Warrior General Games

I don't like the bi-model attributes. I don't think someone should have to give up arm strength to get leg strength. Or throwing accuracy to get throwing strength. I do completely agree that the caps should be different based on position.

Interesting stuff, somehow I had never seen this post before.

It might be too late to make such large changes, but it's well presented and has support. Looks epic to me. Hopefully we can get some admin comment on it.

Originally posted by Nixx
Hopefully we can get some admin comment on it.

I'm sure Bort's a pretty busy fellow, but...I am fairly disappointed. I remember seeing him post every couple of days.

Like some others, I don't agree with the idea of position-specific soft caps. However, I do think soft caps that depend on height and weight are a tremendous idea. I posted this in another thread on Weight Classes on Dec. 1:

Originally posted by TrevJo
Change the ability soft caps depending on the height and weight of the player. Actually now that I think about this I don't know why it wasn't done this way in the first place. For example:
Strength - Slightly lower for taller players, much higher for heavier players
Speed soft caps - Slightly higher for taller players, lower for heavier players
Agility soft caps - Lower for taller players, lower for heavier players
Jumping - Slightly higher for taller players, much lower for heavier players
Stamina - Slightly lower for taller players, much lower for heavier players
Vision - Slightly higher for taller players, unaffected by weight
Confidence - Unaffected by height and weight

So for example. Take a player that is 6'2" 220#. Does't matter what his position is. Soft caps might be:
Strength - 48
Speed - 52
Agility - 47
Jumping - 48
Stamina - 48
Vision - 50

On the other hand, a player that is 6'5" 300# might have the following soft caps:
Strength - 60
Speed - 45
Agility - 41
Jumping - 45
Stamina - 44
Vision - 52

And a player that is 5'9" 190# might have the following soft caps:
Strength - 43
Speed - 51
Agility - 57
Jumping - 50
Stamina - 53
Vision - 47

So the soft caps are determined by height and weight. You could have a button next to the rolls (and also on the player page later) where the user can just click it to see what their soft caps are at that height and weight. I think you could incorporate gaining and losing weight by allowing players to adjust their weight until they hit a soft cap. Once they hit a soft cap they are set, which IMO is fairly realistic because you rarely see NFL players change their weight significantly after their rookie year. (The only exception is at the end of careers you often see guys lose weight just because they can't stay fit at heavier weights anymore.)

Meanwhile, the player's automatic level gains are still determined by their position, because of what they do in practice. And with a new system more carefully tuned to each position rather than trying to fit the major/minor system.

So for a WR, automatic level gains something like:
Speed +.4 Catching +.4 Agility +.3 Jumping +.3 Stamina +.3 Vision +.2 Confidence +.2 Carrying +.2 Strength +.1 Blocking +.1 Throwing +.1 Tackling +.1

For a LB, automatic level gains something like:
Tackling +.4 Strength +.3 Agility +.3 Vision +.3 Confidence +.3 Stamina +.2 Jumping +.2 Speed +.2 Catching +.1 Carrying +.1 Blocking +.1

Those might not add up to 3 or whatever, but you get the idea. If you are making big changes, the strict majors/minors system really ought to go.

So if a guy really wants to make a linebacker that is 6'4" and quicker and faster than Randy Moss, he can do it, but it will cost him a lot more SP to do it than the guy who creates a 6'0" WR, and it will cost him even more SP to do it if he also makes the guy 250#.

If you want to re-vamp things, be it for new players only or whatever, in my humble opinion this is the way to do it.

Hm, interesting ideas in here. I'm not sure if I like the bi-modal idea or not, tbh, at the moment. I would have to think on it some.

I don't think changing soft caps per position is feasable, though. I much prefer just having per-position modifiers on the actual skills as far as how they are used in formulas. Same diff in the end, really, and keeps things easy to understand as far as building goes.

Originally posted by Bort
Hm, interesting ideas in here. I'm not sure if I like the bi-modal idea or not, tbh, at the moment. I would have to think on it some.

I don't think changing soft caps per position is feasable, though. I much prefer just having per-position modifiers on the actual skills as far as how they are used in formulas.

What did you think about the idea of changing the soft caps based on height and weight? It's simple, would make height and weight more relevant, and makes sense in terms of real life/physics. I don't like formula modifications based on position... my take is that one player with x, y, and z attributes be subject to the same formulas, without modifiers, as another player with x, y, and z attributes (with the exception of out-of-position penalties).

Originally posted by Bort
Hm, interesting ideas in here. I'm not sure if I like the bi-modal idea or not, tbh, at the moment. I would have to think on it some.

I don't think changing soft caps per position is feasable, though. I much prefer just having per-position modifiers on the actual skills as far as how they are used in formulas. Same diff in the end, really, and keeps things easy to understand as far as building goes.

And customizable special ability sets, e.g. tree-for-tree?

Originally posted by dmfa41
[The reason I prefer a change in soft-caps as opposed to an outright penalty (as per Bort's weight class idea) is because large athletes still can attain speed. It should be more difficult for them to reach that barrier, but once they do, they shouldn't be penalized.

You know the code; I don't. I take your word for it.

thank god finally epicified!

I actually like the idea of moving the caps based on position. I may like the position modifiers more if we could actually see them and know what they are. I'd be confused less anyway.

The main reason I don't like the bi-modal attributes is because I think it's overly complicated. It could discourage new players because they would have so many options with the attributes and sliders.

Customizable SA sets would kill if Bort was considering an SA re-roll.

Originally posted by dmfa41
Customizable SA sets would kill if Bort was considering an SA re-roll.

I'd wet myself if we got Customizable SAs. Not only would they lead to diversity, they'd lead to endless experimentation.

Originally posted by TheInfinity
Originally posted by dmfa41

Customizable SA sets would kill if Bort was considering an SA re-roll.

I'd wet myself if we got Customizable SAs. Not only would they lead to diversity, they'd lead to endless experimentation.

MadImTheScientist FTW?