All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > long overdue...User Polls
5/5/2014 11:23 AM
The following is the transcript of a ticket I submitted and the direct response to that ticket by the site admins. I want to start by thanking the site admin for taking the time to make such a thorough and thoughtful reply to the ticket. I was already aware that seble had seen the thread before I sent the ticket, and was only trying to further pass along the outcome of the poll(s). With that being said, I also want to point out that the admin who took the time to write this much appreciated response didn't pen his or her name on it, so there is no way to tell who's voice it is.

Ticket:
Hello,
I recently created a thread in the main HD forum which polls users about what changes to the current HD landscape would most improve their HD experience. I feel the poll(s) is both large in scope yet detailed enough to be practical in it's interpretation (and hopefully implementation as well). There has already been well over 100 individual users that have participated by voting.

I'm aware that seble and the HD admins have been interested in making improvements to HD as of late, so I figured it couldn't hurt to pass along this pertinent information. The title of the thread is "long overdue...user polls", here is the link:

http://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?TopicID=476972&TopicsTimeframe=30

Thanks,
Nathan

Response:
Hi Nathan. I have looked at the results of your polls. Thanks for putting that together and getting some feedback. Right now we're trying to knock out some smaller, less time-consuming changes.

I can give some feedback on your suggested items:

Decrease performance disparities that are based on seniority, ex. Fr. v Sr. or under v upper classmen
* There's no inherent advantages based on experience, but older players have had longer to improve and gain IQ

Offensive tempos should equally affect both teams' player fatigue
* Tempo does affect both teams' fatigue, but you have to keep in mind that it's the overall tempo of the game, not just the tempo set by one team. For example, if one team is running up-tempo but the other is slow-down, then the overall effect is in the middle. If both teams are running up-tempo, that's when you'll see a major fatigue impact.

Eliminate halftime "feedback" used by the engine
* I'm not sure what's meant by this one.

Allow end-of-game substitution plans, ex, FT shooters, defenders, etc.
* This is something that we've thought about in the past, but it could get pretty complex pretty quickly on the user settings end. I'm assuming as a coach you'd want specific control over when to use each plan, and when you think about all the scenarios, it becomes hard to boil that down into manageable settings.

Ability to designate defensive match-ups with man-to-man
* This is definitely on our list, but again it requires thought to keep the settings manageable. The end result may be something similar to SimLeague Basketball, where you can't specifically set Player A to guard Player B, but you can specify which positions each of your players are allowed to guard, and the engine will do the actual matching up.

Improve the ways fouls are determined and assessed to individual players
* This is a little vague. Is there a specific scenario or type of player you're talking about?

Remove fullcourt press and fastbreak as individual sets, should work on a scale like tempo or positioning
* This is another one that's definitely on the list, but will require quite a bit of time for testing.

Make current offenses more unique and/or different from the other sets
* This would be interesting to me, but would probably require quite a bit of work on the engine, and I'm not sure the end result would be worth the effort.

Increases chances of offensive of offensive fouls for teams running uptempo
* Not sure I see the reasoning behind this one, but if there's data to back this up I'm open to incorporating it.


A few follow-up thoughts and comments. Firstly, I will be responding to some of the questions/points in the admins reply and I will pass those along to the user community as they become available. Secondly, by far the most eye opening part of admins statements, in my humble opinion is that there is "no inherent advantages based on experience".
5/5/2014 11:52 AM
The IQ is an inherent advantage based on experience. The way the whole IQ thing works is just terrible.

The solution on defensive matchups is inadequate. it doesn't address the shell game that can be played, and it adds a new problem. Say you want your SG to be able to guard the other team's star at SF. But his backup SF is more like a big man and the starter more like a guard...Same could be true at any position where you end up with a scorer and a non-scorer as the two primary players...and then the computer is going to be the one deciding this? i see nothing that could go wrong here!
 
