Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Ken1
Those games, the blowouts, are not really fun to watch.

And I get enough satisfaction when my player forces a fumble that our team recovers. I don't need it returned for a TD to enjoy it a lot.




Bullshit, you laughed and carried on like teenage girls in the team forum just like everybody else does because... EVERYBODY loves when it their dot does it.

Originally posted by Greywolfmeb
Bullshit, you laughed and carried on like teenage girls in the team forum just like everybody else does because... EVERYBODY loves when when their dot does it.

I'm just saying I do just about the same thing anytime my dot forces a fumble that his team recovers.

Originally posted by Ken1
I'm just saying I do just about the same thing anytime my dot forces a fumble that his team recovers.

You are either totally full of shit or as boring a person as this game will become with your way of thinking. If it continues on the current path there will be no one but you and maybe another couple of suckers left to play.

Originally posted by Greywolfmeb
You are either totally full of shit or as boring a person as this game will become with your way of thinking. If it continues on the current path there will be no one but you and maybe another couple of suckers left to play.

The poll showed that (even if you assume we have a radically different group of players today who would vote differently, which is a big assumption) there are a lot of people who like the idea of a game like this that is a simulation of real football.

Originally posted by Ken1
The poll showed that (even if you assume we have a radically different group of players today who would vote differently, which is a big assumption) there are a lot of people who like the idea of a game like this that is a simulation of real football.

You assume there aren't a lot of people who don't and want their dots to do shit.. NVM, I found the results and for certain there aren't that many people left in this game. If you want me to buy into any of that meaning anything anymore they're going to have to do a new poll.

Originally posted by Greywolfmeb
You assume there aren't a lot of people who don't and want their dots to do shit.. NVM, I found the results and for certain there aren't that many people left in this game. If you want me to buy into any of that meaning anything anymore they're going to have to do a new poll.

Dots getting sacks, tackles, deflections, even forcing fumbles and picks that aren't returned for much aren't "doing nothing."

And the poll shows what a broad number of people who are interested in games like this think, the target audience. Even in the unlikely event a poll now produced a different result...it shows through a bigger sample what the target audience thinks.

Originally posted by Ken1
Dots getting sacks, tackles, deflections, even forcing fumbles and picks that aren't returned for much aren't "doing nothing."

And the poll shows what a broad number of people who are interested in games like this think, the target audience. Even in the unlikely event a poll now produced a different result...it shows through a bigger sample what the target audience thinks.

So you speak for every single person who plays this game by saying that they should be happy just to get an interception and not concern themselves with scoring off of it. Also in this brave new GLB quota system you are suggesting how should we control all the non compliant stats? At the same time how many people do you think will stop playing this game due to said qouta system?

Originally posted by Ken1
Dots getting sacks, tackles, deflections, even forcing fumbles and picks that aren't returned for much aren't "doing nothing."

And the poll shows what a broad number of people who are interested in games like this think, the target audience. Even in the unlikely event a poll now produced a different result...it shows through a bigger sample what the target audience thinks.



A poll that is at least over a 1 year old




Stop posting

Originally posted by cjericho
Also in this brave new GLB quota system you are suggesting how should we control all the non compliant stats? At the same time how many people do you think will stop playing this game due to said qouta system?

Lol, quota system. It's simply if something is too high you nerf it. If it's too low, you buff it. You put the law of probability on the side of realism, which has been done well by now in most areas of GLB, but overdone here or there.

Originally posted by cjericho
Originally posted by Ken1

Dots getting sacks, tackles, deflections, even forcing fumbles and picks that aren't returned for much aren't "doing nothing."

And the poll shows what a broad number of people who are interested in games like this think, the target audience. Even in the unlikely event a poll now produced a different result...it shows through a bigger sample what the target audience thinks.

So you speak for every single person who plays this game by saying that they should be happy just to get an interception and not concern themselves with scoring off of it.

That's pretty much Ken1 in a nutshell. He feels that he's special and that he should have the final say on all matters. If we took his disingenuous argument and turned it on QBs saying that they should feel happy any time they make a completion and don't need to score TDs he would get red in the face and start spouting off NFL stats most of which would be made up by him on the spot.

+1

I can't believe this conversation is still going on.

Bort just needs to make the fall down thing a roll based on dot attributes and how easy the interception was to make, then he can just adjust how hard the roll is to pass from there on out. The all or nothing fixes he created with the auto-fall down don't leave any room to find a middle ground, it's an all or nothing solution that isn't based in player attributes. Different builds should be able to do different things, and I see the ability of a player to stay on his feet when intercepting a ball as something that should purely be build related. I can't understand how anyone could even think of a different solution for this problem. He can tweak the rolls every season and it will be much more realistic than if it's just an automatic game mechanic.

Originally posted by MileHighShoes
I can't believe this conversation is still going on.

Bort just needs to make the fall down thing a roll based on dot attributes and how easy the interception was to make, then he can just adjust how hard the roll is to pass from there on out. The all or nothing fixes he created with the auto-fall down don't leave any room to find a middle ground, it's an all or nothing solution that isn't based in player attributes. Different builds should be able to do different things, and I see the ability of a player to stay on his feet when intercepting a ball as something that should purely be build related. I can't understand how anyone could even think of a different solution for this problem. He can tweak the rolls every season and it will be much more realistic than if it's just an automatic game mechanic.

I can agree to that.

Originally posted by MileHighShoes
I can't believe this conversation is still going on.

Bort just needs to make the fall down thing a roll based on dot attributes and how easy the interception was to make, then he can just adjust how hard the roll is to pass from there on out. The all or nothing fixes he created with the auto-fall down don't leave any room to find a middle ground, it's an all or nothing solution that isn't based in player attributes. Different builds should be able to do different things, and I see the ability of a player to stay on his feet when intercepting a ball as something that should purely be build related. I can't understand how anyone could even think of a different solution for this problem. He can tweak the rolls every season and it will be much more realistic than if it's just an automatic game mechanic.

Originally posted by cjericho
I can agree to that.



What's interesting is that I can agree to that too.

Maybe we've found something like a consensus?