Picksix>GLB 2
Forum > Goal Line Blitz > I still prefer GLB Classic
Originally posted by bhall43
I can't ever be Hood enough for you bro
Starting to think that getting a hood tattoo on my lower back was a bad idea
I can't ever be Hood enough for you bro
Starting to think that getting a hood tattoo on my lower back was a bad idea
jamz
offline
offline
Originally posted by bhall43
For someone who doesn't like the past rewritten, you sure do make up your own version of it quite a bit.
Awww yeah bro
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSGxAJvEP6A
For someone who doesn't like the past rewritten, you sure do make up your own version of it quite a bit.
Awww yeah bro
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSGxAJvEP6A
jdbolick
offline
offline
Originally posted by Homage
No it's not. It's boring as fuck for like 5-6 seasons.
"If you're bored then you're boring." Even after all this time there are still new things to try. Heck, INT LBs are only now just getting their due. Your PD DL was innovative. People are experimenting with huge strength rushing QBs. Now that Bort clarified that sticking with receivers through cuts is a matter of vision and not agility, I'm wondering about 90+ vision and high 70s agility CBs. And that's before we even get to debate about the best set-up for even traditional roles. No one is really sure whether 3 AEQ or 4 AEQ is the better approach. Because the ALG approach is a nested system where order of events matters, it is exponentially more complex with that many more possibilities than the GLB2 system. I get the appeal of something new, but you'll be bored with GLB2 long before even your first players hit plateau.
No it's not. It's boring as fuck for like 5-6 seasons.
"If you're bored then you're boring." Even after all this time there are still new things to try. Heck, INT LBs are only now just getting their due. Your PD DL was innovative. People are experimenting with huge strength rushing QBs. Now that Bort clarified that sticking with receivers through cuts is a matter of vision and not agility, I'm wondering about 90+ vision and high 70s agility CBs. And that's before we even get to debate about the best set-up for even traditional roles. No one is really sure whether 3 AEQ or 4 AEQ is the better approach. Because the ALG approach is a nested system where order of events matters, it is exponentially more complex with that many more possibilities than the GLB2 system. I get the appeal of something new, but you'll be bored with GLB2 long before even your first players hit plateau.
bhall43
offline
offline
70 agility is so bad. like super bad. I will never do it again on a secondary player.
Originally posted by jdbolick
"If you're bored then you're boring." Even after all this time there are still new things to try. Heck, INT LBs are only now just getting their due. Your PD DL was innovative. People are experimenting with huge strength rushing QBs. Now that Bort clarified that sticking with receivers through cuts is a matter of vision and not agility, I'm wondering about 90+ vision and high 70s agility CBs. And that's before we even get to debate about the best set-up for even traditional roles. No one is really sure whether 3 AEQ or 4 AEQ is the better approach. Because the ALG approach is a nested system where order of events matters, it is exponentially more complex with that many more possibilities than the GLB2 system. I get the appeal of something new, but you'll be bored with GLB2 long before even your first players hit plateau.
Tru dat.
Originally posted by bhall43
70 agility is so bad. like super bad. I will never do it again on a secondary player.
Tru dat too.
"If you're bored then you're boring." Even after all this time there are still new things to try. Heck, INT LBs are only now just getting their due. Your PD DL was innovative. People are experimenting with huge strength rushing QBs. Now that Bort clarified that sticking with receivers through cuts is a matter of vision and not agility, I'm wondering about 90+ vision and high 70s agility CBs. And that's before we even get to debate about the best set-up for even traditional roles. No one is really sure whether 3 AEQ or 4 AEQ is the better approach. Because the ALG approach is a nested system where order of events matters, it is exponentially more complex with that many more possibilities than the GLB2 system. I get the appeal of something new, but you'll be bored with GLB2 long before even your first players hit plateau.
Tru dat.
Originally posted by bhall43
70 agility is so bad. like super bad. I will never do it again on a secondary player.
Tru dat too.
