Does anyone else think this will make the viable FA's more plentiful? I mean, if one team is building to be a power back team, and another is building to be a deep passing vs one that is short passing, or a combo...well then there will be lots of different builds to fill those team philosophies whereas when recruiting now you are look for the same attibutes over and over.
Forum > Goal Line Blitz > Q&A Archives > Player Archetypes Discussion - Improvements to player development
Deathblade
offline
offline
Originally posted by B2ThaJ
Is there really not gonna be a poll on this?
I know it's not what you had in mind, but here's a pole.
http://i50.tinypic.com/33lnz9j.jpg
Is there really not gonna be a poll on this?
I know it's not what you had in mind, but here's a pole.
http://i50.tinypic.com/33lnz9j.jpg
kurieg
offline
offline
Originally posted by Kayoh
How about just Str, Carry, and Agi? .67 per level?
If you notice, all HB archetypes have 4 majors
How about just Str, Carry, and Agi? .67 per level?
If you notice, all HB archetypes have 4 majors
Catch22
offline
offline
Originally posted by tk_217
So i have level 5 guys, are they basically irrelevant now with the new system?
No, you'll be able to select an archetype for him at the beginning of next season.
So i have level 5 guys, are they basically irrelevant now with the new system?
No, you'll be able to select an archetype for him at the beginning of next season.
Mr Sinister
offline
offline
Originally posted by drake262 DTD
Originally posted by Mr Sinister
I am not reading the whole thread. but if I get this right, now you're telling us we need to choose what specific position our players are going to be when we make them? Say I make an OT, now I have to decide if he's going to be a pass blocker, or a run blocker. You going to have the OT1, and OT2 spots on the specific depth chart for this, or are we going to be screwed if we pass and have a run blocker in there?
So let me see, then I make a LB, he has to be made position specific, as a LOLB, MLB, or ROLB. Then a run stuffer, or a coverage specialist, or a blitzer....
This is dumb. what if I decided I wanted to change him, and make him go from being a LOLB, to a ROLB? I have to start all over again.... Oh, I get it now, make them use up more flex, so they spend more money on the game. Now I get it, make them spend their hard earned cash as fast as you can.
The reason is players can't just change in real football. I know this isn't the NFL, but when Peyton Manning came out of college, he was a passing QB. Later on down his career, he can't just be like "I feel like rushing more, so I'm going to get faster."
I've seen players in the NFL move from DE to LB, I've seen LGs move to RG. It happens all the time. No the reason is you want the cash.
A skills player doesn't change his position as often, but it does happen, look at Kordell Stewert, or any other QB who moved to a TE, or WR when getting out of college.
The idea is to take people and make it so they have no choice in what their players do. You build it, and you are stuck with it, unless you decide to retire him and start over. Or in other words, buy more flex.
This is just a shallow attempt to get people to look at something fancy, and say wow, I need that, and they will buy more flex in the long run.... Nothing more.
Originally posted by Mr Sinister
I am not reading the whole thread. but if I get this right, now you're telling us we need to choose what specific position our players are going to be when we make them? Say I make an OT, now I have to decide if he's going to be a pass blocker, or a run blocker. You going to have the OT1, and OT2 spots on the specific depth chart for this, or are we going to be screwed if we pass and have a run blocker in there?
So let me see, then I make a LB, he has to be made position specific, as a LOLB, MLB, or ROLB. Then a run stuffer, or a coverage specialist, or a blitzer....
This is dumb. what if I decided I wanted to change him, and make him go from being a LOLB, to a ROLB? I have to start all over again.... Oh, I get it now, make them use up more flex, so they spend more money on the game. Now I get it, make them spend their hard earned cash as fast as you can.
The reason is players can't just change in real football. I know this isn't the NFL, but when Peyton Manning came out of college, he was a passing QB. Later on down his career, he can't just be like "I feel like rushing more, so I'm going to get faster."
I've seen players in the NFL move from DE to LB, I've seen LGs move to RG. It happens all the time. No the reason is you want the cash.
A skills player doesn't change his position as often, but it does happen, look at Kordell Stewert, or any other QB who moved to a TE, or WR when getting out of college.
The idea is to take people and make it so they have no choice in what their players do. You build it, and you are stuck with it, unless you decide to retire him and start over. Or in other words, buy more flex.
This is just a shallow attempt to get people to look at something fancy, and say wow, I need that, and they will buy more flex in the long run.... Nothing more.
Originally posted by Bambam3376
No but a hard hitting LB and still be a good coverage guy
But he is known for being a hard hitter. Why would he, later in his career, try and be a coverage LB?
Your hard hitting LB will still be able to cover. Like said above, he won't fail hard if he drops back to cover someone.
No but a hard hitting LB and still be a good coverage guy
But he is known for being a hard hitter. Why would he, later in his career, try and be a coverage LB?
Your hard hitting LB will still be able to cover. Like said above, he won't fail hard if he drops back to cover someone.
