Originally posted by Deathblade
You don't recruit them if you can't use them.
p simple imo
That still didn't answer question.
You don't recruit them if you can't use them.
p simple imo
That still didn't answer question.
Forum > Goal Line Blitz > Q&A Archives > Player Archetypes Discussion - Improvements to player development
Seric
offline
offline
Originally posted by Kircdrb
a little off topic, but why are there differences in these players? why is one's effective level and value more when they're built exactly the same?
http://goallineblitz.com/game/player.pl?player_id=1939012
http://goallineblitz.com/game/player.pl?player_id=1955159
A little off topic? This is totally off topic. Make a new thread and it'll get answered faster. I don't know the answer and don't understand the effective level stuff.
a little off topic, but why are there differences in these players? why is one's effective level and value more when they're built exactly the same?
http://goallineblitz.com/game/player.pl?player_id=1939012
http://goallineblitz.com/game/player.pl?player_id=1955159
A little off topic? This is totally off topic. Make a new thread and it'll get answered faster. I don't know the answer and don't understand the effective level stuff.
LC311
offline
offline
Originally posted by TerryDK
Will we get Specialty Spots for each of these positions in the DC? Right now we have QB1 & QB2. With 4 new positions, how do you slot these new types of players?
Catch22 has said that Bort said that Custom Slots for everything is now on the NGTH list...I do like this new player types solution, but not a big fan of not having custom slots to fully take advantage of specialty type builds..
Chris
Will we get Specialty Spots for each of these positions in the DC? Right now we have QB1 & QB2. With 4 new positions, how do you slot these new types of players?
Catch22 has said that Bort said that Custom Slots for everything is now on the NGTH list...I do like this new player types solution, but not a big fan of not having custom slots to fully take advantage of specialty type builds..
Chris
Catch22
offline
offline
Originally posted by Octowned
This (regarding blocking TE turning into a receiving TE) just made me realize that having DCs tag based on archtype will be a MASSIVE FAIL. Building blocking FBs to run, power backs to catch, blocking TEs to run deep balls, etc., will totally exploit the tagging system, and quite easily at that. The ALGs aren't so unbalanced as to prevent these crossover builds from trying to trick the system.
Please keep that in mind
It'll just be a tagging option, not the sole means for tagging. You'll still have the current tags.
This (regarding blocking TE turning into a receiving TE) just made me realize that having DCs tag based on archtype will be a MASSIVE FAIL. Building blocking FBs to run, power backs to catch, blocking TEs to run deep balls, etc., will totally exploit the tagging system, and quite easily at that. The ALGs aren't so unbalanced as to prevent these crossover builds from trying to trick the system.
Please keep that in mind
It'll just be a tagging option, not the sole means for tagging. You'll still have the current tags.
TerryDK
offline
offline
Originally posted by LC311
Catch22 has said that Bort said that Custom Slots for everything is now on the NGTH list...I do like this new player types solution, but not a big fan of not having custom slots to fully take advantage of specialty type builds..
Chris
What is the NGTH list? (Not Going To Happen?)
Catch22 has said that Bort said that Custom Slots for everything is now on the NGTH list...I do like this new player types solution, but not a big fan of not having custom slots to fully take advantage of specialty type builds..
Chris
What is the NGTH list? (Not Going To Happen?)
Edited by TerryDK on Feb 8, 2010 23:24:09
Anarcho
offline
offline
Originally posted by Kircdrb
a little off topic, but why are there differences in these players? why is one's effective level and value more when they're built exactly the same?
http://goallineblitz.com/game/player.pl?player_id=1939012
http://goallineblitz.com/game/player.pl?player_id=1955159
Probably has something to do with the significant difference between creation days. The age is deceiving.
a little off topic, but why are there differences in these players? why is one's effective level and value more when they're built exactly the same?
http://goallineblitz.com/game/player.pl?player_id=1939012
http://goallineblitz.com/game/player.pl?player_id=1955159
Probably has something to do with the significant difference between creation days. The age is deceiving.