Timetoshine-Metta
offline
offline
Originally posted by Time Trial
Go back to where this all started. It was you, like usual, taking a comment out of context to try and start a fight that you go on to lose.
You:
"Yes, I love playing 100 random games a season and playing in a league named after the contents of a box of animal crackers."
100 random games = a division structure and a ladder, btw.
Me:
"Lots of people like the division setup and the ladder. You were never elite, so you wouldn't need to worry about climbing the ladder. People in the top 40 tuned in for the big ladder games in the latter half of the season when rankings started to stabalize. Not everyone cared, but 8/10 or more leagues in GLB1 are non-elite, non-pro, non-WL, non-PWG... most of GLB is made up of teams with 0 cares or 0 skills."
Not every team in GLB1 is elite and there are tons of random meaningless games. The only people who really cared about the ladder were the ones fighting for the top. For the rest, there were at least games with people within their ladder segment and the division to worry about.
You:
"So what you're saying is only elites should bother with 2.0?
Why are you there?"
So here's where you try and mischaracterize what I said and bait me into a fight. At no point did I say that only elite people should play GLB2, I said only the top 40 or so teams of the ladder really watched the ladder games. There wasn't a thread wondering who would crack the top 100.
I order to prove your point, you point out that my rookie team failed to make playoffs in its third season, S32. I contacted support and a team that was playing league underground and didn't want to be in Elite, but Support chose not to make the swap for us. Dub thought this was pretty funny, so any time I posted anything in the Elite forum, he'd ask me why I was there, until finally after about 30 pages I just destroyed him. Like to the point that : popcorn : was flying. At the height, he decided to PM me and then block me so that I couldn't reply. His insistence that I didn't deserve to be in Elite was of course based on the fact that I had so much contempt for Competitive and below. When I proved that competitive was a joke by going 20-0, and he failed out of Elite by getting destroyed in playoffs, he pretty much stopped posting and sold his team off and no one in Elite Minors heard from him again.
When GLB 2.0 came out, he wanted to be a tester so badly. When he wasn't picked, he was so butthurt, he made no secret of his disdain for those who got the chance. Is that what this is about Dub? Are you still sad that coach left you on the bench?
lol glb 2 has better things to discuss glb sucking but they dont have better things to do than type up all this
Go back to where this all started. It was you, like usual, taking a comment out of context to try and start a fight that you go on to lose.
You:
"Yes, I love playing 100 random games a season and playing in a league named after the contents of a box of animal crackers."
100 random games = a division structure and a ladder, btw.
Me:
"Lots of people like the division setup and the ladder. You were never elite, so you wouldn't need to worry about climbing the ladder. People in the top 40 tuned in for the big ladder games in the latter half of the season when rankings started to stabalize. Not everyone cared, but 8/10 or more leagues in GLB1 are non-elite, non-pro, non-WL, non-PWG... most of GLB is made up of teams with 0 cares or 0 skills."
Not every team in GLB1 is elite and there are tons of random meaningless games. The only people who really cared about the ladder were the ones fighting for the top. For the rest, there were at least games with people within their ladder segment and the division to worry about.
You:
"So what you're saying is only elites should bother with 2.0?
Why are you there?"
So here's where you try and mischaracterize what I said and bait me into a fight. At no point did I say that only elite people should play GLB2, I said only the top 40 or so teams of the ladder really watched the ladder games. There wasn't a thread wondering who would crack the top 100.
I order to prove your point, you point out that my rookie team failed to make playoffs in its third season, S32. I contacted support and a team that was playing league underground and didn't want to be in Elite, but Support chose not to make the swap for us. Dub thought this was pretty funny, so any time I posted anything in the Elite forum, he'd ask me why I was there, until finally after about 30 pages I just destroyed him. Like to the point that : popcorn : was flying. At the height, he decided to PM me and then block me so that I couldn't reply. His insistence that I didn't deserve to be in Elite was of course based on the fact that I had so much contempt for Competitive and below. When I proved that competitive was a joke by going 20-0, and he failed out of Elite by getting destroyed in playoffs, he pretty much stopped posting and sold his team off and no one in Elite Minors heard from him again.
