Posted by furry_nipps on 7/29/2010 6:28:00 PM (view original):
Because everyone maxed out with no weakness was stupid. Now, a starter might be a littler slower, a little bit weaker on the boards or his inside game, a weaker defender. In the top part of div I, this was NEVER the case. You can now adjust and attack. Other coaches have to make adjustments on a game by game basis. You might take a slightly worse player overall, but is a beast at whatever you need. You may sign a ben wallace type guy who is a freak athleticly, defender and rebounder, but lacks scoring. You'd of course counter this by getting a dominate inside scorer to play next to him. Isn't that much better/realistic? 

So seble overcorrects by not only weakening recruits but also slowing down progression? Great job guy...the infamous double whammy...grazie.

I don't think the process has changed much. I just had almost all my guys get multiple areas of 10+ or more gains. In IBA, we are going at a solid pace as well. If he didn't say he slowed it down I wouldn't have noticed it.

Posted by tkimble on 7/29/2010 7:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by furry_nipps on 7/29/2010 6:28:00 PM (view original):
Because everyone maxed out with no weakness was stupid. Now, a starter might be a littler slower, a little bit weaker on the boards or his inside game, a weaker defender. In the top part of div I, this was NEVER the case. You can now adjust and attack. Other coaches have to make adjustments on a game by game basis. You might take a slightly worse player overall, but is a beast at whatever you need. You may sign a ben wallace type guy who is a freak athleticly, defender and rebounder, but lacks scoring. You'd of course counter this by getting a dominate inside scorer to play next to him. Isn't that much better/realistic? 

this is what the new recruits are.  can someone please argue how this is a bad thing?  I really want to hear it.  Colonels?

Some of the recruit ratings are so bizarre that it wouldn't even look good as a Mr. Potato Head. How exactly does a 60 ATH 5 SPD guy play...that's funny...who is this guy Frankenstein? It's like there's no rhyme or reason to the new recruits...seble just hits the random button and laughs.

Posted by colonels19 on 7/29/2010 8:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by arssanguinus on 7/29/2010 4:43:00 PM (view original):

Posted by colonels19 on 7/29/2010 2:58:00 PM (view original):
I most certainly am. I'd rather play a game where there are too many ACTUALLY talented guys than play a game where talent is weighed/judged on whose GARBAGE is better. Give me 700s v. 700s over 550s v. 550s every single day of the week. Too much talent is a good problem to have.

And you, are going into the typical arssintheb nonsense where I have you beaten thus you have nothing left to say but "you're illogical" and I won't debate with these empty statements.

Right,  Believe whatever makes you feel good;  but just a hint - just because someone else gives up arguing with you doesn't mean you are actually RIGHT.  Food for thought.  

Well if you give up because you can't beat me, then what does that really say about you and your argument? You can poopoo what I say all you want, it doesn't mean that what I say/argue isn't valid....food for thought.

You always back out in the heart of an argument, and it's because ya got nothin.

You are quite funny, Colonels.  I leave an argument when it becomes clear you are not trying to be right but instead that you are trying to win.  Or at least make yourself believe that you won, and those are not the same thing at all.

What exactly is different about being right and winning?

You ALWAYS do this...ALWAYS

Posted by colonels19 on 7/29/2010 8:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tkimble on 7/29/2010 7:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by furry_nipps on 7/29/2010 6:28:00 PM (view original):
Because everyone maxed out with no weakness was stupid. Now, a starter might be a littler slower, a little bit weaker on the boards or his inside game, a weaker defender. In the top part of div I, this was NEVER the case. You can now adjust and attack. Other coaches have to make adjustments on a game by game basis. You might take a slightly worse player overall, but is a beast at whatever you need. You may sign a ben wallace type guy who is a freak athleticly, defender and rebounder, but lacks scoring. You'd of course counter this by getting a dominate inside scorer to play next to him. Isn't that much better/realistic? 

this is what the new recruits are.  can someone please argue how this is a bad thing?  I really want to hear it.  Colonels?

Some of the recruit ratings are so bizarre that it wouldn't even look good as a Mr. Potato Head. How exactly does a 60 ATH 5 SPD guy play...that's funny...who is this guy Frankenstein? It's like there's no rhyme or reason to the new recruits...seble just hits the random button and laughs.

Really?  We both know that wasn't the point.  Don't you think these recruits allow you to build a more realistic team?  A team with strengths and weaknesses as a opposed to a team with guards with 95+ speed, passing, and ball handling?

If you can't figure out what the difference between being right and 'winning' is. . then I really can't help you.  I bet there are quite a few other people that can explain it to you.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ChewbaccaDefense

Posted by colonels19 on 7/29/2010 8:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by daalter on 7/29/2010 3:46:00 PM (view original):

Posted by colonels19 on 7/29/2010 3:23:00 PM (view original):
I'm stupid because I don't agree with you? Classy as usual. I'd rather play with a higher mean of players and you'd rather play with whatever seble tells you and whatever the 10 guys during testing told seble to do...whatever happened to zhawks anyway...I'll play however, but I don't have to like it just because it's new and "everyone else does". Give me strength on strength any day. If HD was a push button game, you wouldn't play it.