Deathblade
offline
offline
Originally posted by TerryDK
That still didn't answer question.
p sure it does
you dont recruit one of each archetype
That still didn't answer question.
p sure it does
you dont recruit one of each archetype
Catch22
offline
offline
Originally posted by punkaweedus
+1
Catch22 -- Please explain how this idea is going to create LESS cookie cutter builds. From what I've read in this thread, especially with the bonuses/penalties based on build type selected at player creation, it will actually force agents into selecting certain skills/attributes over others because of the penalties. Sure you COULD accept the penalty and dump points into that skill, but you'd be stupid do to so. This is especially the case with SAs. If I build an elusive HB and dump enough SPs to get 10 in Power Thru, I should have 10 in Power Thru... not be penalized to only 8. In fact it sounds like you're penalizing me for NOT having a cookie cutter elusive HB build.
IMO this player development change is limiting builds (because of attribute bonuses/penalties) rather than allowing user creativity to do whatever they want.
I will say that I do like the idea of allowing an additional SA outside of the two standard trees. This is huge for LBs especially, as the SA trees suck. I'd love to see Superior Vision as a standard SA for LBs.
See the excellent quote at the end of the OP.
+1
Catch22 -- Please explain how this idea is going to create LESS cookie cutter builds. From what I've read in this thread, especially with the bonuses/penalties based on build type selected at player creation, it will actually force agents into selecting certain skills/attributes over others because of the penalties. Sure you COULD accept the penalty and dump points into that skill, but you'd be stupid do to so. This is especially the case with SAs. If I build an elusive HB and dump enough SPs to get 10 in Power Thru, I should have 10 in Power Thru... not be penalized to only 8. In fact it sounds like you're penalizing me for NOT having a cookie cutter elusive HB build.
IMO this player development change is limiting builds (because of attribute bonuses/penalties) rather than allowing user creativity to do whatever they want.
I will say that I do like the idea of allowing an additional SA outside of the two standard trees. This is huge for LBs especially, as the SA trees suck. I'd love to see Superior Vision as a standard SA for LBs.
See the excellent quote at the end of the OP.
footballisgod
offline
offline
Originally posted by Mat McBriar
Your team won't be carrying 1 player of each archetype, lol.
It's all "do I want x or y" type stuff as far as the team-end is concerned.
This definitely presents a new challenge as owner/recruiter, and I really like it. You can build your team a certain way and have the players actually reflect that.
Your team won't be carrying 1 player of each archetype, lol.
It's all "do I want x or y" type stuff as far as the team-end is concerned.
This definitely presents a new challenge as owner/recruiter, and I really like it. You can build your team a certain way and have the players actually reflect that.
Catch22
offline
offline
Originally posted by blazzinken
#3, I agree 100%....No one is going to make a pass blocking lineman besides maybe at LOT..and maybe at LG...but I doubt it.
Are you sure about that. Ask Octowned what he thinks now.
#3, I agree 100%....No one is going to make a pass blocking lineman besides maybe at LOT..and maybe at LG...but I doubt it.
Are you sure about that. Ask Octowned what he thinks now.
Occido
offline
offline
Originally posted by Mat McBriar
Your team won't be carrying 1 player of each archetype, lol.
It's all "do I want x or y" type stuff as far as the team-end is concerned.
What about DE slots? Would it not make sense to be able to use run stuffing DE's in base formations and bring in the pash rushers on passing downs?
Your team won't be carrying 1 player of each archetype, lol.
It's all "do I want x or y" type stuff as far as the team-end is concerned.
What about DE slots? Would it not make sense to be able to use run stuffing DE's in base formations and bring in the pash rushers on passing downs?
crd521
offline
offline
Originally posted by FBGProfessor
When it comes to spending my money, I don't trust other people--I trust myself. No offense to you or to Catch22--who is probably a great guy as you say--but how do you know who he is? How do we know he isn't DD in disguise? It isn't like we see him or DD in person. So, telling me to "trust" really is not very persuasive. Persuade me showing how this is such a great idea and how it will make the game more fun for me.
