Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Ken1
-1 because the suggestion was made for the wrong reason. There are lots of offensive VAs without defensive counters and defensive VAs without offensive counters. One shouldn't look to make counters for every VA, or even as many as is practical. Asymmetrical games are more fun.

Just a suggestion, I thought that was what this thread was for??

If the deleted posts were about a shitty band that hails from Alberta... then +1 to the deleted posts.

If the description of the VA proposed by the OP includes some form of overhyped player who gets too much playing time, then +1 to the OP.

Originally posted by Ken1
-1 because the suggestion was made for the wrong reason. There are lots of offensive VAs without defensive counters and defensive VAs without offensive counters. One shouldn't look to make counters for every VA, or even as many as is practical. Asymmetrical games are more fun.

There absolutely should be a counter for most VAs, especially sonething specialized like slot receiver.

+1 to the addition of this VA

+1 but I'd like to see specifics as to what it would do.

Originally posted by sehorn31
Just a suggestion, I thought that was what this thread was for??

I have no problem with you making it, but what's the reason for it? If the reason is that there is a Slot Machine VA, that's a very bad reason IMO.

Take as a counterexample a defensive VA I'm still working on in my head (and is based on one suggested by someone else last season) but am thinking of eventually proposing:

Double Coverage Pick: This player is great at jumping a route when he has help. Each level of Double Coverage Pick gives him a +1.5% bonus to intercept a pass over 10 yards, and a +3% bonus to intercept a pass over 20 yards, if another defender is within a 2 yard radius of the intended target. Prerequisite: 40 Catching.

Like it or not, it has a reason. Last season, anyway, (and I don't see anything in the changelog to change this for this season) there were too few interceptions, and it's hard to build someone to be an interceptor. This would allow someone to build an interceptor, and lead to more interceptions, especially on longer passes and only in double coverage (If it's one on one, it should be hard to get an interception). Basically, with the Catching prerequisite, it allows one to build an interceptor.

I don't see a reason for your idea, outside of "There's a VA to help slot receivers, so there should be one to help their defenders." I don't buy that as a good reason.

Originally posted by Ken1
-1 because the suggestion was made for the wrong reason. There are lots of offensive VAs without defensive counters and defensive VAs without offensive counters. One shouldn't look to make counters for every VA, or even as many as is practical. Asymmetrical games are more fun.

I don't give a tinkers cuss for his intentions. The idea is a good one. Nickel Back, its a name. Give it a VA dagnabbit.

As for the rest, asymmetrical is only fun if you are the one not taking it up the assymetry.

+1 to a counterbalancing VA and SA for every VA and SA.

+1

Another weird thing: People are +1ing a VA without even knowing what it does: Again, it's a VA not only without a reason, but without a description.

There are a million reasons that VAs shouldn't be made to counter each other. I know a few VAs' beginnings: Someone long ago showed that 3rd and long conversions were too easy, for example. That led to the 3rd Down Stopper VA. It would have completely destroyed the point of that VA had a 3rd Down Receiver VA been also added to balance it (Mr. Reliable sort of does, and possibly should be nerfed on 3rd Downs, although it's less powerful anyway because the deflection chance comes before the catch chance).

People should stop trying to make the game more symmetrical. Balanced =/= symmetrical. Risk is symmetrical; Axis and Allies isn't (it also isn't balanced by the default rules, but they have optional rules for people wanting balance that preserve the asymmetry). Axis and Allies is by far the more interesting game IMO.