No, you're stupid because you're unable to understand simple concepts, and because you're completely inflexible in your viewpoints.

Thanks for the multiple personal attacks and name calling...I might just have to inform CS of these...however, as usual, you display your own inadequacy in grasping my points/arguments. We have different definitions of talent, and you don't understand this. Guys that are talented in this game have 750-900+ ratings. You're trying to tell me that the game is just as good with worse talent/ratings, just because the rest of the game has worse talent/ratings....I don't see how worse/talent ratings equates to a better game, because it just doesn't. In a push button, I'd rather have a mean of 80 than 70.

The numbers that you clamor for are completely arbitrary colonels, and don't matter at all. It's not important that a player's rating is 8 or 80 or 800 ot 8 million, all that matters is how that player's talents compare to other players in the game. A talented player will be one that compares well to his peers, not one that reached some magical threshold. if a 700 rated player in the engine performs like a 800 rated player in the old engine, then he is just as talented. Who cares what the actual number is?

Posted by furry_nipps on 7/29/2010 6:28:00 PM (view original):
Because everyone maxed out with no weakness was stupid. Now, a starter might be a littler slower, a little bit weaker on the boards or his inside game, a weaker defender. In the top part of div I, this was NEVER the case. You can now adjust and attack. Other coaches have to make adjustments on a game by game basis. You might take a slightly worse player overall, but is a beast at whatever you need. You may sign a ben wallace type guy who is a freak athleticly, defender and rebounder, but lacks scoring. You'd of course counter this by getting a dominate inside scorer to play next to him. Isn't that much better/realistic? 

I am tentatively going to say that furry is right.  The whole process is much more challenging than before, figuring out which weaknesses you can live with, and making players fit more like a puzzle rather than creating your own all-star team.  So long as the engine actually does allow you to gameplan more strategically, then I guess most everyone got what they wanted.

I will still argue that the rankings are very messed up, and because of that drop-downs/pull-downs are too.  When unranked guys showing up on my D2 list are better with higher potential than ranked D1 guys that I would have to pull down, something is wrong.  

as much as i have been disgruntled w/ some changes lately, i think the new recruits having weaknesses is a good thing.  it's made recruiting a bit more fun again.

Posted by colonels19 on 7/29/2010 8:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tkimble on 7/29/2010 7:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by furry_nipps on 7/29/2010 6:28:00 PM (view original):
Because everyone maxed out with no weakness was stupid. Now, a starter might be a littler slower, a little bit weaker on the boards or his inside game, a weaker defender. In the top part of div I, this was NEVER the case. You can now adjust and attack. Other coaches have to make adjustments on a game by game basis. You might take a slightly worse player overall, but is a beast at whatever you need. You may sign a ben wallace type guy who is a freak athleticly, defender and rebounder, but lacks scoring. You'd of course counter this by getting a dominate inside scorer to play next to him. Isn't that much better/realistic? 

this is what the new recruits are.  can someone please argue how this is a bad thing?  I really want to hear it.  Colonels?

Some of the recruit ratings are so bizarre that it wouldn't even look good as a Mr. Potato Head. How exactly does a 60 ATH 5 SPD guy play...that's funny...who is this guy Frankenstein? It's like there's no rhyme or reason to the new recruits...seble just hits the random button and laughs.

Maybe you're just confused as to what the ratings categories mean. Athleticism also includes strength, especially for big men; which is why it factors so much into rebounding and low post scoring. Have you never seen Shaq play? I'd say 60 Ath 5 Spd would fit him perfectly. An opposing center could get smashed defending him on the low post, then beat him to the other end by walking.

It seems to me you would rather coach a team full of equally-talented robots than a realistic team of college basketball players. This sounds more like an NBA team than a college team (which is why WIS has SLBK, but I haven't personally tried it though). Would you rather have WIS kept all the ratings the same, but just raise the max of each rating to 150 instead? Just add in a couple superstars for the top-tier programs to fight over and a small amount of variance and you basically have the same recruit generation as we do now.

Posted by summerteeth on 7/29/2010 10:46:00 PM (view original):
as much as i have been disgruntled w/ some changes lately, i think the new recruits having weaknesses is a good thing.  it's made recruiting a bit more fun again.

+1

Gheorghe Muresan.

talent isn't "how good you are at basketball" so much as "how much better you are than everyone else". if every PG in the nba had 99 speed, you wouldn't have "fast" pgs just "not-slow" pgs.

it's a delicate balance if you're trying to simulate "more talent". if everyone has high ratings, nobody really separates themself. if only a few players have high ratings, only a few players separate themselves. you need a balance, and i think having more "unique" players, as the new generation system seems to have, is a step in the right direction.