 
5/5/2014 12:07 PM
I'll throw my specific opinions about each of those responses Ina bit (kinda busy at the moment), but if you read between the lines, you can definitely tell which options the admins have definitely been interested in for a while and/or are already high on their list of which things they'd like to fix.
5/5/2014 2:40 PM
ie - anything that requires a large amount of work will not be addressed
5/5/2014 3:09 PM
Decrease performance disparities that are based on seniority, ex. Fr. v Sr. or under v upper classmen
* There's no inherent advantages based on experience, but older players have had longer to improve and gain IQ

Offensive tempos should equally affect both teams' player fatigue
* Tempo does affect both teams' fatigue, but you have to keep in mind that it's the overall tempo of the game, not just the tempo set by one team. For example, if one team is running up-tempo but the other is slow-down, then the overall effect is in the middle. If both teams are running up-tempo, that's when you'll see a major fatigue impact.
 


regarding the 2 suggested changes above, i agree with admin. if you took a bunch of decent d2 freshmen and put them against a decent d3 team loaded with seniors and juniors, the freshmen would be able to compete and sometimes win. same with d1 frosh v. d2 upperclassmen. once you get to the upper level d1 schools, the freshmen are often good enough to compete with the upperclassmen. IOW, there is nothing inherent in the engine limiting the performance of underclassmen as opposed to upperclassmen.

regarding tempo, admin is confirming something that's been confirmed for years.
 
 
5/5/2014 3:10 PM
Computers are hard.
5/5/2014 3:55 PM
Posted by nachopuzzle on 5/5/2014 11:23:00 AM (view original):
The following is the transcript of a ticket I submitted and the direct response to that ticket by the site admins. I want to start by thanking the site admin for taking the time to make such a thorough and thoughtful reply to the ticket. I was already aware that seble had seen the thread before I sent the ticket, and was only trying to further pass along the outcome of the poll(s). With that being said, I also want to point out that the admin who took the time to write this much appreciated response didn't pen his or her name on it, so there is no way to tell who's voice it is.

Ticket:
Hello,
I recently created a thread in the main HD forum which polls users about what changes to the current HD landscape would most improve their HD experience. I feel the poll(s) is both large in scope yet detailed enough to be practical in it's interpretation (and hopefully implementation as well). There has already been well over 100 individual users that have participated by voting.

I'm aware that seble and the HD admins have been interested in making improvements to HD as of late, so I figured it couldn't hurt to pass along this pertinent information. The title of the thread is "long overdue...user polls", here is the link:

http://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?TopicID=476972&TopicsTimeframe=30

Thanks,
Nathan

Response:
Hi Nathan. I have looked at the results of your polls. Thanks for putting that together and getting some feedback. Right now we're trying to knock out some smaller, less time-consuming changes.

I can give some feedback on your suggested items:

Decrease performance disparities that are based on seniority, ex. Fr. v Sr. or under v upper classmen
* There's no inherent advantages based on experience, but older players have had longer to improve and gain IQ

Offensive tempos should equally affect both teams' player fatigue
* Tempo does affect both teams' fatigue, but you have to keep in mind that it's the overall tempo of the game, not just the tempo set by one team. For example, if one team is running up-tempo but the other is slow-down, then the overall effect is in the middle. If both teams are running up-tempo, that's when you'll see a major fatigue impact.

Eliminate halftime "feedback" used by the engine
* I'm not sure what's meant by this one.

Allow end-of-game substitution plans, ex, FT shooters, defenders, etc.
* This is something that we've thought about in the past, but it could get pretty complex pretty quickly on the user settings end. I'm assuming as a coach you'd want specific control over when to use each plan, and when you think about all the scenarios, it becomes hard to boil that down into manageable settings.

Ability to designate defensive match-ups with man-to-man
* This is definitely on our list, but again it requires thought to keep the settings manageable. The end result may be something similar to SimLeague Basketball, where you can't specifically set Player A to guard Player B, but you can specify which positions each of your players are allowed to guard, and the engine will do the actual matching up.

