Warrior General Games

Originally posted by jpjn94


Everyone that tries out GLB v2 will create players and work towards making a Superstar, but after that first season when you qualify to make a Superstar player; won't everyone just retire their players and start their team over so they can have Superstar players on their roster? I mean the first round of teams won't have Superstar players available; why continue on with those teams when the second round of teams will be superior?



Or once my average joe(s) has(have) achieved his usefulness of getting me to the point of earning a superstar, why would I invest flex in the average joes? Maybe I don't retire them but just let them drift until my superstar retires, then retire the lot of them and start over.

Originally posted by hokegoalie
So lowering the flex refund right?

Dope.


You could always log off, since nobody is forcing you to play this game nor will you be required to play the new one.

i look at superstars like qbs in glb. everyone might just make one but not everyone will be able to hold one on their team. people will make regular guys because just like olinemen, punters, kickers...teams will need regular players to make up a team.

hopefully teams arent just handed out willy nilly too so people arent allowed to just buy a team for the sake of holding their superstars and a bunch of cpus.

Originally posted by podger1001
Or once my average joe(s) has(have) achieved his usefulness of getting me to the point of earning a superstar, why would I invest flex in the average joes? Maybe I don't retire them but just let them drift until my superstar retires, then retire the lot of them and start over.


Yeah, that's going to be a reflex response by many to this aspect of the new game. Part of the enjoyment of the original GLB was waking up one day and realizing that your "regular" dot was out-performing his peers, aka "superstar". If you have to "buy" that level of dominance and get a shiny nametag that comes with it, I'm not sure there's going to be any sort of joy that comes with watching the performance.

Originally posted by bhall43
i look at superstars like qbs in glb. everyone might just make one but not everyone will be able to hold one on their team. people will make regular guys because just like olinemen, punters, kickers...teams will need regular players to make up a team.

I gues I hear you. But in GLB1 when I make a non-glory position, that RG could still be one of the best in the game and recognized at the highest level leagues. Now I know that from birth he'll never be more than average. Makes it even less appealing to create him or continue to pour real money into him once he's achieved his real goal of helping me unlock a superstar.

Also, I beleive there will be superstar positions that owner can't afford or don't want. Take QB, you probably won't carry 2 superstars. So now when people unlock that level superstar they'll stop making QBs and make something else instead. So then HB get overstocked and there is no room for them. The math in this game does not appear to work for finding superstars home in terms of salary structure/cap and supply/demand.

In real life, superstars are forced to take salary cuts, players are cut and resigned to nonguaranteed contracts after game one, some are outright cut and never get the same pay they were due. If you are locked into the superstar approach, I'd suggest having a variety of superstar contracts each with different implications. For example you could have a superstar max, average and min contract offer option. Each could have an effect on the player, say +/- to moral or overall attributes or whatever. It would at a minimum help superstars find homes while giving some negotiation flexibility to both the agent and owner for cap reason. Agents could accept the min offer or look eslewhere or perhaps really negotiate with other owners - "I've got another owner willing to pay me average superstar pay. I'd like to play for your team but I need you to up your offer" kind of things.

Will there be League Survivor in 2.0?

Originally posted by Larry Roadgrader

You could always log off, since nobody is forcing you to play this game nor will you be required to play the new one.

yup, p much this.

look, if we are all honest, bort screwed up giving us all 70% flex back on retirement. not only is it a horrible business model, it's not sustainable unless you continue to grow the base of what is basically a niche game (which maybe is the same thing as being horrible). and now we all feel entitled and he's kinda trapped himself.

i think the proper model is subscription-based tiers, if its not already past the point of no return.

pretty sure there are effects to offers of any player. the superstar contracts are just higher. you could probably offer min salary to a ss but that will negatively hurt his chemistry performance. at least that is what i got out of it so far.

Originally posted by bhall43
pretty sure there are effects to offers of any player. the superstar contracts are just higher. you could probably offer min salary to a ss but that will negatively hurt his chemistry performance. at least that is what i got out of it so far.

For superstars can teams offer a range of salary for any given class. I thought from I read it was like if you are a 150 superstar tier the game spit out a required salary (I think adjusted for what skills/attributes/etc you choose in your build), but that once that number was set owners were locked into a take it leave. If superstars can negotiate off their number that would be a good thing.

The first batch of superstars probably won't include a lot of 150 Flex positions, but I guess that remains to be seen.

Originally posted by podger1001
For superstars can teams offer a range of salary for any given class. I thought from I read it was like if you are a 150 superstar tier the game spit out a required salary (I think adjusted for what skills/attributes/etc you choose in your build), but that once that number was set owners were locked into a take it leave. If superstars can negotiate off their number that would be a good thing.

The minimum desired salary is affected by:

1) Position; and
2) Traits.

I posted a few pages back about how some traits will increase the minimum desired salary by X%. Choosing Superstar as a trait currently increases the minimum desired salary by 100%.

That being said, I am paying:

- my Superstar HB a [HIGH] salary of $456,250
- my regular HB a [MEDIUM] salary of $200,000
- my Superstar WR a [MEDIUM] salary of $280,000
- my regular WRs a [MEDIUM] salary between $155,000 and $175,000 (depending on traits)
- my PQB a [MEDIUM] salary of $240,000
- my RQB a [HIGH] salary of $306,250
- my regular DT a [MEDIUM] salary of $145,000
- my Superstar DT a [MEDIUM] salary of $265,000

Originally posted by evileyez
yup, p much this.

look, if we are all honest, bort screwed up giving us all 70% flex back on retirement. not only is it a horrible business model, it's not sustainable unless you continue to grow the base of what is basically a niche game (which maybe is the same thing as being horrible). and now we all feel entitled and he's kinda trapped himself.

i think the proper model is subscription-based tiers, if its not already past the point of no return.

The only way it's not past the point of return is if he can somehow figure out what each flex point is worth, like 5 cents or something....and then he'd have to take a massive hit up front by allowing users to use flex to pay for their subscriptions.

But i could definately see subscrption tiers, all the in game boosting/equipment would be free, but each tier allows you different things, and then charge it out by season or by month.....

Then their could be a big ala carte menu

I think they already said they weren't going with subscriptions.

Originally posted by Time Trial
The first batch of superstars probably won't include a lot of 150 Flex positions, but I guess that remains to be seen.

What has to be done in order to build a superstar?