Warrior General Games

Originally posted by yello1
You could have a Blocker Utility VA that pairs HBs FBs and TEs I suppose in addition to the other ones.

i like this and ur other post

Originally posted by xhail2skinsx
i agree with this, but maybe they could group it so it's only available when changing to certain positions

QB - n/a
RB- WR, FB
WR- TE
TE- WR, FB
G - T, C
C - G
T - G, C

DE - LB, DT
DT - DE
LB - DE, CB
CB - SS, FS
SS- FS, CB
FS- SS, CB

If it was something like this I could see it being useful without gaming the system

+1

Originally posted by bigtisme
I'd be more worried about FB>HB (to save flex) than something like DT to HB

Yeah, could limit to only working for so many plays per game or percentage of his plays to get around that. A human would eventually take a big time stamina drain playing out of position every play. Or even could limit it to equivalent flex position.

Originally posted by smokinbluegrass
Yeah, could limit to only working for so many plays per game or percentage of his plays to get around that. A human would eventually take a big time stamina drain playing out of position every play. Or even could limit it to equivalent flex position.

I just dont see GLB letting 200 FP dots like TEs and FBs play the glamour positions with little to no impact on performance.

tbh I actually like the VA outside of that.

someone else suggested this once, it's a good idea, but I wouldn't want to see the bonus so good that it makes the OOP player equal to those of the correct position.

Originally posted by bigtisme
I just dont see GLB letting 200 FP dots like TEs and FBs play the glamour positions with little to no impact on performance.

tbh I actually like the VA outside of that.

Yes, I think we were saying the same thing. 300 flex player could only play a 300 flex position. Same for 200s and 100s. Would let the line guys play similar positions, and keep the FB or TE from being a WR. FB and TE could switch up, still.

Originally posted by bigtisme
I just dont see GLB letting 200 FP dots like TEs and FBs play the glamour positions with little to no impact on performance.

tbh I actually like the VA outside of that.

But there IS an impact to performance

First off its a VA, so its not even available till level 25, and for it to be maxed would take a good deal longer than that.

And, of course, its sucking up one of your four or five VA stacks you get your entire career.

And even if its a 1% OOP penalty when its in full effect, that is still an effect. And then there is the opportunity cost of not have 15 VA in something performance enhancing.

If you limit it to a position type (O line etc) then I think thats cost enough to make it something only some people would do and therefore that would have minimal flex impact on Bort.

And, finally, there is the fact that OOP penalty or not most positions SAs and Majors and Minors and proper build spending do not translate 100 percent. OTs are not built like Gs who are not built quite like Centers either. So if you build your dot proper, he wont be as good in his OOP assignments even with a small OOP penalty. And if you build him to be a jack of all trades he wont be great at any of the positions regardless of OOP.

Originally posted by smokinbluegrass
Yes, I think we were saying the same thing. 300 flex player could only play a 300 flex position. Same for 200s and 100s. Would let the line guys play similar positions, and keep the FB or TE from being a WR. FB and TE could switch up, still.

sweet then yeah I agree with that then.

I'd think, though, you'd still have to limit the number or percentage of plays, or set some sort of stamina drain, though. Since all the D is 200, having an LB line up as an end every play could be an exploit.

Originally posted by bigtisme
I just dont see GLB letting 200 FP dots like TEs and FBs play the glamour positions with little to no impact on performance.

tbh I actually like the VA outside of that.

The problem was turning it into 6%/level (different from early posts ITT), allowing it to give a 90% reduction in the penalty. Make it 3%/level, so that more than half the penalty remains anyway (45% max penalty reduction), and there's still a significant performance impact.

I remember a thread talking about that idea, calling the VA "Adaptable," a name I personally think is better than Utility Player, although the name is obviously less important than the content.

+1 great idea something that would add a bit more variety to the game

Originally posted by TaySC
I would support it, but only if it only worked for similar positions.

In other words, if it reduced the OOP for an OT playing C or scatback playing WR, but not if it allowed for extreme gimmicks like a DT playing HB.



but, i can't get behind a system that would eliminate the fridge perry!

not that in any way we should have a system where DTs are playing every down backs
but maybe you could have a scale with different penalties for different attributes...
say a DT would get a far bigger penalty to speed and vision then say he would in strength playing at RB,
each level of the VA further decreasing those penalties, but not to the point where speed or vision would ever be useful.
that way, you could even get theoretical situations where a NT might be a teams best 3 and inches attempt,
if this team had no power backs to speak of (wasn't that the case w/ the '85 bears?)

now this in no way would allow players that far out of position to be successful on an every down basis,
but it might allow them to be used once or twice a game in special circumstances, which,
imo could make the game more interesting.

plus, as far as TEs and FBs, D-line and O-line go, this is a must VA imo

Originally posted by bigtisme
Originally posted by smokinbluegrass

Yeah, could limit to only working for so many plays per game or percentage of his plays to get around that. A human would eventually take a big time stamina drain playing out of position every play. Or even could limit it to equivalent flex position.

I just dont see GLB letting 200 FP dots like TEs and FBs play the glamour positions with little to no impact on performance.

tbh I actually like the VA outside of that.

This really, I could see a Hback VA for TE/FBs, a wingback or Flanker for RB/WR Olineman VA, a Hybrid VA for DE/DTs or even LBs and a Secondary VA, but anything that would make it possible to for non glamor positions play glamor positions without penalty isn't going to happen.

I dont get it. People are actually going to waste 15 VA's to play a position where another dot is using 15 extra VA's?