Improve the ways fouls are determined and assessed to individual players
* This is a little vague. Is there a specific scenario or type of player you're talking about?

Remove fullcourt press and fastbreak as individual sets, should work on a scale like tempo or positioning
* This is another one that's definitely on the list, but will require quite a bit of time for testing.

Make current offenses more unique and/or different from the other sets
* This would be interesting to me, but would probably require quite a bit of work on the engine, and I'm not sure the end result would be worth the effort.

Increases chances of offensive of offensive fouls for teams running uptempo
* Not sure I see the reasoning behind this one, but if there's data to back this up I'm open to incorporating it.


A few follow-up thoughts and comments. Firstly, I will be responding to some of the questions/points in the admins reply and I will pass those along to the user community as they become available. Secondly, by far the most eye opening part of admins statements, in my humble opinion is that there is "no inherent advantages based on experience".
this is a response from seble, and also when you say "seble and the hd admins", you are suggesting there are multiple, when in reality, its just seble. other people answer tickets, but he is THE hd admin.
5/5/2014 10:15 PM
Obviously, that's what I thought, but didn't want people throwing around wild assumptions or accusations if it could be avoided.
5/5/2014 11:16 PM
Posted by nachopuzzle on 5/5/2014 11:01:00 AM (view original):

Once again, please refrain for engaging etta in any negative conversations or thumbs downing any of his comments.

P.S. I'm working on a big update to this thread, it should be out relatively soon.


Thanks for that big update. Very enlightening.

As for Etta, I've given up. I tried engaging with him reasonably, yet he always eventually devolves into condescension and insults.
5/5/2014 11:19 PM
Posted by wildcat98 on 5/5/2014 11:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by nachopuzzle on 5/5/2014 11:01:00 AM (view original):

Once again, please refrain for engaging etta in any negative conversations or thumbs downing any of his comments.

P.S. I'm working on a big update to this thread, it should be out relatively soon.


Thanks for that big update. Very enlightening.

As for Etta, I've given up. I tried engaging with him reasonably, yet he always eventually devolves into condescension and insults.
what did i miss? i thought he was reasonable for the last several days.
5/5/2014 11:41 PM (edited)
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/4/2014 2:33:00 AM (view original):
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/3/2014 6:48:00 PM (view original):
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/3/2014 6:05:00 PM (view original):
I actually think FSS (and scouting) gives you too much information, and free information is too plentiful. I got a guy taken from me last cycle that was 20 miles from campus, no one had done anything with him until right before signings, and then USC-Upstate of all places (my team is in michigan) comes in on him.

It's even worse in D3. Most of the time IRL, D3s recruit locally and regionally, or they use a standout academic reputation to attract players. Of course, that's another issue with D3 on this game (that you can offer scholarships, which is not accurate). Most D3s IRL wouldn't have any clue what players were on the other side of the country. 

I knew a coach IRL that recruited a lot like nick -- basically he relied on a network of people he trusted to provide contacts, and then did a lot of calling and mailing and tried to get them to visit campus. If he got to that point, he usually got a commitment from the player. It's not as common these days but worked well for that hall of fame coach.

But back to FSS and potential. I think it would be much more effective to have potential be a function of current ability, work ethic, IQ (which needs ot be completely overhauled in its own right), maybe more ratings than that but you get the idea. 
thats how it used to work, where there was no potential for each rating. growth ran off practice plans, work ethic, and playing time. this allowed you to basically mold players however you wanted. every 60 per player with decent work ethic could graduate with 90 per. every big man could go up about 30 passing unless he started god awful, every guard could gain 30 lp unless he started god awful (or had bad work ethic).

