User Pass
Home Sign Up Contact Log In
Page:
 
datongw
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Buccs99
Originally posted by datongw

Originally posted by ddingo


Originally posted by datongw



Originally posted by ddingo




I also understand the feelings of the OP but the GLB problem is the attempt to play follow the leader. People continue to chase the build of the most recent dominant player rather than sticking with the original design plan for their dot.


Yeah, but that's only because everyone wants to win. How many people would stick to their "shitty" builds and wait for Bort to nerf other builds so their builds can be flavor of the month? If builds are proven to be successful (albeit temporarily before Bort nerfs them), people are going to mimic it. Who in their right mind would mimic failures?


C'mon. I'm not suggesting you mimic failures. That much should be obvious. OTOH, I am just tired of the idea that only one build can work for each position. Clearly that is NOT the case. Lincoln has two guys that routinely break 10+ tackles in a game and they have significantly different builds which accomplish similar results on the field.

Smart player building will always give your player an opportunity to play somewhere. Some teams might favor a hyperagility, hyperspeed DE on the strongside of the formation but other teams might like a guy with great strength who allows the LB's to close on the play without getting eaten up by blockers. Some teams want a SS who can lay the wood while others want a guy who is like another CB on the field. Neither build is wrong. The problem is created when the SS dot that is supposed to be a vicious headhunter decides that his build is broken after only 5 seasons of development so he starts chasing another build type.


Who said only one build can work for each position? I certainly didn't.

I have DEs that were started off as strength builds, but switched them to agility builds after 3-4 seasons. Mimicking? Maybe. But I'd like to think I'm adapting.

Besides, what is wrong with mimicking the most dominating builds in the game? I'm pretty sure everyone rather have a dominating build rather than an average one. I certainly didn't create players with the goal of making them "average".


Sounds a lot like my DT. It's another thing that gripes me about this game. Balance of players doesnt work really well. It seems you need to be really dominate with just 1-2 attributes than being very good at everything.


Don't worry, just follow your heart and keep on building them. I've heard that Bort will make balanced players dominate this game in season 9. You've put up with them sucking for 6+ seasons, what's 2 more
 
Buccs99
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by datongw
Originally posted by Buccs99

Originally posted by datongw


Originally posted by ddingo



Originally posted by datongw




Originally posted by ddingo





I also understand the feelings of the OP but the GLB problem is the attempt to play follow the leader. People continue to chase the build of the most recent dominant player rather than sticking with the original design plan for their dot.


Yeah, but that's only because everyone wants to win. How many people would stick to their "shitty" builds and wait for Bort to nerf other builds so their builds can be flavor of the month? If builds are proven to be successful (albeit temporarily before Bort nerfs them), people are going to mimic it. Who in their right mind would mimic failures?


C'mon. I'm not suggesting you mimic failures. That much should be obvious. OTOH, I am just tired of the idea that only one build can work for each position. Clearly that is NOT the case. Lincoln has two guys that routinely break 10+ tackles in a game and they have significantly different builds which accomplish similar results on the field.

Smart player building will always give your player an opportunity to play somewhere. Some teams might favor a hyperagility, hyperspeed DE on the strongside of the formation but other teams might like a guy with great strength who allows the LB's to close on the play without getting eaten up by blockers. Some teams want a SS who can lay the wood while others want a guy who is like another CB on the field. Neither build is wrong. The problem is created when the SS dot that is supposed to be a vicious headhunter decides that his build is broken after only 5 seasons of development so he starts chasing another build type.


Who said only one build can work for each position? I certainly didn't.

I have DEs that were started off as strength builds, but switched them to agility builds after 3-4 seasons. Mimicking? Maybe. But I'd like to think I'm adapting.

Besides, what is wrong with mimicking the most dominating builds in the game? I'm pretty sure everyone rather have a dominating build rather than an average one. I certainly didn't create players with the goal of making them "average".


Sounds a lot like my DT. It's another thing that gripes me about this game. Balance of players doesnt work really well. It seems you need to be really dominate with just 1-2 attributes than being very good at everything.


