Warrior General Games

Originally posted by lardaddy
over/under on number of games played before Oden goes down w/ an injury?

*sigh*

10

Originally posted by Catch22
Wouldn't be a hard cap on attributes, would be a cap on the number of points you could put into an attribute via EQ.

And no it would not be voted on. If we think something needs to be done to improve the game, we're going to do it.

ooof, i hope there is a fair amount of open discussion about this before it happens.

Once you start limiting how someone can construct their build, a lot of min maxers are going to be pissed. Makes a lot more sense to increase the relative worth of secondary attributes in order to force min maxers to think harder about what they are losing/risking.... giving them more to sacrifice by neglecting secondaries rather than flat out limit how min/max they can go

EQ and attrib capping really are the same thing

Originally posted by TrevJo
Any chance of adding offseason scrimmages against other teams? I realize teams won't always have a full roster, but it would really be nice to be able to work on things in the offseason when there is nothing else to do, and before the hectic preseason begins.

sim servers often have hodgepodge code or are offline for changes. Maybe I could leave one up though; I'll think about it.

Originally posted by Bort
I really think the main thing that would need a change is velocity being an inverse exponential curve instead of linear.

That should work as well. Just that with archetypes and new training system we're going to see some insane att scores that are game-breaking while the secondaries are ignored because, right now at least, they don't appear to affect the overall performance as much as they possibly should.

QB AI targeting:

If a 6'5 WR is covered by a 5'10 CB wil the QB "see" him as more open than if he were covered by a 6'3 CB? If yes, then will he attempt to throw the ball higher, so that the shorter defender has worse Deflection/Int rolls?

Does the QB have any way of knowing an archetype of a defender and adjusting for it... like maybe a Returner CB in as the CB5 might be more susceptible to pump fakes, or maybe the QB shouldn't lay a WR out over the middle when a HH safety is around? -- Players do have reputations and tendencies ect IRL...

Originally posted by Kotoll
Saw a small comment about league structures. We are still getting tons of teams gaming the system. As a paying customer that boost all his dots it feel like we're getting griefed. (A MMO term for players that do nothing else but exploit a game weakness.)

I don't mind agents that don't boost and play the game. But it does seem like a larger part of that community is griefing and doing whatever they can to be in a position of power and not on equal ground.

Is there a plan to help the more invested agents of the game and maybe a better system to help new players enjoy the game? Because right now it seems to be getting worse each season and for new players this has to be a major turnoff. I mean who wants to pay and spend 6-9 months getting beat by teams they have no chance against.

If you have teams gaming the system, I highly encourage you to contact Support or myself and we will look into it.

2 questions , thanks.

Which procedure overrides the other , player tactics(slider) or the tactics set by the Coord ?

And what exactly is the purpose of the player(agent) having the option if the AI is the override ?

Originally posted by Catch22
And capping the number of points you can put into an attribute via EQ will help do that. It's somewhat ridiculous that you can put up to 58 points into an attribute from EQ alone. It's an issue we've considered for a long time and one we are evaluating even more with the new training system. It also doesn't mean we're going to do it - we're DISCUSSING it.

I understand that you are only in discussion. I'm not one of those agents who thinks you just throw a dart at a wheel and that is your future GLB change. I actually respect how you guys put thought into your game changes.

My point is that you're choosing between one method that allows more choices, but with different costs, versus a method that forces some build aspects. Putting a cap on how much EQ can go into an attribute will force agents to go certain routes. Allowing them to choose in a cost/benefit scenario will open up build variability. You just have to prevent the super-extreme builds from being so effective in their choice of strengths that they can exploit the sim. That is where changing the deviations comes in. This might be a moot point, however. To just go with speed as an example (since that is the attribute most at issue), most elite man coverage CBs in the future will have around 140 speed and most hard hitters will have around 125-130 speed. If that 140 speed is enough to keep up decently with 160-170 speed WRs, then all is good. If those 160-170 speed WRs will break a guaranteed 1-2 TDs per game, then changing the difference between those speeds might be needed. This doesn't mean that you should use diminishing returns, but that you should shrink the range of possible speeds, so that higher speed will mean something, but not so much that it is exploitable.

Originally posted by Bort
Doesn't work with the current sim code. Not high on my list to get working really. I agree it would be cool though.

Understand. Thanks

Originally posted by PrizzlePulse
Question(Bort): Is there any plans to have improvements at other admin positions and communication, as I see since Corndog guy was hired, production has increased. But there are still admins that don't do the job right, is there any plan in place in the future to replace such admins with ones that can help GLB become a better game?(And same question, but for mods).

I think job performance evaluation is between us and the employee.

I really think the main thing that would need a change is velocity being an inverse exponential curve instead of linear.

What?

Originally posted by F8n4tune
2 questions , thanks.

Which procedure overrides the other , player tactics(slider) or the tactics set by the Coord ?

And what exactly is the purpose of the player(agent) having the option if the AI is the override ?

Coordinator first. The only one I can really think of that overlaps is coverage distance, though...and the coverage distance ADDS to whatever the coord set up.

Originally posted by Dr. E
I really think the main thing that would need a change is velocity being an inverse exponential curve instead of linear.

What?

Make speed give less and less gains to max velocity the higher it gets.

Originally posted by Longhornfan1024
Originally posted by Catch22

And capping the number of points you can put into an attribute via EQ will help do that. It's somewhat ridiculous that you can put up to 58 points into an attribute from EQ alone. It's an issue we've considered for a long time and one we are evaluating even more with the new training system. It also doesn't mean we're going to do it - we're DISCUSSING it.

I understand that you are only in discussion. I'm not one of those agents who thinks you just throw a dart at a wheel and that is your future GLB change. I actually respect how you guys put thought into your game changes.

My point is that you're choosing between one method that allows more choices, but with different costs, versus a method that forces some build aspects. Putting a cap on how much EQ can go into an attribute will force agents to go certain routes. Allowing them to choose in a cost/benefit scenario will open up build variability. You just have to prevent the super-extreme builds from being so effective in their choice of strengths that they can exploit the sim. That is where changing the deviations comes in. This might be a moot point, however. To just go with speed as an example (since that is the attribute most at issue), most elite man coverage CBs in the future will have around 140 speed and most hard hitters will have around 125-130 speed. If that 140 speed is enough to keep up decently with 160-170 speed WRs, then all is good. If those 160-170 speed WRs will break a guaranteed 1-2 TDs per game, then changing the difference between those speeds might be needed. This doesn't mean that you should use diminishing returns, but that you should shrink the range of possible speeds, so that higher speed will mean something, but not so much that it is exploitable.

yeah I agree with this

CB's are going to be at a distinct disadvantage in the seasons to come because they have to have the builds to defend both the insane speed guys and the possession guys, while the pure speedsters can burn anyone but CB's that go to extremes to keep up with them in speed, leaving them very vulnerable to WR's built in the other direction. makes the offense pretty damn overpowered tbh.

Originally posted by Bort
Make speed give less and less gains to max velocity the higher it gets.


Roseta Stone didn't have that language you had used.