in general, we feel its more realistic to have variance in the growth curves of a given player, for different ratings. it was totally unrealistic the way it was before, not every player can go up 10% from the line, not every player can greatly improve their jump shot, not every player can greatly improve their defense, or athleticism, or speed. not to say the current model couldn't be improved upon, but what you suggest has no difference for a given player, on their growth curve, for any rating. to me, that is grossly unrealistic. but really, i don't care all that much about realism, but strategy and enjoyability, and the current method has way more strategy in terms of team planning and all, than the old method or your suggestion. the combination of strategy, enjoyability, and realism, is why we have the method today, instead of the old method, which is much like what you are suggesting.

in this game, d3 is a training ground for d2 and d1, its like a place to practice. its important, for that reason, that d3 has similar mechanics to d2. you could change "offer scholarship" to "offer spot", but that is basically nitpicking semantics, isn't it? we all know you can't give athletic scholarships in real life, but if you did that in HD, it still makes no difference on the levelness of the playing field for d3 schools. i'd have no problem if they just reworded it to "offer spot" but i also couldn't care less if they don't.

Well I didn't say there shouldn't be variance, but doesn't mean you should necessarily know it from subscribing to a scouting service.

But in general it does follow that the players that are good shooters in high school are the ones that are great shooters in college. I disagree that the current way is more strategic. What's strategic about 'recruit the guys with a lot of blue'? 

You want the way you understand. For you enjoyability =/ realism because you don't know that much realism. So much that you don't even understand what I was suggesting. 

Never mind, have it the same crappy way you have it now. I mean that's why people are beating down the doors to get in and all the spots are full, right? That's why you all are setting up facebook pages to try to drum up interest? Because everything's so great right now? 

You have even less understanding of how not having a scholarship to offer affects decision making on D3 schools. I'm not even going to attempt to straighten you out on that because like you said, you don't care about realism anyway. It's pretty surprising though considering you're considered a demigod here and you went to a D-III school IRL, and still you don't seem to get it at all.
oh, i see now wildcat/nacho, i missed this one in which etta reverted to his old condescending bs. i was extremely helpful giving advice about his team in that thread he started, the one about his team being so bad, to try to make things more civil between us - but i guess he just doesn't want it that way.

etta, your basic reading comprehension is remarkably poor for someone pursing an MBA. i said not being able to offer a scholarship, but being able to offer a spot on the team, wouldn't affect the levelness of the playing field for d3. IN HD. it even says "in HD" that in the sentence. come on, you can do better than that - we know you are no savant, but we know you are not mentally retarded, either. presumably, if seble implemented this change, being offered a spot on the team would be worth less effort than offering a scholarship in d2 or d1. seble could also alter the way d3 recruiting works in other ways, such as making players more likely to want to play close to home. i'd be down for suggestions like those, but not the ones you made.

also, you claim that "[i] want the way [i] understand". years ago, in HD, the ability to grow (aka potential) was a function of current ability and work ethic, while growth was a product of the player's potential and his practice and playing time. this is a heck of a lot like what you described ("to have potential be a function of current ability, work ethic, IQ (which needs ot be completely overhauled in its own right), maybe more ratings than that but you get the idea"), and back then, i had no problem winning championships, either. so its a little stupid to suggest i don't understand how that would work. i understand both ways just fine - while you understand neither. i like the current way because it enhances the strategy. im not even going to attempt to straighten you out on that one, because like you said, you don't seem to care about this game anyway. however, given that you have played 3 seasons, and your biggest claim to fame is managing to win one game, given the enormity of your recruiting blunder - its NOT surprising that you don't seem to get it at all.
5/5/2014 11:37 PM
Posted by llamanunts on 5/4/2014 7:03:00 PM (view original):
I know my method of recruiting is not the popular method, but it has worked. I think Nyack in the Knight world is probably the best example of my method.
If peaking at the #49 RPI and some first round NT exits is a supportive example of your method, you may have some reevaluating to do.
I think the general opinion is that maybe I am not putting much thought into recruiting, because I don't use the service.
I'm sure you're putting a lot of thought into it, but it's really inefficient.  If you want to be a winning coach you're going to have to use all the information you can get your hands on.  FSS is VITAL if you want to have any real success.  Two guys with identical starting numbers will often look wildly different from each other with FSS information.  You're a sacrificing huge huge huge amount by foregoing it.
I did ramble on this post. I should be sleeping.