Why not discuss a change like this with the players before it is set in stone? There was discussion we are told--but no one I knew participated in it. To me this change is like every other change in GLB--it is top down.
Maybe it will be good; maybe it will be bad. I am still trying to figure that out. But the implementation is no different. A group of insiders talked about. Then we were told about it. There is a forum where we can supposedly help to shape the plan, but in reality, the essentials are decided already. Those of us who have concerns are "haters' and "whiners."
Just saw a need for a disclaimer here: I don't know Catch22, or whoever his previous agent was because he was probably way before my time, so I don't intend to come off as defending Catch22, or trying to sell this idea to anybody. Not telling anyone else to trust him or the group who came up with this, just saying that I trust that the real idea behind this idea is to improve the game. My point was basically just a vote of confidence for the idea in general, and was saying I am glad this discussion is happening, in order to polish it up and make it workable whenever they do decide to implement it. I totally understand some of the points of those who do not support this idea, many have merit, and with any luck these issues will be taken into account before this is finalized.
When it comes to spending my money, I don't trust other people--I trust myself. No offense to you or to Catch22--who is probably a great guy as you say--but how do you know who he is? How do we know he isn't DD in disguise? It isn't like we see him or DD in person. So, telling me to "trust" really is not very persuasive. Persuade me showing how this is such a great idea and how it will make the game more fun for me.
Why not discuss a change like this with the players before it is set in stone? There was discussion we are told--but no one I knew participated in it. To me this change is like every other change in GLB--it is top down.
Maybe it will be good; maybe it will be bad. I am still trying to figure that out. But the implementation is no different. A group of insiders talked about. Then we were told about it. There is a forum where we can supposedly help to shape the plan, but in reality, the essentials are decided already. Those of us who have concerns are "haters' and "whiners."
Just saw a need for a disclaimer here: I don't know Catch22, or whoever his previous agent was because he was probably way before my time, so I don't intend to come off as defending Catch22, or trying to sell this idea to anybody. Not telling anyone else to trust him or the group who came up with this, just saying that I trust that the real idea behind this idea is to improve the game. My point was basically just a vote of confidence for the idea in general, and was saying I am glad this discussion is happening, in order to polish it up and make it workable whenever they do decide to implement it. I totally understand some of the points of those who do not support this idea, many have merit, and with any luck these issues will be taken into account before this is finalized.
Originally posted by TerryDK
Originally posted by LC311
Catch22 has said that Bort said that Custom Slots for everything is now on the NGTH list...I do like this new player types solution, but not a big fan of not having custom slots to fully take advantage of specialty type builds..
Chris
What is the NGTH list?
Not going to Happen
Originally posted by LC311
Catch22 has said that Bort said that Custom Slots for everything is now on the NGTH list...I do like this new player types solution, but not a big fan of not having custom slots to fully take advantage of specialty type builds..
Chris
What is the NGTH list?
Not going to Happen
Originally posted by blazzinken
Originally posted by SunshineMan89
Problems I see (apologies if they've already been mentioned):
1. HB Combo>HB Power as a powerback. Having speed is a major is a big deal.
2. Why is there more variation for FBs than WRs?
3. Who exactly is going to make the "Pass Blocking" archetype of O-linemen?
4. Every well-built DB in the game is now going to be phenomenally good.
5. Why is CD a penalty SA for zone coverage safeties?
All that said, this looks awesome!
#3, I agree 100%....No one is going to make a pass blocking lineman besides maybe at LOT..and maybe at LG...but I doubt it.
To be honest, you can't cloud yourself with the current view of the sim where a run blocking oriented linemen handles the pass just fine. I'm very much a strong supporter of letting the strength gluts suffer a bit in their pass blocking. Plus, the pass blocking build is much more maneuverable, so it holds use...even in run blocking.
