Warrior General Games

Originally posted by jdbolick

Why would you refuse if you aren't intentionally doing something different from what the coordinator wants? In that case, you should be benched.

I went back in the thread and this was the first quote of its type I found. It probably isn't the only one.

It is the above attitude that many owners or coordinators would have, and that is what makes the suggestion toxic.

-10000

+10000 to balance Ken1's -10000.

I think you overstate your case. This would not cause massive issues. And most problems would resolve themselves pretty quickly - idiotic or overbearing owners tend to end up with empty teams or teams full of bad dots. Bad dots tend to end up on teams where the owner is desperate and will take anyone, regardless of whether they will share builds/tactics etc.

It would help all agents who want to be team players, and all co-ordinators/owners. That, I would venture, represents the majority of people playing this game.

Originally posted by Ken1
I went back in the thread and this was the first quote of its type I found. It probably isn't the only one.

JD is saying you'd deserve benching if going rogue. I doubt he's ever benched anyone for anything....

It is the above attitude that many owners or coordinators would have, and that is what makes the suggestion toxic.

You're extrapolating 1 offhand remark to support your contention that MANY owners are waiting to bench your players. Weak.

-10000

I'm still waiting for your list of owners who might bench players. C'mon Ken you've been here as long as I have. Just 2 names ....

Originally posted by Antonine

.................................
It would help all agents who want to be team players, and all co-ordinators/owners. That, I would venture, represents the majority of people playing this game.

Bingo.

Originally posted by Ken1
I went back in the thread and this was the first quote of its type I found. It probably isn't the only one.

It is the above attitude that many owners or coordinators would have, and that is what makes the suggestion toxic.

-10000

Again, I already addressed that concern in the OP... so I'll just quote myself here.

Originally posted by Novus

1.) Isn't this going to lead to team owners forcing everyone on their team to open up their tactics by benching people who don't? Happens all the time with people keeping their builds closed!
Actually, people getting benched over closed builds doesn't happen nearly as often as you think. Check out this thread I posted over on the Goal Line Blitz forum ( http://goallineblitz.com/game/forum_thread.pl?thread_id=4435940 ) where I asked a simple question: how many people here have ever been benched for keeping their builds closed. 67 replies and 2 days later, I've had exactly 2 agents who say they've been benched, two team owners who say they bench closed builds -- and WAY more agents and owners who say they've never had much of a problem with keeping their builds closed.

So, if your fear is that owners are going to force dots to open their tactics because you think owners already do that with builds, guess again. That sort of owner micro-management doesn't happen nearly as much as you think it does.

How about a setting to let their tactics be managed by the ownership. If you don't want to open that up to the team then allow tactics to be viewed. You still need to allow a player wants to keep his cards up, not allow the team to control the tactics, and not show what he is playing. Kind of like when you allow others to see your player's attributes... just reverse.

Then if an owner had a player that will not open the tactics and that is a requirement, then they can treat them like someone who does not close up thier attributes to everyone or just accept the player wants to have last word. When the resigning comes around again, don't resign the player. I still agree the option to view should be there and an option to allow the team ownership to set the tactics on players, if the player so wishes it.

Originally posted by Peaches22
How about a setting to let their tactics be managed by the ownership.


this is NGTH. Best bet is to stick with the suggestion as it is: a setting to allow players to have their tactics viewable if they wish.

While I would also like the option to allow owners to change my dots tactics, simply allowing viewing will solve my issue of quickly verifying how a player is set without the hassle of bothering the agent.
Likewise with my dots on other teams. I can't stay on top of all those forum posts......
I've heard several mentions that player tactics don't matter much and suspect that's a result of the current difficulty in coordinating tactics without lots of unnecessary messaging. It should be no more than click.. click.. see what he's got, and PM/post if a change is warranted.

I am going to minus -1000 this. This is going to become the same as keeping builds closed during recruiting. If I keep my tactics closed during recruiting, nobody will recruit me. And if I sometimes disagree with the tactics of the owner, I don't want them to bench because they can see it. So essentially this will force each player to set tactics according to the owner.

Keep your tactics closed, you don't get recruited. Keep your tactics open but set them to something other than what the owner says, you're 2nd string. And say you do get on a team with closed tactics, but there are 2 players of similar caliber on the depth chart, and the other player has open tactics, then you're automatically the backup. And I know as a former owner and currently HC/everything else, I will not start a player with a closed build, and should this tactic thing come up, I wouldn't start somebody with closed tactics. I'm not the only one either. Some may say they don't but when it comes down to making those tough decisions, it's going to make a difference.

Also, that thread Novus posted to prove people don't get benched due to closed builds is BS. (http://goallineblitz.com/game/forum_thread.pl?thread_id=4435940&page=1) Just take a look at the first page and see how much negative sentiment there is towards closed builds (i.e. not getting recruited). Nothing personal against Novus because I've been on teams where he coached, but this suggestion is only going to lead to the owner's controlling more and more.

Originally posted by dbreeze
I'm still waiting for your list of owners who might bench players. C'mon Ken you've been here as long as I have. Just 2 names ....


I don't want to name names because I don't want to get someone personally pissed off at me for no reason (personally "What an asshole" pissed as opposed to "I strongly disagree with his opinions" pissed). I did something similar by providing a quote of someone suggesting he would bench players who don't follow team-defined tactics.

i think that there is a reason that so many now only play with people they know. i've been on teams where players were benched because they didnt have open builds, or they weren't building exactly as told. to think that there isnt a large number of owners/GMs that would bench a player for not sharing tactics is extremely naive.