When GLB 2.0 came out, he wanted to be a tester so badly. When he wasn't picked, he was so butthurt, he made no secret of his disdain for those who got the chance. Is that what this is about Dub? Are you still sad that coach left you on the bench?
lol glb 2 has better things to discuss glb sucking but they dont have better things to do than type up all this
Time Trial
offline
offline
Originally posted by jdbolick
"If you're bored then you're boring." Even after all this time there are still new things to try. Heck, INT LBs are only now just getting their due. Your PD DL was innovative. People are experimenting with huge strength rushing QBs. Now that Bort clarified that sticking with receivers through cuts is a matter of vision and not agility, I'm wondering about 90+ vision and high 70s agility CBs. And that's before we even get to debate about the best set-up for even traditional roles. No one is really sure whether 3 AEQ or 4 AEQ is the better approach. Because the ALG approach is a nested system where order of events matters, it is exponentially more complex with that many more possibilities than the GLB2 system. I get the appeal of something new, but you'll be bored with GLB2 long before even your first players hit plateau.
I started some high strength rushing QBs on July 15, 2013. Hopefully in 8 more months I will impress someone with the build enough to get a shot at a WL gig. If I failed, oh well, I'll get another shot in September 2015.
That's what is wrong with GLB. We all have an idea for an experiment, but time kills the excitement.
"If you're bored then you're boring." Even after all this time there are still new things to try. Heck, INT LBs are only now just getting their due. Your PD DL was innovative. People are experimenting with huge strength rushing QBs. Now that Bort clarified that sticking with receivers through cuts is a matter of vision and not agility, I'm wondering about 90+ vision and high 70s agility CBs. And that's before we even get to debate about the best set-up for even traditional roles. No one is really sure whether 3 AEQ or 4 AEQ is the better approach. Because the ALG approach is a nested system where order of events matters, it is exponentially more complex with that many more possibilities than the GLB2 system. I get the appeal of something new, but you'll be bored with GLB2 long before even your first players hit plateau.
I started some high strength rushing QBs on July 15, 2013. Hopefully in 8 more months I will impress someone with the build enough to get a shot at a WL gig. If I failed, oh well, I'll get another shot in September 2015.
That's what is wrong with GLB. We all have an idea for an experiment, but time kills the excitement.
Time Trial
offline
offline
Originally posted by Timetoshine-Metta
lol glb 2 has better things to discuss glb sucking but they dont have better things to do than type up all this
I AM GLB 2?
lol glb 2 has better things to discuss glb sucking but they dont have better things to do than type up all this
I AM GLB 2?
Timetoshine-Metta
offline
offline
Originally posted by Time Trial
I AM GLB 2?
yeah there's like 4 people here that are glb 2
other than that i dont know who else plays
I AM GLB 2?
yeah there's like 4 people here that are glb 2
other than that i dont know who else plays
Time Trial
offline
offline
Originally posted by bhall43
Is high strength an experiment?
Mine is. Most rushing QBs are built to run outside. I'm building inside rushers.
First Step, Surge, Power Thru, Spin. Bort said that the QB sneak plays aren't scripted at the start, so First Step and Surge can both fire.
http://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/player.pl?player_id=4486617
Level 49, Agility+Strength build:
100.8 Agility
86.96 Strength
97.96 (+36) Speed
62.96 Carrying
49.8 Vision
Basic rushing QB, but with a lot of emphasis on strength. Will move some equipment off speed as I get AEQ.
http://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/player.pl?player_id=4484991
Level 49, Strength+Vision+Carrying build:
Strength 99.8
Vision 89.8
Speed 98 (+37)
Carrying 77.96
Kind of wish I hadn't pumped vision... 3 ALG major blinded me to the potential of this build. Still, in short yardage (2 or fewer yards) he's going to be tough to bring down with First Step and Surge. Considered Dive for Yards instead of Spin and Mr. First Down VA to make him a pure short yardage specialist.
