Warrior General Games

We're not doing a poll on this.

Originally posted by jaxinthebox
Wouldn't it be easier and smarter to just let people decide their own Major/Minor attributes and if forget about all of the contingencies?

Now *THAT* is an interesting idea. Let me pick the position, and then major/minor attributes for them. You'd definitely get some variation in "archetypes".

Originally posted by rockislandmike
Seriously? That lolmeasure ??????



Don't want to get too far off topic, but I agree the effective level thing isn't very helpful. I've seen some crap builds have high effective levels.

Originally posted by Dustin Diamond
Originally posted by SwagOnLock

Yikes, this is not good news. It's amazing to me that this type of overhaul is given priority or everything else when such glaring flaws already exist.



+1

Originally posted by Jack Riley
Originally posted by Vallic

I like the basic idea, but this makes all players over the 120 day mark worthless.

That honestly, is the one major concern as an owner I also have.

Definitely doesn't do this. Some players will actually be superior to those 'new generation' players. The gap won't be too large, though.

Originally posted by Catch22

It'll be implemented with a selection screen I imagine.

not quite what I was asking.... what would happen to the SAs that we invested in that no longer "exist" for our position? would they be returned via SP or would they simply become whatever substitutes them in the tree?

Also would the ALGs be reverse engineered or only applied going forward?

Originally posted by rockislandmike
Now *THAT* is an interesting idea. Let me pick the position, and then major/minor attributes for them. You'd definitely get some variation in "archetypes".

Discussed and shot down by Bort.

Originally posted by jaxinthebox
Wouldn't it be easier and smarter to just let people decide their own Major/Minor attributes and if forget about all of the contingencies?

No, Dt's would be Speed/agi/str.... Well all lb'ers/hb's/de's/dt's/fbs/te's would likely be this,definately need restrictions on builds. The most imbalanced one as of right now IMO is. Combo LB
5'10" - 6'6", 230-260 Lbs
Major Agility Speed Tackling Vision (+.5)

This is awesome. The ALGs have been the biggest problem in glb since day 1 (tackling for 0-linemen, etc).

Originally posted by rockislandmike
Originally posted by jaxinthebox

Wouldn't it be easier and smarter to just let people decide their own Major/Minor attributes and if forget about all of the contingencies?

Now *THAT* is an interesting idea. Let me pick the position, and then major/minor attributes for them. You'd definitely get some variation in "archetypes".

Sweet, I'll take my LB with strength, speed, agility, vision as majors.

See the problem?

Originally posted by Catch22
We're not doing a poll on this.

Good

catch shouldnt special teamers be 150 flex since they dont play as much i agree they should be 100 flex but 200 is alittle high for a dot to only see 15 plays per game?

imagine being a new player, all of these choices will overwhelm the average newb & discourage growth.

truth be told - I doubt non min/maxers will really even notice that much of a difference in many cases - though the SA bonus is nice (but in many cases invisible/undetectable)

Does this mean another 2 1/2 years til this is out of Beta?