I get it happening once by accident, but multiple people are leaving one of the 'e's out of the word archetype. http://youtu.be/llgY3VBwTAo
Forum > Goal Line Blitz > GLB 2 Archtypes
Originally posted by Corndog
Not everybody builds min/max players.
They won't in the beginning. If the min/max players are clearly superior then the formula will be shared and they will become the norm.
I hope I'm wrong because I really like the idea behind the player building setup. I just worry that it will cause issues several seasons down the line when it will be hard to correct.
Not everybody builds min/max players.
They won't in the beginning. If the min/max players are clearly superior then the formula will be shared and they will become the norm.
I hope I'm wrong because I really like the idea behind the player building setup. I just worry that it will cause issues several seasons down the line when it will be hard to correct.
bhall43
offline
offline
Originally posted by AirMcMVP
But when everyone builds min/max players we're suddenly left with teams that can't carry a "complete" roster of 43. That means less bots built which means less revenue for the game.
Pretty sure we have done enough testing to know you don't need a full 43 sprite roster to win. That is just the cap.
Talking from a revenue standpoint only holds water for agents that create full teams themselves. To which point they shouldn't give two hoots about the way it is.
But when everyone builds min/max players we're suddenly left with teams that can't carry a "complete" roster of 43. That means less bots built which means less revenue for the game.
Pretty sure we have done enough testing to know you don't need a full 43 sprite roster to win. That is just the cap.
Talking from a revenue standpoint only holds water for agents that create full teams themselves. To which point they shouldn't give two hoots about the way it is.
Time Trial
offline
offline
Originally posted by AirMcMVP
Salary is one of three values. High, medium, or low. It can be difficult to fill a roster at medium salary if traits aren't just right. The majority of bots will have a medium salary with some low salaries in certain roles if traits make it necessary.
A bot at a position (and at an age) has a base salary of X (so QBs cost >>> Cs, Vets >>> rookies).
The base salary is then modified based on the traits that are chosen. The better the traits that you choose, the more your base salary is increased, though inexplicably some good traits have no increase and all of the terrible traits have 0 decrease.
Once you determine the new base salary after traits, you can offer a high, medium, or low contract.
All details regarding contracts are on the team roster page, including type of contract and $$$s paid.
Most teams will stick to the medium contracts because the penalties are too great for low and the bonuses too marginal for high.
Salary is one of three values. High, medium, or low. It can be difficult to fill a roster at medium salary if traits aren't just right. The majority of bots will have a medium salary with some low salaries in certain roles if traits make it necessary.
A bot at a position (and at an age) has a base salary of X (so QBs cost >>> Cs, Vets >>> rookies).
The base salary is then modified based on the traits that are chosen. The better the traits that you choose, the more your base salary is increased, though inexplicably some good traits have no increase and all of the terrible traits have 0 decrease.
Once you determine the new base salary after traits, you can offer a high, medium, or low contract.
All details regarding contracts are on the team roster page, including type of contract and $$$s paid.
Most teams will stick to the medium contracts because the penalties are too great for low and the bonuses too marginal for high.
Time Trial
offline
offline
Originally posted by euchrid
I get it happening once by accident, but multiple people are leaving one of the 'e's out of the word archetype. http://youtu.be/llgY3VBwTAo
Because e'ryone just called them "Arches", which was shortened to "Archs".
I get it happening once by accident, but multiple people are leaving one of the 'e's out of the word archetype. http://youtu.be/llgY3VBwTAo
Because e'ryone just called them "Arches", which was shortened to "Archs".
Originally posted by AirMcMVP
They won't in the beginning. If the min/max players are clearly superior then the formula will be shared and they will become the norm.
If rosters can't handle min/max'd players, it won't become the norm.
If they can, then it isn't a problem.
They won't in the beginning. If the min/max players are clearly superior then the formula will be shared and they will become the norm.
If rosters can't handle min/max'd players, it won't become the norm.
If they can, then it isn't a problem.
If "The better the traits that you choose, the more your base salary is increased"
Can a high trait bot accept a low contract, or do you have to hire it with a predetermined wage?
Can a high trait bot accept a low contract, or do you have to hire it with a predetermined wage?
Time Trial
offline
offline
Originally posted by Corndog
Everyone was always going to pick the best traits.
Adding a penalty to receiving skills on a rushing HB isn't really a counterbalance.
It's expected that most people will take the mutually exclusive top tier traits...that isn't really a knowledge bomb, they were designed with that in mind. At least with a salary increase attached to them, the "min/max" players actually cost more than the average joe.
You put yourself in charge of the task of balancing them. There didn't used to be any traits that had all positives and no negatives, you added those yourself.
The whole object of the "balancing" of the traits was to actually make fewer "obvious" choices, which led to more diversity. Now when I pick, I hate so many of the choices because they either provide no boost, or they increase the cost of the bot.
Everyone was always going to pick the best traits.
Adding a penalty to receiving skills on a rushing HB isn't really a counterbalance.