Don't worry, just follow your heart and keep on building them. I've heard that Bort will make balanced players dominate this game in season 9. You've put up with them sucking for 6+ seasons, what's 2 more


HAHAHAHA
 
Vegas_Bronco
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Galkuris
Originally posted by ddingo


I don't think it was unforeseeable that we would reach a point in gameplay evolution where your dot would consistently miss tackles with only 50-60 in what most people consider to be a critical attribute for a defensive player IRL.


This, I already thought last season that 50 strength and 50 tackling were necessities for LBs with 55/55 being even better. This season it took its natural progression and now the minimum should be 55/55 with 60/60 being ideal.

I told this to a couple teams I was on last season already, those that didn't listen...are struggling pretty badly against Power HBs


Wow - here is what I've been looking for....Thank you Galkuris!!!

Classic GLB thread - takes 3-4 pages to answer a simple question.
Last edited Jan 20, 2009 09:51:44
 
coachviking
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Vegas_Bronco
Originally posted by Galkuris

Originally posted by ddingo



I don't think it was unforeseeable that we would reach a point in gameplay evolution where your dot would consistently miss tackles with only 50-60 in what most people consider to be a critical attribute for a defensive player IRL.


This, I already thought last season that 50 strength and 50 tackling were necessities for LBs with 55/55 being even better. This season it took its natural progression and now the minimum should be 55/55 with 60/60 being ideal.

I told this to a couple teams I was on last season already, those that didn't listen...are struggling pretty badly against Power HBs


Wow - here is what I've been looking for....Thank you Galkuris!!!

Classic GLB thread - takes 3-4 pages to answer a simple question.


Galk spreading valuable GLB info. This is why he is a mod.
 
Maik Jeaunz
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Vegas_Bronco

http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=288718&pbp_id=7909682


damn, that's a sexy bitch.
 
Kevin Smith
offline
Link
 
Folks, when talking about "only 50" donīt forget that Bort, when he set this whole thing up 6.5 seasons ago, thought that 48 was "high" and 65 "very high".
 
Galkuris
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Kevin Smith
Folks, when talking about "only 50" donīt forget that Bort, when he set this whole thing up 6.5 seasons ago, thought that 48 was "high" and 65 "very high".


Um, no he didn't, he thought 50 was just getting to the MINIMUM for a Pro-type player.
 
ddingo
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Vegas_Bronco
Originally posted by Galkuris

Originally posted by ddingo



I don't think it was unforeseeable that we would reach a point in gameplay evolution where your dot would consistently miss tackles with only 50-60 in what most people consider to be a critical attribute for a defensive player IRL.


This, I already thought last season that 50 strength and 50 tackling were necessities for LBs with 55/55 being even better. This season it took its natural progression and now the minimum should be 55/55 with 60/60 being ideal.

I told this to a couple teams I was on last season already, those that didn't listen...are struggling pretty badly against Power HBs


Wow - here is what I've been looking for....Thank you Galkuris!!!

Classic GLB thread - takes 3-4 pages to answer a simple question.


Are you kidding? You are missing tackles and you couldn't figure out that you need to raise tackling? Maybe the FAQ needs to be expanded to better explain what the tackling attribute actually does?
 
Vegas_Bronco
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by ddingo
Are you kidding? You are missing tackles and you couldn't figure out that you need to raise tackling? Maybe the FAQ needs to be expanded to better explain what the tackling attribute actually does?


Ha - Dingo! If we were all as naive as you'd like to make it sound. Nice Post.

Go Dingo go!


 
MontyK
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by HurricaneWarriors
I don't have a problems with power backs breaking tackles but breaking multiple tackles on one play and then running away from LB or S with 90+ speed is getting a little ridiculous.

http://goallineblitz.com/game/replay.pl?game_id=288642&pbp_id=3317894

I don't like to complain about this game and I think HHW have made adjustments every season to stay competitive... believe it or not we actually built this team initially as a passing team... but I can totally relate to people who are getting tired of these drastic changes... i think bort needs to do more testing before implementing major changes. change is good and necessary but it really needs to be better controlled and implemented.




