Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Octowned
Been toying with the "pass blocker" o-line which a lot of people write off as "LOL NO STRENGTH!!11"

Here, just food for thought...

79 agility (level 13), gains to 100
68 blocking (level 20), gains to 85
49 confidence (after a strength cap, level 25), gains to 65
79 strength (level 39), gains to 84
Speed/vision easily 65 attainable, stamina to 50, standard SAs, blah blah

+42 strength with equip = 126 strength

126 strength
100 agility
85 blocking
65 confidence

That's a build that would be very difficult to achieve today, at least as far as the distribution across the majors, and could be wildly successful down the road

Thanks for posting this

But are you going to implement it halfway through the offseason, without prior notice?? You know how much we love it when you change the game partway through it....

Here comes the cookie cutter players.....

Originally posted by drake262 DTD


Check announcements forum.

You've been pretty facepalm happy in this thread. Though, I don't blame you

Originally posted by quinnqn2
I love the concept. Just make sure that in doing this, 5 or 6 seasons down the line, certain types of archetypes don't become the "Go-to" advantage that everyone has to have to be competitive, while leaving the others worthless to their owners. Most of us with some experience in this game have suffered through building players that work one season and are ineffective the next because the winds of change blew in. That becomes immensely frustrating. It takes the shine off of the entire game when you've put a year into building a player(s) who's attributes suddenly becomes obsolete. And there's nothing worse than scratching around to find the secret sauce to put a band-aid on your previous work. If this concept is to be effective, you need to work out the balance to the different archetypes before presenting them to the masses. But the potential that this possesses to break out of the mold, where only one style of build per position is the right way and everything else pales in effectiveness, is great.

I agree 100%. I said it a couple pages ago, but no real response. This is the only potential downfall of the new system in my eyes.

Originally posted by Husker2

Catch, if you get a chance?


Those all sound like suggestions to me - which is why I didn't answer them. #4 is a valid concern and one we'll definitely be keeping a very close eye on.

Originally posted by beenlurken
Sorry jdros... this was a horrible justification. Why even bother with the archetype then?

why not?

Originally posted by FBGProfessor
Am I the only one who thinks Catch22 is DD in disguise?

I'm WAY too nice to be DD.

Originally posted by Husker2
Catch, if you get a chance?


I don't mean to be a debbie downer, but Catch can't take personal questions/responses to everyone. He'd have 100+ people lined up at his doorstep.

Originally posted by Catch22
I'm WAY too nice to be DD.

i heard dd had a giant neck beard

Originally posted by Deathblade
Why would team sizes increase?

It's no different than it is now, except for ALGs are less awkward.

Just posing the question, that's all. I don't know if it would or not. You can get a fairly diverse team w/about 51-52 players. Team limit is 55. Don't know how you could have multiple players at each position type with all the different builds and stay within 55.

It's a great idea who's time has come. I also think it's explained quite clearly. There's bound to be law of unintended consequences as a result - but cleaning up the ALG's is a huge bonus to the game long term. For those screaming to fix the sim first - this is the biggest fix to the biggest problem in the game. For instance, you can now build an OT who doesn't waste ALG's on Tackling. You can build a FB who gets ALG on speed. etc. etc. This is a huge improvement.


(And yes, I read the whole thread before posting. It can be done.)

why cant FBs be ST returners?? this makes me sad

Originally posted by Daudy
Anarcho isn't saying this new system is "diverse" at all. He's saying that it isn't really, but there are at least some choices.

What he's saying is, if we did get TRUE diversity, all hell would break loose because everyone would choose the same thing anyway (ie whatever works best to create the ultimate player of that position).

Ok, I just don't see what the objective is. The OP did say it would lead to more diversity but Catch22 never explained how and to my knowledge no one in this thread has. The only advantage I have heard is that it is easier for GMs to "tag." Not really sure what that means or how much of an improvement this will be. But as a player, I don't see how this will make the game more fun because there already is very little to do. Will this give us more to do other than pick our original archetype? Once we have picked an archetype how will this give us more to do or how will it make the game more fun?

Originally posted by Daudy
Anarcho isn't saying this new system is "diverse" at all. He's saying that it isn't really, but there are at least some choices.

What he's saying is, if we did get TRUE diversity, all hell would break loose because everyone would choose the same thing anyway (ie whatever works best to create the ultimate player of that position).

This. And I apologize if it seemed like I was attacking. That's not how I meant it.

Originally posted by Kirghiz
It's human nature. It is also human nature to get upset when something new and radically different comes along.

I HATE CHANGE! BURN IT WITH FIRE!