Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Time Trial
It varies by age of the team, but it scales so that you will be able to ressign all your same players each season (as traits cannot change after birth).

To post a list of all of the possible low/medium/high contracts is too much work. A spreadsheet was started by Romo at one point I think, but it made a lot of bad assumptions.

There is no "Superstar" salary, superstar is just a trait you can pick (if unlocked). It increases your base salary by 100% (though I think that is going up to 125% after my "exploit").

I'm just looking for the INITIAL (S1) salaries at this point to try to determine initial roster composition and salary allocation....

for example:
100M total cap
High 3-4M
Medium 2-3M
Low 1-2M

THANKS for any input if this info is available at this point....

Even if superstars cost more, teams will go from 32 players and 16 superstars to 32 players and 12 superstars, because they don't need backups so why not use the extra salary on superstars?

Originally posted by bhall43
Honestly you still need a pretty decent roster size to compete except for teams that were going with 35 man teams with loads of superstars. And if they won't be able to be doing that then it shouldn't really be that big a problem.

Most of the teams never fixed their builds after the trait rollout. Tough to say how many of those teams would have been in under the salary cap had they rebuilt.

That was one of my finds. Why build two players that cost 1.25 times normal (2.5 when multiplied) when you can build one really good player instead? Now if I'm not going to be able to do it with superstars, I will do it by cutting roster spots in certain positions (like I did by going with 3 WRs).

Originally posted by Monty Burns
I'm just looking for the INITIAL (S1) salaries at this point to try to determine initial roster composition and salary allocation....

for example:
100M total cap
High 3-4M
Medium 2-3M
Low 1-2M

THANKS for any input if this info is available at this point....


No one has that info from the testers right now. Ignore the low/medium/high and just concentrate on offering Medium salaries to everyone.

It would be a lot of work because base salary is based on position and modified by traits. I would need to look at a position like QB and then multiply out the % salary increases from traits.

Then that information would give you the base salary of a QB, but until your QB chooses traits, you won't know the true cost.

Originally posted by Corndog
But backups kind of have to be a necessity (unless you invest heavily into conditioning).

Otherwise it is a weird limbo where you only need starters, but you have a salary cap meant for 43 players. I wouldn't be against the idea of making it more "ironman" and dropping the max roster down to like 32 and the salary to go with it.

Having only 32 players but the salary cap for 43 just makes it into "lulzmoresuperstars".

Most of us don't want to do algebra to figure out the difference between the positive increases, and the nerfs. It don't make sense to make the AI simpler, while making everything else more complicated.

Buy a Madden game, and simplify the builds like that.

got it....THANKS TT...

Originally posted by Corndog
But backups kind of have to be a necessity (unless you invest heavily into conditioning).

Otherwise it is a weird limbo where you only need starters, but you have a salary cap meant for 43 players. I wouldn't be against the idea of making it more "ironman" and dropping the max roster down to like 32 and the salary to go with it.

Having only 32 players but the salary cap for 43 just makes it into "lulzmoresuperstars".

Really the only thing throwing a wrench in the equation is superstars here though. Because their extra skill points make it easy to add enough conditioning to be worth it. But for positions like WR or CB you are going to want to obviously carry more than 2 and quite possibly 5-6 depending on your gameplan. Spreading out all those statistics is why people dislike building WR's in GLB.

Capping teams down to 32 might be interesting...seems like that would put a whole new life on things though.

Originally posted by Time Trial
Most of the teams never fixed their builds after the trait rollout. Tough to say how many of those teams would have been in under the salary cap had they rebuilt.

That was one of my finds. Why build two players that cost 1.25 times normal (2.5 when multiplied) when you can build one really good player instead? Now if I'm not going to be able to do it with superstars, I will do it by cutting roster spots in certain positions (like I did by going with 3 WRs).

im talking outside of superstars. Obviously the superstars throw a huge wrench in everything when it comes to traits like conditioning.

Originally posted by BadBuc99
Most of us don't want to do algebra to figure out the difference between the positive increases, and the nerfs. It don't make sense to make the AI simpler, while making everything else more complicated.

Buy a Madden game, and simplify the builds like that.

It's really not that complicated.

Originally posted by bhall43
im talking outside of superstars. Obviously the superstars throw a huge wrench in everything when it comes to traits like conditioning.

To be honest, I never noticed a huge issue even with my non-superstars.

My old FB played almost every snap and only had something like 45 conditioning. I rebuilt him as a SS (because when I dumped my SS QB, I thought "why not?") and he's only gotten better.

Originally posted by Corndog
Even if superstars cost more, teams will go from 32 players and 16 superstars to 32 players and 12 superstars, because they don't need backups so why not use the extra salary on superstars?

Because no one will have any. The only teams that will be able to carry that many superstars are the "planned" teams. In GLB1, those were one man operations and network teams. In GLB2, your cap on SSs will make those either multis or teams of agents who timed their SSs to all be together.

This thread makes me even more anxious for GLB2 to go live.

Originally posted by Time Trial
To be honest, I never noticed a huge issue even with my non-superstars.

My old FB played almost every snap and only had something like 45 conditioning. I rebuilt him as a SS (because when I dumped my SS QB, I thought "why not?") and he's only gotten better.

That is a blocking FB though. Something that isn't very speedy nor move a lot. I could play a blocking FB all day in GLB1 and not use him on ST's and he would play just fine. Actually in the modern era of GLB many people do play one blocking FB almost every snap plus ST's tbh.

Wouldn't work the same at WR for me though.

Originally posted by Bane
This thread makes me even more anxious for GLB2 to go live.

I'm tired of reading about it

Let everyone play it already.

Originally posted by Bane
I'm tired of reading about it

Let everyone play it already.

Soon.

Finishing up a few things in code, and Bort is setting up new servers today I think.

Originally posted by Bane
This thread makes me even more anxious for GLB2 to go live.

That's why I started it.

I should get a team guaranteed because of this thread.