Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Finnious Cretin
Originally posted by lawdog

This actually hurts the teams that don't make the playoffs. Now, instead of training on intense and maxing out points, the players will lose energy during the games and have to train on relaxed to get energy back for these non-important scrimmages.

unless they aren't for XP, then it doesn't matter how much energy you regain between games. If it's just for fun, planning, testing, then if your players are at 30 Energy it's not a big deal, they'll regain it before season 3 anyway.

And that would only matter to low levels, who progress faster anyway. Who else can afford to train on intense?

Originally posted by Gott

And that would only matter to low levels, who progress faster anyway. Who else can afford to train on intense?

Anyone that's saved up some money from having a decent bonus when signing? Minimum contract for a level 8 is around 1100, so if they're level 11 now they'd need 17600 to train intense the whole offseason... they've probably made at least 12k from normal/relaxed training during the season. And besides it's at the low levels when it's the most useful since it'll get them up to speed to higher levels quicker.

I guess it also depends on your definition of low level.

First of all, this is a GREAT idea. The teams who predominately suck in the regular season are given at least a couple of games (much like a pre season except at the end of the year) to try and figure out what is wrong. They can play with the Offensive and Defensive settings without any forthcoming repercussions. Hopefully they will improve over the off season and see improvements.

Next, whether it is decided to give or not to give XP is important. Whichever option is chosen, it must remain constant. We can't give the playoff teams XP only because they will further increase the gap between their players and the players of the teams in their conference. Thus, nothing will ever change. The top 4-6 teams will be the top 4-6 teams for seasons to come. You also cannot give XP to only non-playoff teams because that is too much incentive to not make the post-season. While I believe there SHOULD be XP given, it should be the same for all teams.

The options are give XP at a normal rate for all teams/players. Do not give XP to any players during the post-season... Or even possibly give a flat rate of XP per game for players.

I think scrimmage teams should get 1/2 XP and 1/2 their normal paycheck for their games while playoff teams get full salary and XP.

Originally posted by Favre4Ever

The options are give XP at a normal rate for all teams/players. Do not give XP to any players during the post-season... Or even possibly give a flat rate of XP per game for players.

Flat-rate as pointed out I think is probably the best choice. That way it can be controlled for player progression purposes, also when experimenting with different tactics no one can be upset due to loss of play time - and it gives the games some meaning to everyone since they are getting something out of it.

I would like to see either no XP, or a small flat rate across the board. Say 65 XP, the median between level 1 and 21 daily training.

No XP keep it the same. So you guys can work on other things.

My views, which I guess are equal to everyone else's views.

1. I would rather that all teams, whether scrimmagers or playoff-bound, get XP; if they don't though, it's no big deal.

2. If they do get XP, I think playoff teams and scrimmaging teams should get equal XP.
2a. If scrimmaging teams get more XP, potential 7 and 8 seeds will tank.
2b. If playoff teams get more XP, the rich get richer.
2c. If "Playoff XP" is implemented, the rich still get richer--and it's more to code.

3. For those saying "no" to post-season XP because it will screw up their scrimmage tactics, grow up. Every team can test things at any point in the season. Our team changes things and tries things all the time. Yes, we wanted to make the playoffs; yes, we wanted to secure some home field advantage games; yes, our starters want XP; but the big picture is building for the big picture. Figure out when you can try things out and do it. The scrimmage is not the only time you could do that. Heck, we'll probably change things up in the first round of the playoffs.

4. For those arguing for a baseline XP, I have no argument against it. If it's either baseline XP or no XP, I'd go for baseline. However, it's probably more work to code, and I'd rather XP progress as usual based on my reason #3.

5. How will this screw up game progression? I know we'll have 25% more games per season, which could equal about 15 additional levels if you play your cards perfectly right. There was a thread about the max levels people could get would be ~75 in 10 seasons. If you add 25% to level 75, you'd be at level 94 (and I'm not sure 25% more games = 25% more levels; someone better at math should check that).

Even at level 94, which would theoretically be the player's ultimate peak, there would be no way to really overkill the attributes. As long as 100 (+equipment bonuses) is max for each stat and it costs nearly 20 SP to boost your attribute one point when you're in the 90's, no one's going to max out 100's across the board.

Am I overlooking something?

Possibly factor a 'reduced' EXP situation...maybe make it 25%?

If scrimmage and playoff teams get equal XP then from a player standpoint theres no difference between the playoffs and scrimmages. THe point of the playoffs is to reward the great teams of that season, so giving them more XP than scrimmage teams is fine with me since they earned it.

No XP for playoffs/scrimmages this season. We've decided to stick to the original plan and not change the rules mid-stream.

We'll revisit it for next season.

Dern! I had to read 17 pages to get to the final answer.