Warrior General Games

Originally posted by jetsown09
This is just not true at all. I would definitely not 7-cap speed before capping any other attribute, like you pretty much are forced to do now with speed HBs, WRs, DBs, even some LBs, TEs, and FBs. Some of the stuff may be similar to the ALG system but we would see much, much, much, much more rounded builds in the lower levels that will STILL BE EFFECTIVE later on!! That will be the key to making the game more fun at the lower levels before Pro/WL, without making end builds suffer!


If you want to build an end game character on any MMO on your first try you are completely delusional. I have friends that play WoW and they spend countless hours out specing the final build of their characters usually after some trial and error with their first builds.

Simplifying the build process won't draw in new users but it would certainly drive away many of the biggest spenders and guys who spend the most time on GLB.

Originally posted by jetsown09
Originally posted by bigtisme

how many times do we have to repeatedly beat to death why removing ALGs wouldn't make a magic fix.

You're right, it wouldn't be a magic fix. But it'd be a step towards a solution.

the only solution it would be a step towards is making newby players not have to put any work into learning how to build players. I for one don't think that is fair I had to spend money to learn how to build dots so should everyone else.

Originally posted by jetsown09
You're right, it wouldn't be a magic fix. But it'd be a step towards a solution.

Solution for what?

Wow, can't believe this is still open considering it's NGTH.

I thought this was a crazy radical idea until I really started thinking about it over the past couple of days. I'm really beginning to think it would be a good idea to completely eliminate ALGs and put a cap on "banked" SP. Here's why:

1) People would no longer be going crazy with maxing one attribute and completely unbalancing their dots. This would make the sim and games fun from day 1, rather than after 4 months. Not only will this help the game be more attractive to new users, it would let us get more fun for our money.
2) There would still be a build process - someone will put together a spreadsheet and figure out the optimal training ranges, etc. All those that want to figure out how to only build for the WL will still be able to do so, though the final differences between their dots and others would be a little less extreme than it is now. A team's worth will probably still make a consequential difference in performance at the top levels of the game, preserving the precious WL supremacy and a reason for networks to still exist.
3) People could experiment with their builds as they grow, without completely making them useless if the sim changes or if their gambit doesn't pan out. Basically, dots could actually adjust without completely obliterating their usefulness.
4) The extra variety could possible make recruiting fun again, rather than the dismal, dreaded chore it is now.

Because of training, there would still be room for the elite to keep themselves elite, but it would allow a hell of a lot more variety and forgiveness for everything else, which will equal more months of fun and more return on our dollars. If you like football, the games themselves, running a team, recruiting, etc. more than checking VPB scripts and plugging numbers in spreadsheets, then I don't see why you would be against this change.

The people who really won't like this, even after seriously thinking about it, are those who want to have a method to follow so that no one can do any better than they in building their dot and then rely on others to put it to use to win a trophy that took no creativity or personalization (save the name, maybe) on the part of the dot creator. Some with extremely well organized networks won't like it, because they will realize that it is the organization of the agents in following the plan that gives them their advantage, not necessarily expertise in the game itself, and that would be diminished without ALGs, which require a very long and disciplined approach to player creation.

To refute a few points made above:
1) everyone has to learn the hard way in these types of games - yeah, but how hard is hard? To learn after spending a fair amount of money and a few months that everything you did was wrong and that doing it the right way means you won't have fun for another 4 months and more money is not a good way to go, IMO.
2) This just makes it easy for those who don't know anything to play - well, do you want the user base to grow? Guess what, if they ain't already playing for a few months, they don't know by definition. See the point immediately above. A large portion of the userbase started when almost no one had figured out the ALG building trick, and most of us had the most fun back then, planning builds to adjust to that season's games! That kept people a hell of a lot more intersted in what was happening with their teams and dots on a day to day basis.

Of course, I'm open to other arguments, as I don't think I've thought of everything yet. But removing ALGs sounds more and more like a good idea for the long-term health and fun of the game to me.

Originally posted by spartan822
Wow, can't believe this is still open considering it's NGTH.

details.

-1

Originally posted by MissingNola

Because of training, there would still be room for the elite to keep themselves elite, but it would allow a hell of a lot more variety and forgiveness for everything else, which will equal more months of fun and more return on our dollars. If you like football, the games themselves, running a team, recruiting, etc. more than checking VPB scripts and plugging numbers in spreadsheets, then I don't see why you would be against this change.

