where you could only use K and P there would still be a number of people who would try that league out.

I don't really have a problem with an iron man league so much as my participation in this game has gone down so it wouldn't affect me in any way. I just don't think that this isn't something that can't be done right now if you get a group of people together who are interested and tell them they can only sign 15 players and create your own league using scrims. There are already several leagues like this around using scrims. To be seriously considered for implementation tho there would have to be more factors to take into consideration than just limiting roster size to 20.

+1

Originally posted by kingjonb
http://s116895246.onlinehome.us/public/glb/staminatest/

Thanks for providing this irrefutable evidence and then placing it in a URL that I do not have permission to view. I apologize if this doesn't change my mind. My counterargument is here:

http://cache1.asset-cache.net/xc/100782989.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=EF02D7492C29D69376507C6AA459BBA27A8C6928AD4E183B90C639DC58D025A2AF02A446DE301F85

Originally posted by kingjonb
the coding would not change for this league so it's safe to assume that the stamina effects now would be the same in an iron man league.

Obviously stamina would be a huge factor in a league where nearly every dot is playing on both sides of the ball. I don't think any intelligent person would claim that stamina would be unimportant. I'm sure you'll come back to the point of this later, since there doesn't seem to be any argument here.

EDIT: Oops, guess not. Ok, well perhaps in your response to this, you could also point out that in an Iron Man League, the team that scores the most points in a game will win.

Originally posted by kingjonb

you just helped my case about the FA issue. Iron man players could not be used in regular leagues so if a person is going to create 5 players and decides that 2 of them will be for iron man, you now have 2 less players to recruit for regular teams. These leagues would not increase the amount of regular players to recruit, but decrease it.

Your argument assumes that this imaginary person (a friend of yours?) is making dots just to make dots and then faces this tough choice on whether to make them Iron Man dots or not. Your argument further assumes that this person is not making dots for a team, but just to make them for the hell of it. Your argument assumes a lot of things, actually.

We fully expect that the majority of dots made for Iron Man are dots that will be made for Iron Man. I agree that this argument doesn't carry the weight it once did. On the support list (Page 1) are literally dozens of names of people who wanted to make Iron Man dots, but they're no longer on GLB now making dots for anyone. They were never given the option. Had this been implemented a couple years ago, when the support level was high and enthusiasm was rampant, who knows? Maybe some of those people stick around.

No matter how you stack it, it's six of one, a half-dozen of the other. But I seriously doubt the implementation of Iron Man will have an noticeable impact on the FA market, either positive or negative. There are many other factors causing a lack of enthusiasm for making dots that are much more to blame.

Originally posted by kingjonb

congest: To overfill or overcrowd
nowhere does it say popular. The game would be overflowing with builds that nobody can use.

So the idea would be SO popular that the game would be overflowing with builds that nobody (but Iron Man teams) can use. We thank you for your optimism and support.

Originally posted by kingjonb

There does seem to be a decreasing amount of customer satisfaction going on, but regardless of that, if leagues were created where you could only use K and P there would still be a number of people who would try that league out.

No idea what this means

Originally posted by kingjonb

I don't really have a problem with an iron man league so much as my participation in this game has gone down so it wouldn't affect me in any way. I just don't think that this isn't something that can't be done right now if you get a group of people together who are interested and tell them they can only sign 15 players and create your own league using scrims. There are already several leagues like this around using scrims. To be seriously considered for implementation tho there would have to be more factors to take into consideration than just limiting roster size to 20.

First, I bolded the triple negative that made me laugh at your horrible grammar skills. Sorry, but it's an epic failure of a sentence.

Second, this cannot be done currently by a League Underground. Not with 15-man rosters (impossible with the current coding as per Bort) and not with 20 (because the CPU automatically re-does the depth chart before every game if you have fewer than 25 players). As far as I know, there are NOT currently Iron Man League Underground leagues. A couple of aborted attempts have been made to create them, but the depth chart glitch has prevented them from happening. Thank you for making sure you have your facts straight before spending so much time explaining why you are against it.

We thank you once again for your input.