3/28/2013 7:32 PM (edited)
Posted by llamanunts on 3/28/2013 4:37:00 PM (view original):
I think the NCAA should look at HD and realign its conferences to match this game.
Not only would that be better, I think it's more likely to happen.
This...

Realignment happens in real life because every school/conference is the biggest money grubbing whore you'll ever see...and again, you want WIS to follow suit and kowtow to the wishy-washy paper chaser...c'mon man.  Conference realignment is the slipperiest slope that HD could ever encounter and there are nothing but negative consequences.
3/28/2013 9:49 PM
Posted by milwood on 3/28/2013 1:43:00 PM (view original):
It's pretty simple why I hate off days.....I like this simulation and silly as it sounds I look forward to my game results every morning. Mornings, or afternoons, when I don't have a game just seem to be missing something. I do enjoy going over the box scores and the pbp. I don't know maybe I enjoy it a little too much?

If there were more off days I would lose interest pretty quickly. I enjoy seeing my guys develop and thinking about having it take twice as long to see a player reach his potential just isn't appealing to me. I guess I fall into that category of people that need instant gratification.

I actually think just the opposite of the op. I think the NCAA should look at HD and realign its conferences to match this game. Conferences at DI have just gotten out of hand. Okay, that was said somewhat in jest, but I don't think the game play woud be improved just by aligning conferences
++++++++111111111.  AGREE,
3/28/2013 10:17 PM
Posted by terps21234 on 3/28/2013 9:49:00 PM (view original):
Posted by milwood on 3/28/2013 1:43:00 PM (view original):
It's pretty simple why I hate off days.....I like this simulation and silly as it sounds I look forward to my game results every morning. Mornings, or afternoons, when I don't have a game just seem to be missing something. I do enjoy going over the box scores and the pbp. I don't know maybe I enjoy it a little too much?

If there were more off days I would lose interest pretty quickly. I enjoy seeing my guys develop and thinking about having it take twice as long to see a player reach his potential just isn't appealing to me. I guess I fall into that category of people that need instant gratification.

I actually think just the opposite of the op. I think the NCAA should look at HD and realign its conferences to match this game. Conferences at DI have just gotten out of hand. Okay, that was said somewhat in jest, but I don't think the game play woud be improved just by aligning conferences
++++++++111111111.  AGREE,
++++++++11111111111
3/29/2013 3:11 PM
Posted by graff on 3/27/2013 9:49:00 AM (view original):
I understand that the 12 teams/conference cookie cutter makes life easier for people but why are we FORCED to live in that box again? 

Why can't teams play different numbers of conference and non-conference games, just like in real life? It might mean the coders have to have different schedule functions based on the conference affiliation but I don't see why it's not doable.

Honest question here because the make believe conferences really detracts from the game. I had a friend ready to sign up until they saw this and I got laughed out of the office for playing a "totally erroneous fantasy land game akin to dungeons and dragons built upon a big random number generator". Sadly I couldn't argue too much.
your friend has a very archaic view of things. how are sports not "erroneous" if not for the dedication of so many people to sports? How is WhatIf different from any game, really? It's the time and effort that everyone puts into the game that gives it meaning, regardless of any outsider's pretentious dismissals.
3/29/2013 8:05 PM
The guy was probably disappointed that it wasn't like some console games where you actually play the game yourself with a controller.  Now that's completely realistic and not random at all.
4/1/2013 2:39 AM
I've gone through and re-read this thread and had responses for most of these posts, but in the end it's a waste of time. We're going to have to agree to disagree apparently.

It just sucks to see something with potential end up a hack job like it is. 

I actually did an entire study on the average number of minutes played by real life NCAA starters vs. the amount of minutes played by WiS starters to show people, statistically, exactly how WiS is screwed up in this area, but posting it is pointless. Many seem to much rather enjoy the bliss of their ignorance or force themselves to suspend all concepts of reality and mold and shape themselves into this distorted WiS world until they can actually enjoy it.

You've got a game where height and positions DO NOT MATTER. That may be music to the ears of all the 5'8 computer programmer white guys out there, but it isn't based on ANYTHING resembling reality. I don't care how good your "LP" is, if you're 5'8 you're not posting up a guy who is 6'6. You're not even going to be able to receive a pass on the block. This is gameplay which can NEVER happen in real life.

You've got a game where Florida Gulf Coast is still D2. Notre Dame is in the Big 10. God only knows how many other incorrect teams/conferences there are. Is it the BIGGEST problem with the game? Far from it, but it just adds to the lack of realism. This is a part of the game which can NEVER happen in real life.

You've got a game where starters can only play 22-24 minutes a game unless you go slowdown/zone or they get too tired and play like crap, making 7-8 man rotations virtually impossible and forcing coaches to play 10 man rotations. Again I've got the data to back all this up. The fatigue/stamina system is jacked to crap and needs tweaked. Not thrown away. Not start over from scratch. Tweaked. As it is 99% of all coaches HAVE to play 10 man rotations. This is part of the game which can NEVER happen in real life (everybody having to have those types of rotations that is).