Originally posted by PP
What I'm having an extremely hard time living with is when Bort "fixes" build related things. I have no doubt in my mind that my OTs would have done OK this season, if Bort hadn't nerfed the DEs. Still, he just had to "fix" things, and has in turn ruined the builds of many players this season. Here's an even better example. Anyone remember him "fixing" over powered power backs several seasons ago? First, he fixed them so they were over powered. Then he fixed them so they weren't. They went from great to absolutely worthless in a blink of an eye. So, any player that had a PB that they either didn't want to retire or watch stink up the field for 2-3 seasons starting putting more speed & agility into them, just so they could be marginal, instead of horrible. Now, he has fixed them again so they're "over powered". If he'd just left them the hell alone the 1st time, Ds would have adjusted, power backs would have settled at a decent lvl and we wouldn't be chasing this around in circles again. Instead, he "fixes" them and here we are chasing our tails again. Leave builds alone already, let us adjust on our own and stop ruining builds every season. If Bort would do that, I'd be thrilled.


What these guys said


 
coachviking
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Galkuris
Originally posted by Kevin Smith

Folks, when talking about "only 50" donīt forget that Bort, when he set this whole thing up 6.5 seasons ago, thought that 48 was "high" and 65 "very high".


Um, no he didn't, he thought 50 was just getting to the MINIMUM for a Pro-type player.


Galk went off on the scary clown.

It's SHOW TIME
 
ddingo
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Vegas_Bronco
Originally posted by ddingo

Are you kidding? You are missing tackles and you couldn't figure out that you need to raise tackling? Maybe the FAQ needs to be expanded to better explain what the tackling attribute actually does?


Ha - Dingo! If we were all as naive as you'd like to make it sound. Nice Post.

Go Dingo go!




I'm an idiot. So the OP was just whining and ranting without any constructive purpose in mind? Got it.
 
coachviking
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by ddingo
Originally posted by Vegas_Bronco

Originally posted by ddingo


Are you kidding? You are missing tackles and you couldn't figure out that you need to raise tackling? Maybe the FAQ needs to be expanded to better explain what the tackling attribute actually does?


Ha - Dingo! If we were all as naive as you'd like to make it sound. Nice Post.

Go Dingo go!




I'm an idiot. So the OP was just whining and ranting without any constructive purpose in mind? Got it.


Like that's the first time that's happend on GLB
 
Sik Wit It
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by Vegas_Bronco
Originally posted by Galkuris

Originally posted by ddingo



I don't think it was unforeseeable that we would reach a point in gameplay evolution where your dot would consistently miss tackles with only 50-60 in what most people consider to be a critical attribute for a defensive player IRL.


This, I already thought last season that 50 strength and 50 tackling were necessities for LBs with 55/55 being even better. This season it took its natural progression and now the minimum should be 55/55 with 60/60 being ideal.

I told this to a couple teams I was on last season already, those that didn't listen...are struggling pretty badly against Power HBs


Wow - here is what I've been looking for....Thank you Galkuris!!!

Classic GLB thread - takes 3-4 pages to answer a simple question.


So I guess the 2nd post doesn't count? That was the first thing I said...more tackling.
 
djgomez33
offline
Link
 
Originally posted by ballsANDweinahs
My LB with over 60 tackling and 50 strength, on WRAP UP...missed 9 tackles in a game this season.

Nine.

By far the most MTs in a game in 7 seasons.

The power backs are fucked up. Period. I'm sure its a combination of changes made including the VAs...I'm just hoping it is fixed in the OS cause right now it is very clearly broken.


Although that seems ridiculous, I do not feel it is at all. Assuming you have 50 STR and 60 TACK, how are you going to tackle a HB with 70+ strength? Further, how are you going to tackle a HB with the Tenacious SA if you play on Wrap-Up? I'm tired of people complaining that have Dexter Reid playing LB.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wbO3ZOQMbQ
Last edited Jan 20, 2009 18:30:01
 
Page:
 


You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.