Big thing to note- When this suggestion was started (2010), being benched might have been a significant issue. Now it is not an issue other than perhaps being bored for some period of time. So let me try to comfort those who fear the mighty benching.

1. It's rare a team will, to use an old saying, cut off their nose to spite their face. Benching a player can be very detrimental to a teams performance as they have now one or more fewer players splitting the play time for positions. Especially if it's a position that is somewhat required for the team to function- HB's, returners, p/k, QB etc. You might get stuck into ST, or something else but being benched hurts a team much more than it hurts a player (unless your player is so awful that your team improves by them not using you). If one side or the other is so disagreeable that things have to go to the point of someone being removed from depth then it's better to find this out and get on a different team.

2. You get XP now just being on a team. You do not have to play a single down all season as long as you are on a team. Being cut would actually be more detrimental to a players development (assuming you do not bother to pick up another team or log on enough to notice you aren't on a team anymore). So that aspect of being benched as a punishment is right out the window. Again all a team does by leaving you is them spending money to keep you, for no value, while you continue to train and level up.

3. If you are left off the depth chart for a period of time and it is just bothering you to get the ability to train and level up without getting game stats, contact support. They are supposed to be able to deal with those situations.

If a team/owner wants to hurt you because they are jerks and demand you share information that could help them game plan and give the team overall a better experience by being able to compare game results to player tactics, then sign 1 season contracts, and if they do bench you for part of a season because they are too dumb to take the 2 chem hit by cutting you (or it's the playoffs) then don't renew the contract at the end of the season and find another team. Believe me there are far more teams in every level looking for players than there are players (cept maybe QB's and HB's).

As i said, a team is much better off cutting you, in which case you can find a new team, even a CPU team, for the remainder of the season and sign with someone else the next season.

All great points and well put Alindyl. I'm getting tired of this and will put it another way.....

It amazes me how utterly self-centered a few GLBer's can be. Everyone does realize that for 400 flex you can buy and run your own team, right? Exactly how you want to... Why in hell would someone come to a team based sport and then expect to do only what they want regardless of how it affects others? I'll wager a nickel to a dollar that if any of these kids had their own team they'd be exactly that kind of owner that they claim to fear. That's why they fear it. Deep down, they know what they'd do......
Children.......
Children dictating what the rest of us can do with our own dots because of their fear and inability to deal with it.
Is there not an individual-based MMORPG somewhere you "mavericks" can go to to exercise your freedom and ability to do as you wish without degrading the experience for everyone else who came to play a team sport? Oh.... that's right, you're nothing without an unsuspecting, supporting team to carry your childish ass along for a while.....

Sometimes I just get fed up with the dumb shit around here..........

What's it going to be Bort? Continue catering to the needs of a few scared children? Or can we get on with making this the ultimate virtual American Football MMORPG available?
I'll ask this again, where in real football does a player get to go on the field and just ignore the teams' needs and just do as he wishes for more than about 2 plays?

explaining why it is stupid for teams to bench players is irrelevant. we all know that it happens now, and this would make it happen more often and usually to the newer members of the community. those new bored agents arent likely to stick around long enough to find out that they had simply signed with a jackass of a owner.

if you dont think it will be a big deal, create 10 players next season, sign with 10 owners that you know nothing about, and leave their builds closed all season and see how many of them are starters by the end of the season. the stupidest part of glb is how many will judge a player solely by build and not the performance on the field.

Originally posted by dbreeze
All great points and well put Alindyl. I'm getting tired of this and will put it another way.....

It amazes me how utterly self-centered a few GLBer's can be. Everyone does realize that for 400 flex you can buy and run your own team, right? Exactly how you want to... Why in hell would someone come to a team based sport and then expect to do only what they want regardless of how it affects others? I'll wager a nickel to a dollar that if any of these kids had their own team they'd be exactly that kind of owner that they claim to fear. That's why they fear it. Deep down, they know what they'd do......
Children.......
Children dictating what the rest of us can do with our own dots because of their fear and inability to deal with it.
Is there not an individual-based MMORPG somewhere you "mavericks" can go to to exercise your freedom and ability to do as you wish without degrading the experience for everyone else who came to play a team sport? Oh.... that's right, you're nothing without an unsuspecting, supporting team to carry your childish ass along for a while.....

Sometimes I just get fed up with the dumb shit around here..........

What's it going to be Bort? Continue catering to the needs of a few scared children? Or can we get on with making this the ultimate virtual American Football MMORPG available?
I'll ask this again, where in real football does a player get to go on the field and just ignore the teams' needs and just do as he wishes for more than about 2 plays?

and when one cant win an argument thru logic, resort to name calling. btw, players cost a helluva lot more than owning the team so some owner who doesnt have a clue can tell a power back to set their running style to elusive, or a zone built cb to play man. if you want 100% control over all the players on a team, build your own damn players.

You haven't even been following the thread. All of your imagined issues have already been addressed ad nauseum.
You haven't checked my background before making accusations but I can see that you've boosted only maybe a half dozen dots to completion for as long as you've been in the game. A page full of lolGM teams.....
Go away kid. Your fear of boogeymen is gettin' in my way. If you can't handle the big boy games then go find a nursery to play in.