So no, I don't hate the game. This is my 4th go-round. I've tried it 3 times before and quit after 1 season each time because I just couldn't deal with it. We'll see if go #4 is any better, but judging by the tone of the forum responses I've gotten, probably not. So I'll probably be a 1 and done for the 4th time again.

Apparently some would rather stoop to calling me names or some weird attempt at looking at my WiS record (as if that means I understand the game of basketball or not) instead of just engaging in a dialogue with me about ways to improve the simulation so that's it's at least BASED on reality. Right now it isn't and I just gave 3 huge examples above (though there are more). If the game isn't going to be based on reality, then what's the point in even calling it basketball? It's all just a make believe numbers game with the word basketball in the title. Nothing more, nothing less. Could still be fun to play. Be my guest if that's all you want or what you enjoy. Just know that there ARE people like me out there who COULD enjoy this service if only it made some basketball sense. 
4/1/2013 3:27 AM
Sorry...just not true.   Most coaches play starters 22-24 mins by choice.   You can easily get players with decent staminas to play 30 mpg at getting tired without any ill effects.   Below is a DI team who F-ed up their recruiting last season and only had 7 scholly players.  They seemed to do just fine.

http://www.whatifsports.com/hd/TeamProfile/Stats.aspx?tid=5363


My guess is you do not have enough experience to form educated anough opinions yet on this.
4/1/2013 3:35 AM
Posted by graff on 4/1/2013 2:39:00 AM (view original):
I've gone through and re-read this thread and had responses for most of these posts, but in the end it's a waste of time. We're going to have to agree to disagree apparently.

It just sucks to see something with potential end up a hack job like it is. 

I actually did an entire study on the average number of minutes played by real life NCAA starters vs. the amount of minutes played by WiS starters to show people, statistically, exactly how WiS is screwed up in this area, but posting it is pointless. Many seem to much rather enjoy the bliss of their ignorance or force themselves to suspend all concepts of reality and mold and shape themselves into this distorted WiS world until they can actually enjoy it.

You've got a game where height and positions DO NOT MATTER. That may be music to the ears of all the 5'8 computer programmer white guys out there, but it isn't based on ANYTHING resembling reality. I don't care how good your "LP" is, if you're 5'8 you're not posting up a guy who is 6'6. You're not even going to be able to receive a pass on the block. This is gameplay which can NEVER happen in real life.

You've got a game where Florida Gulf Coast is still D2. Notre Dame is in the Big 10. God only knows how many other incorrect teams/conferences there are. Is it the BIGGEST problem with the game? Far from it, but it just adds to the lack of realism. This is a part of the game which can NEVER happen in real life.

You've got a game where starters can only play 22-24 minutes a game unless you go slowdown/zone or they get too tired and play like crap, making 7-8 man rotations virtually impossible and forcing coaches to play 10 man rotations. Again I've got the data to back all this up. The fatigue/stamina system is jacked to crap and needs tweaked. Not thrown away. Not start over from scratch. Tweaked. As it is 99% of all coaches HAVE to play 10 man rotations. This is part of the game which can NEVER happen in real life (everybody having to have those types of rotations that is).

So no, I don't hate the game. This is my 4th go-round. I've tried it 3 times before and quit after 1 season each time because I just couldn't deal with it. We'll see if go #4 is any better, but judging by the tone of the forum responses I've gotten, probably not. So I'll probably be a 1 and done for the 4th time again.

Apparently some would rather stoop to calling me names or some weird attempt at looking at my WiS record (as if that means I understand the game of basketball or not) instead of just engaging in a dialogue with me about ways to improve the simulation so that's it's at least BASED on reality. Right now it isn't and I just gave 3 huge examples above (though there are more). If the game isn't going to be based on reality, then what's the point in even calling it basketball? It's all just a make believe numbers game with the word basketball in the title. Nothing more, nothing less. Could still be fun to play. Be my guest if that's all you want or what you enjoy. Just know that there ARE people like me out there who COULD enjoy this service if only it made some basketball sense. 
It is based on reality. I'm not sure based on means what you think it does. There have been, admittedly numerous, concessions to attempt to make the game fairer for all players. Height is already an aspect of the ratings*, so they claim, and as such I'm fine with it.

Not many 5'8" players have the LP skills to post anyone up that I am aware of (in HD I mean), and also, are you familiar with the bounce pass? And while 5'8 posting 6'6 might be exceedingly rare, shorter players sometimes can be successful posting larger players. I assume you have heard of Charles Barkley?

12 team conferences make scheduling much simpler and keep all coaches playing the same number and ratio of conference games (ie 2 vs division, 1 vs other division). It may not be perfect, but the majority of teams are in the right conferences. The constant shuffling of teams in real life makes the prospect of forcing strict adherence to reality a nightmare for this game, and I would have a very negative reaction to constant changes of HD conference makeup, especially if one or more of my teams were directly affected. Others have different opinions on this. 