The people who really won't like this, even after seriously thinking about it, are those who want to have a method to follow so that no one can do any better than they in building their dot and then rely on others to put it to use to win a trophy that took no creativity or personalization (save the name, maybe) on the part of the dot creator. Some with extremely well organized networks won't like it, because they will realize that it is the organization of the agents in following the plan that gives them their advantage, not necessarily expertise in the game itself, and that would be diminished without ALGs, which require a very long and disciplined approach to player creation.


Hit it right on the head. The hardcore, network players don't want ALGs to leave because then they'll lose their stronghold on the game. They don't care that the game should grow and be more creative, all they do is build cookie cutter dots according to a super specific build plan. "Fuck the noobs, why should the game grow?" seems to be their mentality.

Originally posted by merenoise
If you want to build an end game character on any MMO on your first try you are completely delusional. I have friends that play WoW and they spend countless hours out specing the final build of their characters usually after some trial and error with their first builds.

Simplifying the build process won't draw in new users but it would certainly drive away many of the biggest spenders and guys who spend the most time on GLB.

Yes, they may have had some trial and error with their first WoW characters, but the key thing is that those characters were still VIABLE CHARACTERS. You can just wing it, like millions and millions of WoW players do, and come up with a fun to play, useful character. I made a guy on a trial account, then became a full time player, leveled that guy up, and he still was a very useful player even though he was my very first.

Now take a look at GLB. My very first players were essentially forced into retirement at lvl 20 because I had built them all wrong and they sucked. Why should anybody have to waste money to learn how to play a game? Does that make business sense to you? Essentially new players are wasting money on their first dots as a sort of self-propelled tutorial to dot building. Where in the world have you seen a game force you to pay for a tutorial, and on top of that go through it with little help?

When I put in GTA in my PS3, I didn't have to pay an additional fee and spend a month learning how to play the game. The key to a successful video game, MMO or not, is making it so that all players can join in and easily learn how to play. Catering to the hardcore gamers will only keep GLB in its state of decline.

Originally posted by MissingNola
1) People would no longer be going crazy with maxing one attribute and completely unbalancing their dots. This would make the sim and games fun from day 1, rather than after 4 months. Not only will this help the game be more attractive to new users, it would let us get more fun for our money.


Are you honestly saying that if they did away with ALGs that people would stop maxing one attribute that would make a build unbalanced!?! You think they will magically start putting points into STA or JMP after level 11 or something? The probably is that there is only three attributes that really matter SPD, AGI, & STR, in most cases, and those are going to get pushed whether they are helped by ALGs or not.

Originally posted by MissingNola

1) People would no longer be going crazy with maxing one attribute and completely unbalancing their dots.
2) There would still be a build process - someone will put together a spreadsheet and figure out the optimal training ranges, etc.
3) People could experiment with their builds as they grow, without completely making them useless if the sim changes or if their gambit doesn't pan out. Basically, dots could actually adjust without completely obliterating their usefulness.
4) The extra variety could possible make recruiting fun again, rather than the dismal, dreaded chore it is now.


1) People would still max out the attributes in order, because 2) has already been done, which means 3) is incorrect and 4) loses meaning.

-1 to this suggestion. There have been countless things suggested throughout the years for removing ALGs, and this one is sadly not thought through enough to be considered as a viable solution.

Originally posted by jetsown09
Yes, they may have had some trial and error with their first WoW characters, but the key thing is that those characters were still VIABLE CHARACTERS. You can just wing it, like millions and millions of WoW players do, and come up with a fun to play, useful character. I made a guy on a trial account, then became a full time player, leveled that guy up, and he still was a very useful player even though he was my very first.

Now take a look at GLB. My very first players were essentially forced into retirement at lvl 20 because I had built them all wrong and they sucked. Why should anybody have to waste money to learn how to play a game? Does that make business sense to you? Essentially new players are wasting money on their first dots as a sort of self-propelled tutorial to dot building. Where in the world have you seen a game force you to pay for a tutorial, and on top of that go through it with little help?

When I put in GTA in my PS3, I didn't have to pay an additional fee and spend a month learning how to play the game. The key to a successful video game, MMO or not, is making it so that all players can join in and easily learn how to play. Catering to the hardcore gamers will only keep GLB in its state of decline.

You have a free slot now, you don't need pay to learn.