Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Disastermaster
not true
http://goallineblitz.com/game/team.pl?team_id=624

you just need to have good enough dots, just keep your normal equipment up to date, spending VP where it make sense at your level and using plays that are working well at the level you are playing. Than you can beat teams in the win right now modus at all levels witout investing time in gameplanning. I only really gameplanned for one game, the WL playin game.

Ya, but you are awesome. Vlady is a little less awesome.

Originally posted by Disastermaster
Originally posted by vladykins

Tying this only to networks is ridiculous. Even the "independent" teams I've ever been on don't take things seriously until near PLs- it's partially because if you are building for the future, the unbalanced builds do too many quirky things to worry about what they will do. Somebody who wants to win low levels just gets everyone to balance their build, add lots of stamina early on, and they can win with a little gameplanning. The teams that win like this basically sacrifice their future build though.

not true
http://goallineblitz.com/game/team.pl?team_id=624

you just need to have good enough dots, just keep your normal equipment up to date, spending VP where it make sense at your level and using plays that are working well at the level you are playing. Than you can beat teams in the win right now modus at all levels witout investing time in gameplanning. I only really gameplanned for one game, the WL playin game.

Sounds like you put cares in prior to PL, so my guess is you've made my point. Most people don't worry about the lower levels, so all it takes is someone with a few cares to win it. Most teams are phoning it in prior to PL, not just networks. Thus, my point of blaming networks being silly.

You've also pointed out that a "network team" won things at lower levels, which still counters PotO's "networks kill it" argument.

Originally posted by Husker2


Ya, but you are awesome. Vlady is a little less awesome.

I don't have just some awe, I am ful of aw.

Originally posted by AirMcMVP
I've been in multiple networks and usually fill about half my needs from outside the network, tbh. In my experience networks are great for getting commitments to build dots for new teams but free agents aren't as common. I know some networks are different and feeder networks are a whole different conversation.

If you build good dots (which it appears you do), you're dots will be in demand. Well, unless you build QBs and don't have a home lined up for them.

I don't have "trouble" finding teams, its just not as fun. I used to have threads of top 10 teams on my FAs list(out of 50+) and would do a sort of "elimination" style shenanigans in the threads before finally signing with one.

Now, I get interest from maybe 10 teams total...7 of which are complete shit.

Originally posted by vladykins
Sounds like you put cares in prior to PL, so my guess is you've made my point. Most people don't worry about the lower levels, so all it takes is someone with a few cares to win it. Most teams are phoning it in prior to PL, not just networks. Thus, my point of blaming networks being silly.

You've also pointed out that a "network team" won things at lower levels, which still counters PotO's "networks kill it" argument.

If you define upgrading normal equipment, spending VP and using AI´s that make sense as care, than I cared. Always had tons of SP. VP and AEQ not used and never really gameplanned except for the one game that counted.

But your argumeent was that it make no sense to even put a little bit care in it as you dont have a chance to beat the win now teams and winning at lower levels will sacrifice your future and thats not true.

Grizzlies are not a network team, they are a standalone right from the start.

Originally posted by Disastermaster
Originally posted by vladykins

Sounds like you put cares in prior to PL, so my guess is you've made my point. Most people don't worry about the lower levels, so all it takes is someone with a few cares to win it. Most teams are phoning it in prior to PL, not just networks. Thus, my point of blaming networks being silly.

You've also pointed out that a "network team" won things at lower levels, which still counters PotO's "networks kill it" argument.

If you define upgrading normal equipment, spending VP and using AI´s that make sense as care, than I cared. Always had tons of SP. VP and AEQ not used and never really gameplanned except for the one game that counted.

But your argumeent was that it make no sense to even put a little bit care in it as you dont have a chance to beat the win now teams and winning at lower levels will sacrifice your future and thats not true.

Grizzlies are not a network team, they are a standalone right from the start.

In the kingdom of the blind, the one eyed man is king. "Putting in plays that work for that level" is more cares than most teams put in sub PL; they tend to throw whatever AI they have from upper levels and let it play out (or don't even load any AI). Many teams have to remind people along the way "Yo- we should probably put some EQ on". Because folks have won golds higher up, shining up a lower level gold is kind of silly to many. Most tend to only focus for tourneys at lower levels, and rarely even then.

And that's why the Grizzlies have Dodel on their avy, because they have no network affiliation whatsoever? That whole "Official Dodel Team" is just a joke you made up to pass the time? Just because a team is built start to finish does not mean it "has no network affiliation".

Originally posted by hokegoalie
Networks killed glb the most for me. I've never joined one and never would really. My players going to free agency back in like season 8 was the most fun I'd have in the game. A bunch of owners pining for my players, a bunch of owners getting crapped on when I turn them down. Now everyone fills holes internally and players like mine are left for the shit box.

But there is no way to remove them sooooo, I'm for the investments I've made previously...if I hadn't spent the pennies I already have, id be gone.

nobody "joins" networks

i love people acting like "networks" are these super secret underground Illuminati groups that you have to perform rituals to be accepted into

"networks" are groups of people that decide to play the game together, not a sacred pact bound by blood

except maybe the addicts, but who the fuck takes them serious?

Originally posted by Deathblade
nobody "joins" networks




join (join)
v. joined, join·ing, joins

1. To put or bring together so as to make continuous or form a unit.
2. To put or bring into close association or relationship.
3. To connect (points), as with a straight line.
4. To meet and merge with.
5. To become a part or member of.

People DEFINITELY "join" networks. To your point, however, who cares... that's part of any game.

Originally posted by qjam6


join (join)
v. joined, join·ing, joins

1. To put or bring together so as to make continuous or form a unit.
2. To put or bring into close association or relationship.
3. To connect (points), as with a straight line.
4. To meet and merge with.
5. To become a part or member of.

People DEFINITELY "join" networks. To your point, however, who cares... that's part of any game.

wat

Originally posted by Deathblade
wat

lolz typical.

Originally posted by qjam6
lolz typical.

wat

The moral of the story for lower leagues is that it is just a myth that building for the future equates to not winning. People who takes the time to win, win. Plain and simple.

Originally posted by bhall43
The moral of the story for lower leagues is that it is just a myth that building for the future equates to not winning. People who takes the time to win, win. Plain and simple.

this is pretty true. my old team was a farm team where basically every dot went to either a top pro team or wl team and we were 1 game away from winning 3 golds in a row.