Make it cost less and I will use it. The service costs too much when users are in a weak conference. The service is affordable a little bit more bigger conferences. That is my biggest issue. A successful school should benefit more from it regardless of the conference. Why share the "team" success with a conference full of sims. IRL D3 level public schools HAVE advantages when they are a conference of private schools that cost $30,000+ year to attend. You think Wichita St has an as small basketball budget as the rest of the conference ? I wouldn't think so. Why should I be at fault in that case too?

I don't disagree with the benefits. I said in an earlier post this past season I had $3,000 to spend on one recruit. As it turns out I spent 3/4 of it on a recruit that was undecided until about the last day. I woke up the recruit ended up signing with someone else. If I were to get into battles with the best "potential" from the FSS service, I wouldn't have any cash to get a decent player.


As for the # 49 RPI, yeah I see what you are saying. I try my best to schedule tough non-conference games, but I can't control the conference. Not using the service, took Nyack to the first NT EVER, when 5 previous coaches could not. (They probably used the service.) Just good coaching?

Am I at fault for wanting to turn a program around? Often times they are in the weakest conferences. I took a small chunk little of thunder away from the Felician dominance while I was there. I am sure that user used the service too.
5/5/2014 11:44 PM
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/4/2014 10:45:00 PM (view original):
Yeah, that's why I've gotten paid essentially to communicate in basically every job I've had since graduation. Because I'm not very good at it.

Funny how it doesn't seem to be much of a problem outside HD. Maybe you all are just especially stupid, or maybe the egghead mentality that seems to be attracted to this game doesn't function very well when asked to think in a more abstract fashion.
wow, are you implying that just because people get paid to do a job requiring a skill or an ability, that they are necessarily good at that skill/ability? that is truly remarkable, i really don't think i've ever met anyone who sees the world as narrowly as you. way to think abstractly.
5/6/2014 1:10 AM
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/5/2014 11:19:00 PM (view original):
Posted by wildcat98 on 5/5/2014 11:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by nachopuzzle on 5/5/2014 11:01:00 AM (view original):

Once again, please refrain for engaging etta in any negative conversations or thumbs downing any of his comments.

P.S. I'm working on a big update to this thread, it should be out relatively soon.


Thanks for that big update. Very enlightening.

As for Etta, I've given up. I tried engaging with him reasonably, yet he always eventually devolves into condescension and insults.
what did i miss? i thought he was reasonable for the last several days.
Not much. Just me throwing the 0-27 thing back in colonel's face since we won a game already. Bench? We don't need no stinking bench! Or rebounding, or a power forward, apparently.
5/6/2014 1:14 AM
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/5/2014 11:45:00 PM (view original):
Posted by ettaexpress on 5/4/2014 10:45:00 PM (view original):
Yeah, that's why I've gotten paid essentially to communicate in basically every job I've had since graduation. Because I'm not very good at it.

Funny how it doesn't seem to be much of a problem outside HD. Maybe you all are just especially stupid, or maybe the egghead mentality that seems to be attracted to this game doesn't function very well when asked to think in a more abstract fashion.
wow, are you implying that just because people get paid to do a job requiring a skill or an ability, that they are necessarily good at that skill/ability? that is truly remarkable, i really don't think i've ever met anyone who sees the world as narrowly as you. way to think abstractly.
You're arguing just for the sake of arguing. Go on if that's what makes you happy, Don Quixote.
of 18
All Forums > Hoops Dynasty Basketball > Hoops Dynasty > long overdue...User Polls

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.