Warrior General Games

Originally posted by ink43
oki obviously theres some touchy areas with it but the only way to fix the problem i think would be putting weight caps. so anything over 270 would be slower at 100 speed then someone under. but i mean it wouldnt be unrealistic to say someone who is 250 cant run as fast as someone whos 180. vernon davis(spelling maybe) is the best example. kids big and faster then most people even smaller or lighter then him. i know what your saying it seems stupid to have like every d-lineman and LB or TE breaking the mold by being able to run as fast as the dbs and wrs. but it speed makes for an amazing player at those positions and everyone on here obviously wants an amazing player.

Vernon Davis is a rarity, and something we can't duplicate in GLB without a "random freak factor"

Yes, having an amazing player is the goal, but there is a thing called "realistic". Having a DE fly around the OT because he's got the speed of a WR isn't realistic. It was so unrealistic, that Bort ended up NERFING the hell out of DEs to compensate. This would undo that nerf, make things realistic.

Power Backs can be stronger than DTs, this would make it more realistic

Look at the formulas, do some math. They work out almost perfectly.

Having an "amazing player" should be within the realm of possibilities, not just because you pumped a skill to 100. This would allow for more diversity as well. You could bulk up your player to be more of a power guy, or slim him down to be more mobile, or balance him out to be a utility type guy.

+1 but make it all invisible so no one bitches. No re-roll on your sizes either. If you already pumped your speed up on a fat ass then while he wont be as fast, he will stil be fast for a fat guy.

Some of us took size into great consideration while rolling already.

i do like size factor and stuff. one of my DT is 6'5 337 i think. and im like wow a freak and took that build. but i just have a problem with saying DE cant be fast cuz there bigger or something along those lines. even if u wanna make their speed suffer then cut down their speed on lateral movement and change of direction. linear speed is linear speed. cant deny that

Originally posted by ink43
i do like size factor and stuff. one of my DT is 6'5 337 i think. and im like wow a freak and took that build. but i just have a problem with saying DE cant be fast cuz there bigger or something along those lines. even if u wanna make their speed suffer then cut down their speed on lateral movement and change of direction. linear speed is linear speed. cant deny that

Yes, linear speed is linear speed. Look at 40yd dash times. That is linear speed. The heavier players are generally slower. It takes a HELL of a lot more force to move a 300lb guy at 20mph, than it takes to move a 180lb guy at 20mph.

ALL physical skills are affected by player size. The heavier you are, the more power you can exert, but at the same time, the slower you'll become. The LIGHTER you are, the less power you can exert, but the faster you can go.

Ever wonder why most Olympic sprinters are under 200lbs? They can be fast, for a DE, but not fast in terms of WR speed.

Off the top of my head, I'd assume the fastest DE in this years combine was probably in the 4.6 range. Assumption.
I'm guessing the speed HBs and WRs were usually in the 4.3/4.4 range.

Javon Kearse was not as fast as Randy Moss, and he was a beast at the speed rush end.

im saying your not right im just saying that you should be so fast to say less weight=faster player. doesnt work like that. plus strength should come into play here. a strong player can carry his weight and make him faster etc. you get where im going with that

Originally posted by ink43
im saying your not right im just saying that you should be so fast to say less weight=faster player. doesnt work like that. plus strength should come into play here. a strong player can carry his weight and make him faster etc. you get where im going with that

Yes, I get it. However, I'm turning these simple attributes into general skills.

If we want to get specific, there are two types of "strength", the explosive kind and the just raw power kind. We can't split that up with the current skills.

The general statement that "heavier = slower" is more or less true, and we made a curve within the formulas. The lighter your player, the less the curve will affect you, and the more it will affect a heavier player.

There are 240lb guys that are faster than 200lb guys, and there are 200lb guys that are stronger than 240lb guys, but if they have equal attributes across the board, the 240lb guy will be 'stronger' and the 200lb guy will be faster. However, it won't be a HUGE difference, but one that is realistic and logical, IMO

If they both have 100 speed and 60 strength, the 200lb guy will be a touch faster, and the 240lber will be a touch stronger. That's the way it is in real life, that's the way it should be in the game.

http://www.usapowerlifting.com/records/american/men-raw.htm

If you look at the weightlifting records, the numbers increase as you rise in the weight classes. Naturally, as more muscle mass can (Doesn't always) translate into more strength

This is also relevant in speed. The heavier you are, the more mass you have to control, and the more power is required to move that mass. Generally speaking, the body has a HARD time pushing that much weight. Running mechanics suffer, and the body just has problems moving that weight.