Could add throwing to make a viable short yardage pass an option (if they stack the box to sell out against the run), but I would only do that if I was making a few different versions of this build.
Is high strength an experiment?
Mine is. Most rushing QBs are built to run outside. I'm building inside rushers.
First Step, Surge, Power Thru, Spin. Bort said that the QB sneak plays aren't scripted at the start, so First Step and Surge can both fire.
http://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/player.pl?player_id=4486617
Level 49, Agility+Strength build:
100.8 Agility
86.96 Strength
97.96 (+36) Speed
62.96 Carrying
49.8 Vision
Basic rushing QB, but with a lot of emphasis on strength. Will move some equipment off speed as I get AEQ.
http://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/player.pl?player_id=4484991
Level 49, Strength+Vision+Carrying build:
Strength 99.8
Vision 89.8
Speed 98 (+37)
Carrying 77.96
Kind of wish I hadn't pumped vision... 3 ALG major blinded me to the potential of this build. Still, in short yardage (2 or fewer yards) he's going to be tough to bring down with First Step and Surge. Considered Dive for Yards instead of Spin and Mr. First Down VA to make him a pure short yardage specialist.
Could add throwing to make a viable short yardage pass an option (if they stack the box to sell out against the run), but I would only do that if I was making a few different versions of this build.
Edited by Time Trial on Jan 28, 2014 21:26:17
Originally posted by bhall43
102 strength http://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/player.pl?player_id=4304296
Pretty worthless to me.
As is that link of yours to me.
I'm to lazy to change
102 strength http://glb.warriorgeneral.com/game/player.pl?player_id=4304296
Pretty worthless to me.
As is that link of yours to me.
I'm to lazy to change
Homage
offline
offline
Originally posted by jdbolick
"If you're bored then you're boring." Even after all this time there are still new things to try. Heck, INT LBs are only now just getting their due. Your PD DL was innovative. People are experimenting with huge strength rushing QBs. Now that Bort clarified that sticking with receivers through cuts is a matter of vision and not agility, I'm wondering about 90+ vision and high 70s agility CBs. And that's before we even get to debate about the best set-up for even traditional roles. No one is really sure whether 3 AEQ or 4 AEQ is the better approach. Because the ALG approach is a nested system where order of events matters, it is exponentially more complex with that many more possibilities than the GLB2 system. I get the appeal of something new, but you'll be bored with GLB2 long before even your first players hit plateau.
I might feel differently if I didn't have to wait so long.
And I am still experimenting. I've been trying to make a legit scrambling QB but it appears Bort's code makes them move around like cracked out fiends simply because they have more speed... not to mention, there's some massive pass quality penalty when passing on the run and on the run S.A. hasn't curbed any of this. Maybe things will pick up once we all hit 79, but right now shit is bleak.
"If you're bored then you're boring." Even after all this time there are still new things to try. Heck, INT LBs are only now just getting their due. Your PD DL was innovative. People are experimenting with huge strength rushing QBs. Now that Bort clarified that sticking with receivers through cuts is a matter of vision and not agility, I'm wondering about 90+ vision and high 70s agility CBs. And that's before we even get to debate about the best set-up for even traditional roles. No one is really sure whether 3 AEQ or 4 AEQ is the better approach. Because the ALG approach is a nested system where order of events matters, it is exponentially more complex with that many more possibilities than the GLB2 system. I get the appeal of something new, but you'll be bored with GLB2 long before even your first players hit plateau.
I might feel differently if I didn't have to wait so long.
And I am still experimenting. I've been trying to make a legit scrambling QB but it appears Bort's code makes them move around like cracked out fiends simply because they have more speed... not to mention, there's some massive pass quality penalty when passing on the run and on the run S.A. hasn't curbed any of this. Maybe things will pick up once we all hit 79, but right now shit is bleak.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