Originally posted by Bambam3376
Originally posted by drake262 DTD
The reason is players can't just change in real football. I know this isn't the NFL, but when Peyton Manning came out of college, he was a passing QB. Later on down his career, he can't just be like "I feel like rushing more, so I'm going to get faster."
No but a hard hitting LB and still be a good coverage guy
And under the new system, this happens. You can have a hard hitting archetype still be a great coverage guy.
Originally posted by drake262 DTD
The reason is players can't just change in real football. I know this isn't the NFL, but when Peyton Manning came out of college, he was a passing QB. Later on down his career, he can't just be like "I feel like rushing more, so I'm going to get faster."
No but a hard hitting LB and still be a good coverage guy
And under the new system, this happens. You can have a hard hitting archetype still be a great coverage guy.
footballisgod
offline
offline
I haven't read through all 17 pages, but what is the definitive way to ensure that all archetypes will be successful? Each one has to have legitimate enough drawbacks to make it like an actual selection.
While I don't want to have my Zone DB to only be good in Zone, he needs to be significantly enough better than a Man DB to make it worth choosing Zone. And I'm just using that as an example, but it holds true for all positions. It just seems to me like there are going to be major, major changes to the sim to make the work properly. Which is fine, doesn't bother me at all. But will that be done before the archetypes are fully rolled out? Or is everything going to be a retroactive response instead of proactive ones?
While I don't want to have my Zone DB to only be good in Zone, he needs to be significantly enough better than a Man DB to make it worth choosing Zone. And I'm just using that as an example, but it holds true for all positions. It just seems to me like there are going to be major, major changes to the sim to make the work properly. Which is fine, doesn't bother me at all. But will that be done before the archetypes are fully rolled out? Or is everything going to be a retroactive response instead of proactive ones?
Catch22
offline
offline
Originally posted by B2ThaJ
Is there really not gonna be a poll on this?
Pretty sure that's what I said. Sorry to disappoint you.
Is there really not gonna be a poll on this?
Pretty sure that's what I said. Sorry to disappoint you.
Dustin Diamond
offline
offline
Originally posted by Catch22
No, you'll be able to select an archetype for him at the beginning of next season.
but if the ALGs are better you will be much better off starting over.
No, you'll be able to select an archetype for him at the beginning of next season.
but if the ALGs are better you will be much better off starting over.
Meatdawg
offline
offline
The major drawback I saw when I first saw this proposal is that it would kill letting people choose there own path.
I was really against it at first, but if you really look at all the builds, you can pretty much do whatever build you want to. This will also help steer so many people in the correct direction when making players.
I was really against it at first, but if you really look at all the builds, you can pretty much do whatever build you want to. This will also help steer so many people in the correct direction when making players.
B2ThaJ
offline
offline
Originally posted by Deathblade
I know it's not what you had in mind, but here's a pole.
http://i50.tinypic.com/33lnz9j.jpg
Cool story bro
I know it's not what you had in mind, but here's a pole.
http://i50.tinypic.com/33lnz9j.jpg
Cool story bro
Dpride59
offline
offline
Originally posted by Kayoh
How about just Str, Carry, and Agi? .67 per level?
haha, I wish, that would be awesome. Building players is my favorite thing to do. I mean I would love to have a 95 natural str/85 natural carry back, and then dump all my equip into speed take to 80 natural, get 3 pieces of break tackle chance, and take the oop hit on spin and go 10 pt 10 spin 65% break tackle with like 125 speed 95 str 85 carry, and 77 agility.
Too bad it would be freaking Op'ed and we would have hb's crushing nt's. lol.
How about just Str, Carry, and Agi? .67 per level?
haha, I wish, that would be awesome. Building players is my favorite thing to do. I mean I would love to have a 95 natural str/85 natural carry back, and then dump all my equip into speed take to 80 natural, get 3 pieces of break tackle chance, and take the oop hit on spin and go 10 pt 10 spin 65% break tackle with like 125 speed 95 str 85 carry, and 77 agility.
Too bad it would be freaking Op'ed and we would have hb's crushing nt's. lol.
Originally posted by Bambam3376
No but a hard hitting LB and still be a good coverage guy
and here - a hard hitting LB who is built well - will also be a good cover guy (and likely a decent blitzer)
dont' get caught up in the label - look at the majors and minors and recognize that you'll still be building that player with skill points...
No but a hard hitting LB and still be a good coverage guy
and here - a hard hitting LB who is built well - will also be a good cover guy (and likely a decent blitzer)
dont' get caught up in the label - look at the majors and minors and recognize that you'll still be building that player with skill points...
Bambam3376
offline
offline
Originally posted by Catch22
Exactly. The archetypes are labels with specific ALG's/bonuses/penalties. You can very well pick an archetype and have your player do the exact opposite of what the archetype is labeled.
But why would you if your going to get penalties
Exactly. The archetypes are labels with specific ALG's/bonuses/penalties. You can very well pick an archetype and have your player do the exact opposite of what the archetype is labeled.
But why would you if your going to get penalties
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