This should get some more attention, or possibly some more ideas?

Regardless of the degree that you make guys sluggish based on weight, I would love to see a category of weight you put on by training.

As mentioned we don't have the difference b/t fast-twitch muscles (explosive strength) and strength-over-time, like you would use in holding a block perhaps (for example.)

But a player can be assumed to train the type of strength he needs.

So it strikes me that conditioning should be outside of speed for the most part. Elsewhere I mentioned the "workout warrior" wide receivers in the real world. Whether good (TO, except he's a head case,) or bad (David Boston,) these guys do not seem to lose a step because they're ripped, and muscle weighs more than fat.

The same goes for training up your big uglies. Stick 'em in the weight room, and it's not aerobic, so there's only so much weight loss, but you'll replace fat with muscle; caloric intake is simply expended differently, and the guy is lighter on his feet, not more sluggish.

So I could see room for a category of weight gained through training that is not affected by the proposed sluggishness curve.

It would also give you the ability to gain a limited amount of weight, to a certain plateau. I don't think it's realistic to go past 20 lbs. over the course of a career -- muscle mass is tough to gain, if it's for doing work rather than showing off. I'm assuming of course that there are no steroids in the game.

So how about it - over their first few seasons, with a ceiling of 20 lbs., up to a general weight cap at which a player is fat/muscle exchanging (say, 260, 280). Or apply a curve to it... heavier guys can gain less, lighter guys can gain more. Players can gain weight through training, and that weight is exempt from the curve. That weight could be put on when strength training.

Or, screw it.

Belly

Originally posted by BellyCheck
Regardless of the degree that you make guys sluggish based on weight, I would love to see a category of weight you put on by training.

As mentioned we don't have the difference b/t fast-twitch muscles (explosive strength) and strength-over-time, like you would use in holding a block perhaps (for example.)

But a player can be assumed to train the type of strength he needs.

So it strikes me that conditioning should be outside of speed for the most part. Elsewhere I mentioned the "workout warrior" wide receivers in the real world. Whether good (TO, except he's a head case,) or bad (David Boston,) these guys do not seem to lose a step because they're ripped, and muscle weighs more than fat.

The same goes for training up your big uglies. Stick 'em in the weight room, and it's not aerobic, so there's only so much weight loss, but you'll replace fat with muscle; caloric intake is simply expended differently, and the guy is lighter on his feet, not more sluggish.

So I could see room for a category of weight gained through training that is not affected by the proposed sluggishness curve.

It would also give you the ability to gain a limited amount of weight, to a certain plateau. I don't think it's realistic to go past 20 lbs. over the course of a career -- muscle mass is tough to gain, if it's for doing work rather than showing off. I'm assuming of course that there are no steroids in the game.

So how about it - over their first few seasons, with a ceiling of 20 lbs., up to a general weight cap at which a player is fat/muscle exchanging (say, 260, 280). Or apply a curve to it... heavier guys can gain less, lighter guys can gain more. Players can gain weight through training, and that weight is exempt from the curve. That weight could be put on when strength training.

Or, screw it.

Belly

I agree, and I think I've mentioned it in this thread. Lighter players have an easier time gaining weight, while the big guys have trouble (muscle, that is, not fat). And on the other end, lighter players have trouble losing fat while the heavier guys have more to lose, so it's "easier".

Also, fat doesn't weigh less than muscle, it's just less dense . A pound of muscle is the same as a pound of fat, but the pound of muscle will take up less space and when on a body, the muscle will be productive while the fat will not be. Another thing, you can't turn fat into muscle, just incase anybody thinks you can. You can lose or gain fat, or lose or gain muscle, but cannot turn a lipid into a protein


On a different note, if this were to be implemented, some sort of strength training/weight training would be necessary, like mentioned in the OP

Broken record time for me, but:

All of these issues could be solved, IMO, by simply having different caps based on weight.

So it would be harder for a 280 pound guy to hit 68 speed, just like real life.

So it would be harder for a 180 pound guy to hit 68 strength, just like real life.

Those players could hit those levels, but it would take much more effort (ie, SP) and would come at a cost (ie, other attributes wouldn't be developed as they should be).

Combine that with the football skill attributes really meaning something (which seems to be the case now - finally) then the player build model takes a giant leap towards where it should be.

