Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Myd
I'm doubtful that would happen. I think you are missing the point of GLB. You seem to be only looking at the game from a team owner's perspective. The majority of GLB don't own teams and therefore CPU players aren't really an issue.

I see your point. I still think CPU players need to be penalized. I agree some of the teams might have great AI’s in place, but if you look around it is not just one or 2 teams it is a lot that are competitive. This tells me the CPU players need to be toned down a bit.

A team ran and stacked with human players with good builds should never lose to a Human owned team that has the majority filled with CPU players. Human players decline over time CPU players don’t. Seems a bit unfair from my point of view, but you are right I am looking at it as an owner.

Originally posted by Reggie Sanders

A team ran and stacked with human players with good builds should never lose to a Human owned team that has the majority filled with CPU players. Human players decline over time CPU players don’t. Seems a bit unfair from my point of view, but you are right I am looking at it as an owner.


Should never lose? I think they should sometimes lose, if the human-owned team of CPUs carry out a far superior gameplan. Weaker teams beat stronger teams quite often in sport, because of clever coaches.

Originally posted by Reggie Sanders
A team ran and stacked with human players with good builds should never lose to a Human owned team that has the majority filled with CPU players. Human players decline over time CPU players don’t. Seems a bit unfair from my point of view, but you are right I am looking at it as an owner.


I think its more complicated that that. Yes human players decline. But they also retire and get replaced by the next tier of players advancing. CPU players are constantly designed so they are a certain percentage weaker than the opposition. It doesn't matter how old they are. Which leads to the next variable. The opposition. As many have pointed out, there are quite a few human bad builds out there. There are also quite a few bad coordinators out there. There are bad AIs out there. There are AIs that are hindered by agents who don't set their tactics. There are teams that don't bother gameplanning when they see the opposition is mostly or all CPUs. There are teams that use the CPU games to try new AIs whether its to test them out or throw off future opponents from scouting them. The possible reasons behind "human teams" losing to CPU can be extensive.

Originally posted by Guppy, Inc
if a cpu filled team is consistently winning, they probably have some good AIs and the other teams arent taking into account. cpu players still suck in general.

Yep, I've only been beaten by a CPU team one time. That was in a preseason scrim in peewee. The dots on our team hadn't dumped any SP yet so I knew there was a chance we would lose. Outside of that I've never had a problem beating CPUs.

the CPU player thread in GLB main was locked as "game is broken" but there still seems to be an issue...look at this PLAYOFF game

http://goallineblitz.com/game/game.pl?game_id=1879514

Not really sure what you are getting at, tbh.

Just watched the first quarter of that game and my suspicions were confirmed. The pass progressions were fucked up, they continually ran the same few plays, and there's typically not a high success rate when you're throwing to a blocking FB. Their defense was solid and their offense was absolutely horrible.

As I looked over the conference I couldn't help but to notice that it is made up of non-boosters, shit dots, and CPUs for the most part. Anyone that is even half-way trying should win that conference easily.

Originally posted by Dub J
Not really sure what you are getting at, tbh.

I have no connection to either team by the way... guess the point was looking at the matchup

http://goallineblitz.com/game/compare_teams.pl?team1=487&team2=547

no amount of bad game planning should account for a 19-18 final score...just wouldn't happen with human players, why should it happen with CPU players, much less CPU game planning.

To elaborate--I've run a lot of teams with non-boosted dots playing boosted dots, even with the best plans the non-boosted dots can't compete. These CPU dots seem to be much better than non-boosted human dots. If that's the case, anyone who wants to run a whole team is better off using CPU dots than humans, depriving GLB of income (at least 10,000 flex) and can do it better.

Originally posted by fogie55
no amount of bad game planning should account for a 19-18 final score...just wouldn't happen with human players, why should it happen with CPU players, much less CPU game planning.

Trust me, with a non-retarded game plan by a human team the Reapers would have lost by 6 or 7 TDs.

Originally posted by Dub J
Trust me, with a non-retarded game plan by a human team the Reapers would have lost by 6 or 7 TDs.



not with that much of a talent differential.

compare any Reapers game this season to this playoff game, even their regular season game vs Cornwall... something is definitely wrong.

What talent? The conference is absolute shit.

Reapers vs. Brigade week 6 http://goallineblitz.com/game/game.pl?game_id=1842354
Reapers vs. Brigrage 1 round of playoffs http://goallineblitz.com/game/game.pl?game_id=1879514

what accounts for that?

Originally posted by Dub J
What talent? The conference is absolute shit.



that's just it though...they played a lot of non- or semi-boosted teams and killed them, but when playing a CPU team its closer than vs. humans.

Originally posted by fogie55
Reapers vs. Brigade week 6 http://goallineblitz.com/game/game.pl?game_id=1842354
Reapers vs. Brigrage 1 round of playoffs http://goallineblitz.com/game/game.pl?game_id=1879514

what accounts for that?

RNG I suppose. 32 is not a blow out by GLB standards in any sense. All it takes is an unlucky roll or two to completely change the complexion of the sim. Looks like the same extremely shitty offense in both games. The Reapers were fortunate to win both times.