Warrior General Games

Originally posted by wchs63
Not a fan.. It will eventually make us choose the direction and there is no turning back or changing the build... Just another apporach to make us spend more money because a lot of people will butcher their players and want to start anew....

Disagree. Take a line backer. Speed/agility vision tackle. = .5 level gain.

If you really don't know what to do, take each of those to 73 natural, by that time you will be level 48, and no matter what route you took you will be fine.

Originally posted by Catch22
It's a game based on a random number generator and probabilities, so the answer to that question will always be yes. There are things you can do to increase your chance of success though through player development.

so x factor is RNG based?

balanced WR?

Very exciting! I have been looking forward to hearing more about this. Should be fun to build under this system.

As of right now i'd much rather not worry about player building and fix things in the actual game ai...we just got this new system to try out that could help make builds alot different and already we are changing it....I don't mind the new change, but switching to a whole brand new system I would hope i could withdraw flex if thats done. Thats not what i paid for and when i bought my flex it wasn't even mentioned in a future thing coming on glb.

How does this get away from cookie cutter builds as opposed to the current system? Use a HB for example.

Swat Ball as a bonus for Speed DT? Why not Big Sack like it is for a Blitzing LB? Not that many DL enthusiasists invest into Big Sack, but I'm sure most would use it before touching Swat Ball.

love it!

Originally posted by Bill Jack
So to keep what I have now it will cost me $ 25 in flex for all of my players to be converted.

Not a good idea, should cost zero.

o_O

How is it going to cost you $25?

Seriously, in the How would you make the game better section, how many people said that they wanted their player to be more specialized(good at fewer things)?

Speaking as someone who never understood the disparity between the majors and minors of the different positions, I love this idea. This is a much needed change, and I'm glad it's been handled in such a well thought out manner.

Originally posted by Nif
Why no O-Line combo option? The Defense all have one. Why only 200 flex point special teamers? Thanks and I'll take my answer off the air.

Because there was no combo option that we could come up with that would not have made it better than the two other choices (we discussed this one quite a bit).

Why only 200 flex point special teamers? Honestly, because if we allowed the players that were only 100 flex those would be the only ones ever made. Most positions are 200 flex anyway, so this allows for most players to get that archetype.

Is any thought be given to allowing us any training combo we want? If we're gonna have specialized players, we should be able to customize their training!!


BTW, +100 to the idea

I actually like it a lot. It's a little difficult for the common player (i.e. newbies) how exactly they should build their character.

I think if you did this, you should also highlight the 'major' and 'minor' skills in the skill windows with different colors or brightnesses, so as to show what kind of player you're building -- if you get what I mean. Instead of the plain grey, use a darker grey for 'outside' skills, and then show the current grey for minor and a brighter one for majors. Also the 'green bar' to a darker and brighter colors for non-skill/major skill as a result. Also, use some sort of highlighting for the 'bonus' and 'penalty' skills. Could look a bit more colorful and easier to read, honestly.

Yeah, so it's a random little GUI suggestion, but why not?

when dealing with players a couple seasons old, could you also please run a script to also award us the difference in a flat bonus (or penalty, depending on if the old ALGs were higher than the new ALGs) of (level - 1) x (new ALG bonus - old ALG bonus)? or all that divided by 2 to make it a bit more fair?

it's a game of inches, man. 5+ major positions are going to be a bit inferior to their successors, while 3- major positions (mainly just K/P) are gonna have a slight advantage.

i don't know if it's worth the trouble. both the above idea, and this whole new system