Originally posted by OttawaShane
Broken record time for me, but:

All of these issues could be solved, IMO, by simply having different caps based on weight.

So it would be harder for a 280 pound guy to hit 68 speed, just like real life.

So it would be harder for a 180 pound guy to hit 68 strength, just like real life.

Those players could hit those levels, but it would take much more effort (ie, SP) and would come at a cost (ie, other attributes wouldn't be developed as they should be).

Combine that with the football skill attributes really meaning something (which seems to be the case now - finally) then the player build model takes a giant leap towards where it should be.

Cap based on weight? Where do the weight ranges fall? I don't like caps, but rather a simple thing added into player movement. To me, caps seem like they'd take more to code, where as the formula would apply to everything. Plus, this would add another dimension to the game with the addition of weight loss/gain.

Originally posted by Staz
Originally posted by BellyCheck

Regardless of the degree that you make guys sluggish based on weight, I would love to see a category of weight you put on by training.

As mentioned we don't have the difference b/t fast-twitch muscles (explosive strength) and strength-over-time, like you would use in holding a block perhaps (for example.)

But a player can be assumed to train the type of strength he needs.

So it strikes me that conditioning should be outside of speed for the most part. Elsewhere I mentioned the "workout warrior" wide receivers in the real world. Whether good (TO, except he's a head case,) or bad (David Boston,) these guys do not seem to lose a step because they're ripped, and muscle weighs more than fat.

The same goes for training up your big uglies. Stick 'em in the weight room, and it's not aerobic, so there's only so much weight loss, but you'll replace fat with muscle; caloric intake is simply expended differently, and the guy is lighter on his feet, not more sluggish.

So I could see room for a category of weight gained through training that is not affected by the proposed sluggishness curve.

It would also give you the ability to gain a limited amount of weight, to a certain plateau. I don't think it's realistic to go past 20 lbs. over the course of a career -- muscle mass is tough to gain, if it's for doing work rather than showing off. I'm assuming of course that there are no steroids in the game.

So how about it - over their first few seasons, with a ceiling of 20 lbs., up to a general weight cap at which a player is fat/muscle exchanging (say, 260, 280). Or apply a curve to it... heavier guys can gain less, lighter guys can gain more. Players can gain weight through training, and that weight is exempt from the curve. That weight could be put on when strength training.

Or, screw it.

Belly

I agree, and I think I've mentioned it in this thread. Lighter players have an easier time gaining weight, while the big guys have trouble (muscle, that is, not fat). And on the other end, lighter players have trouble losing fat while the heavier guys have more to lose, so it's "easier".

Also, fat doesn't weigh less than muscle, it's just less dense . A pound of muscle is the same as a pound of fat, but the pound of muscle will take up less space and when on a body, the muscle will be productive while the fat will not be. Another thing, you can't turn fat into muscle, just incase anybody thinks you can. You can lose or gain fat, or lose or gain muscle, but cannot turn a lipid into a protein


On a different note, if this were to be implemented, some sort of strength training/weight training would be necessary, like mentioned in the OP


Well, I'm pretty sure I did say fat weighs more than muscle. An equivalent volume of muscle weighs more than that volume of fat.

You great bespectacled geek

I don't think I said you can turn fat into muscle but if I did, it's shorthand. If you have a mixed regime wherein your fat goes away and you gain lean muscle mass, that process could be characterized (however technically incorrectly) as "turning fat into muscle," without the implication that a lipid has become a protein, through the wonders of conversational English.

lol I have a pet peeve about some of those things. While you're correct, you didn't actually say "turn fat into muscle", you did correctly state that you would 'replace' it, which could be twisted as you wish.

All in all, I hear too many people claiming they need fat to build muscle, can turn fat into muscle, etc. I like to clarify things without really needing to

Plus, my vision is 20/15, I don't need glasses.

As I reply to all threads like this, I think the idea is a good one, but I would personally like to be able to choose new weights (and heights) for my older players as they were created earlier.

And no, I do not want to have to train the weight changes, I want to enter a value in a box and reset them.

Originally posted by mandyross
As I reply to all threads like this, I think the idea is a good one, but I would personally like to be able to choose new weights (and heights) for my older players as they were created earlier.

And no, I do not want to have to train the weight changes, I want to enter a value in a box and reset them.

The thing I agree with is being able to change your current player's weight. The thing I DON'T agree with is being able to simply type in a number. Being able to reroll height/weight, yes, but being able to SELECT your height/weight? I don't think you should have that much control over it.