Originally posted by SunshineMan89
Problems I see (apologies if they've already been mentioned):
1. HB Combo>HB Power as a powerback. Having speed is a major is a big deal.
2. Why is there more variation for FBs than WRs?
3. Who exactly is going to make the "Pass Blocking" archetype of O-linemen?
4. Every well-built DB in the game is now going to be phenomenally good.
5. Why is CD a penalty SA for zone coverage safeties?
All that said, this looks awesome!
#3, I agree 100%....No one is going to make a pass blocking lineman besides maybe at LOT..and maybe at LG...but I doubt it.
To be honest, you can't cloud yourself with the current view of the sim where a run blocking oriented linemen handles the pass just fine. I'm very much a strong supporter of letting the strength gluts suffer a bit in their pass blocking. Plus, the pass blocking build is much more maneuverable, so it holds use...even in run blocking.
Edited by Mat McBriar on Feb 8, 2010 23:25:54
Boogie21
offline
offline
Originally posted by punkaweedus
Originally posted by Mavooo
I must be missing something because to me it looks like this will encourage mass cookie cutter builds.
Maybe a power back might want first step now if its considered a penalized SA every power back will build the same way with power thru and lower shoulder maxed out.
Maybe a strength based NT might wanna try having shed blocks as a SA, with this system its now penalized and NT
s will all max out break thru and wall because thats whats basically being encouraged.
Unless im missing something or dont understand, all I see happening is everyone being encouraged to build players the same way.
+1
Catch22 -- Please explain how this idea is going to create LESS cookie cutter builds. From what I've read in this thread, especially with the bonuses/penalties based on build type selected at player creation, it will actually force agents into selecting certain skills/attributes over others because of the penalties. Sure you COULD accept the penalty and dump points into that skill, but you'd be stupid do to so. This is especially the case with SAs. If I build an elusive HB and dump enough SPs to get 10 in Power Thru, I should have 10 in Power Thru... not be penalized to only 8. In fact it sounds like you're penalizing me for NOT having a cookie cutter elusive HB build.
IMO this player development change is limiting builds (because of attribute bonuses/penalties) rather than allowing user creativity to do whatever they want.
I will say that I do like the idea of allowing an additional SA outside of the two standard trees. This is huge for LBs especially, as the SA trees suck. I'd love to see Superior Vision as a standard SA for LBs.
Why take power thru with an elusive back?
Originally posted by Mavooo
I must be missing something because to me it looks like this will encourage mass cookie cutter builds.
Maybe a power back might want first step now if its considered a penalized SA every power back will build the same way with power thru and lower shoulder maxed out.
Maybe a strength based NT might wanna try having shed blocks as a SA, with this system its now penalized and NT
s will all max out break thru and wall because thats whats basically being encouraged.
Unless im missing something or dont understand, all I see happening is everyone being encouraged to build players the same way.
+1
Catch22 -- Please explain how this idea is going to create LESS cookie cutter builds. From what I've read in this thread, especially with the bonuses/penalties based on build type selected at player creation, it will actually force agents into selecting certain skills/attributes over others because of the penalties. Sure you COULD accept the penalty and dump points into that skill, but you'd be stupid do to so. This is especially the case with SAs. If I build an elusive HB and dump enough SPs to get 10 in Power Thru, I should have 10 in Power Thru... not be penalized to only 8. In fact it sounds like you're penalizing me for NOT having a cookie cutter elusive HB build.
IMO this player development change is limiting builds (because of attribute bonuses/penalties) rather than allowing user creativity to do whatever they want.
I will say that I do like the idea of allowing an additional SA outside of the two standard trees. This is huge for LBs especially, as the SA trees suck. I'd love to see Superior Vision as a standard SA for LBs.
Why take power thru with an elusive back?
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