It's expected that most people will take the mutually exclusive top tier traits...that isn't really a knowledge bomb, they were designed with that in mind. At least with a salary increase attached to them, the "min/max" players actually cost more than the average joe.
You put yourself in charge of the task of balancing them. There didn't used to be any traits that had all positives and no negatives, you added those yourself.
The whole object of the "balancing" of the traits was to actually make fewer "obvious" choices, which led to more diversity. Now when I pick, I hate so many of the choices because they either provide no boost, or they increase the cost of the bot.
Originally posted by BadBuc99
If "The better the traits that you choose, the more your base salary is increased"
Can a high trait bot accept a low contract, or do you have to hire it with a predetermined wage?
Any player can accept a low contract.
It's just 87.5% of what their normal contract would be.
If "The better the traits that you choose, the more your base salary is increased"
Can a high trait bot accept a low contract, or do you have to hire it with a predetermined wage?
Any player can accept a low contract.
It's just 87.5% of what their normal contract would be.
Time Trial
offline
offline
Originally posted by BadBuc99
If "The better the traits that you choose, the more your base salary is increased"
Can a high trait bot accept a low contract, or do you have to hire it with a predetermined wage?
They can accept a low contract, but it will be more $$$$ than the low contract for another trait combination. The penalty for choosing low contract is significant.
If "The better the traits that you choose, the more your base salary is increased"
Can a high trait bot accept a low contract, or do you have to hire it with a predetermined wage?
They can accept a low contract, but it will be more $$$$ than the low contract for another trait combination. The penalty for choosing low contract is significant.
Originally posted by bhall43
Pretty sure we have done enough testing to know you don't need a full 43 sprite roster to win. That is just the cap.
Talking from a revenue standpoint only holds water for agents that create full teams themselves. To which point they shouldn't give two hoots about the way it is.
As it stands now, sure. You can carry less than 43 and win. I seem to remember a post about wanting to change the effect of low energy on play (I could be wrong). If/when that happens then 43 players will be necessary.
As for revenue, its in the game's best interest to have maxed rosters (which is why energy would be corrected).
Pretty sure we have done enough testing to know you don't need a full 43 sprite roster to win. That is just the cap.
Talking from a revenue standpoint only holds water for agents that create full teams themselves. To which point they shouldn't give two hoots about the way it is.
As it stands now, sure. You can carry less than 43 and win. I seem to remember a post about wanting to change the effect of low energy on play (I could be wrong). If/when that happens then 43 players will be necessary.
As for revenue, its in the game's best interest to have maxed rosters (which is why energy would be corrected).
Originally posted by euchrid
I get it happening once by accident, but multiple people are leaving one of the 'e's out of the word archetype. http://youtu.be/llgY3VBwTAo
I'd say it's just Americans doing what they do best, 'dumbing down' the English language. But I'm thinking you are an American, so maybe it's just an educational thing.
USA! USA!
doobas™
I get it happening once by accident, but multiple people are leaving one of the 'e's out of the word archetype. http://youtu.be/llgY3VBwTAo
I'd say it's just Americans doing what they do best, 'dumbing down' the English language. But I'm thinking you are an American, so maybe it's just an educational thing.
USA! USA!
doobas™
Originally posted by Time Trial
There didn't used to be any traits that had all positives and no negatives
No, a penalty to receiving skills that you can ignore, with bonuses to rushing, on an HB with no other counterbalances is completely "all positive with no negatives".
Salary is a negative. The fact that you "hate all the choices" pretty much proves that there is no clear winner.
There didn't used to be any traits that had all positives and no negatives
No, a penalty to receiving skills that you can ignore, with bonuses to rushing, on an HB with no other counterbalances is completely "all positive with no negatives".
Salary is a negative. The fact that you "hate all the choices" pretty much proves that there is no clear winner.
Originally posted by Corndog
If rosters can't handle min/max'd players, it won't become the norm.
If they can, then it isn't a problem.
Originally posted by bhall43
Pretty sure we have done enough testing to know you don't need a full 43 sprite roster to win. That is just the cap.
I know one is a moderator and one is an admin but this helps make my point.
If rosters can't handle min/max'd players, it won't become the norm.
If they can, then it isn't a problem.
Originally posted by bhall43
Pretty sure we have done enough testing to know you don't need a full 43 sprite roster to win. That is just the cap.
I know one is a moderator and one is an admin but this helps make my point.
Originally posted by Time Trial
They can accept a low contract, but it will be more $$$$ than the low contract for another trait combination. The penalty for choosing low contract is significant.
I think I'm getting the picture here.
There will be a salary cap, and you can only fit so many high contracts into it...but those who are given a low contract have their bot penalized (less effective?)
They can accept a low contract, but it will be more $$$$ than the low contract for another trait combination. The penalty for choosing low contract is significant.
I think I'm getting the picture here.
There will be a salary cap, and you can only fit so many high contracts into it...but those who are given a low contract have their bot penalized (less effective?)
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