Teams can and do win national championships in HD with 8 man rotations. 10 man rotations are generally easier, and probably fairer, in that the elite teams (which have an advantage in recruiting, much as elite teams in reality do, although how it is expressed in HD is perhaps flawed) cannot just sign 8 great players and beat everyone else (at least not most of the time). It also adds an deeper level of team building as it is important not just to have 8-10 talented players, but 8-10 (or more) pieces that fit well together. A team made up of the best 8 SFs in a world might be pretty good, but I wouldn't expect them to win titles. 

There are a number of issues with this game. It is unlikely that they will ever be fixed given what I have seen over my time playing it. I am willing to accept that, while still trying to push for improvement in key areas (I don't feel player height, conference affiliation or even fatigue are in the top 10 of things that are important to "fix"). While I do admire the passion with which you make your case I am put off by your overall tone. That is my opinion. 




*From developer chat May 4, 2010: Will a 7'0" C with 70 LP have an easier time scoring than a 6'4" C with a 70 LP? "With all other ratings being equal" I was told before that height didn't have an effect it was just the ratings. (utvol4life - All-Star - 2:37 PM)
I think the only adjustment that could be made is to account for extreme differences in height. In general, the rating accounts for their height. So you can look at your example like this: the 7'0" player may only be a 50 LP if he were 6'6" instead.

4/1/2013 12:24 PM (edited)
mully and dac, please direct me to the infinite reservoir of restraint to which you seem to have access.  I admire your ability to stay rational in the face of wharrgarbl.
4/1/2013 12:10 PM
graff, I respectfully think that you need to find another game.
4/1/2013 12:34 PM
I keep waiting for a "hand out" closing.
4/1/2013 12:55 PM
Posted by graff on 4/1/2013 2:39:00 AM (view original):
I've gone through and re-read this thread and had responses for most of these posts, but in the end it's a waste of time. We're going to have to agree to disagree apparently.

It just sucks to see something with potential end up a hack job like it is. 

I actually did an entire study on the average number of minutes played by real life NCAA starters vs. the amount of minutes played by WiS starters to show people, statistically, exactly how WiS is screwed up in this area, but posting it is pointless. Many seem to much rather enjoy the bliss of their ignorance or force themselves to suspend all concepts of reality and mold and shape themselves into this distorted WiS world until they can actually enjoy it.

You've got a game where height and positions DO NOT MATTER. That may be music to the ears of all the 5'8 computer programmer white guys out there, but it isn't based on ANYTHING resembling reality. I don't care how good your "LP" is, if you're 5'8 you're not posting up a guy who is 6'6. You're not even going to be able to receive a pass on the block. This is gameplay which can NEVER happen in real life.

You've got a game where Florida Gulf Coast is still D2. Notre Dame is in the Big 10. God only knows how many other incorrect teams/conferences there are. Is it the BIGGEST problem with the game? Far from it, but it just adds to the lack of realism. This is a part of the game which can NEVER happen in real life.

You've got a game where starters can only play 22-24 minutes a game unless you go slowdown/zone or they get too tired and play like crap, making 7-8 man rotations virtually impossible and forcing coaches to play 10 man rotations. Again I've got the data to back all this up. The fatigue/stamina system is jacked to crap and needs tweaked. Not thrown away. Not start over from scratch. Tweaked. As it is 99% of all coaches HAVE to play 10 man rotations. This is part of the game which can NEVER happen in real life (everybody having to have those types of rotations that is).

So no, I don't hate the game. This is my 4th go-round. I've tried it 3 times before and quit after 1 season each time because I just couldn't deal with it. We'll see if go #4 is any better, but judging by the tone of the forum responses I've gotten, probably not. So I'll probably be a 1 and done for the 4th time again.

Apparently some would rather stoop to calling me names or some weird attempt at looking at my WiS record (as if that means I understand the game of basketball or not) instead of just engaging in a dialogue with me about ways to improve the simulation so that's it's at least BASED on reality. Right now it isn't and I just gave 3 huge examples above (though there are more). If the game isn't going to be based on reality, then what's the point in even calling it basketball? It's all just a make believe numbers game with the word basketball in the title. Nothing more, nothing less. Could still be fun to play. Be my guest if that's all you want or what you enjoy. Just know that there ARE people like me out there who COULD enjoy this service if only it made some basketball sense. 
This game was never, never, never intended to be a perfect reflection of real life. Since you can't get past that, you shouldn't play.

(Ask any old-timer about when Old Admin added "dilemmas" in a misguided attempt to make this game more like real life.)

To some of us, it's magic that this game gets as close as it does to reflecting reality. There's room for improvement in HD, but the fact is this game is very good.
4/1/2013 12:58 PM
Graff-last time I checked, WIS doesn't advertise HD as "the most realistic simulation you'll ever play."  There's a huge disconnect between what the game offers and what your expectations are.  Based on several of your statements and desire for realism, I'm guessing you never read fiction books, don't allow your kids (if you have them) to believe in Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny, and you certainly never play video games with cartoon characters in them.  Because after all, none of those things are "real" or "realistic."  If you curb your expectations of the game and accept it for what it has to offer, stick around a few seasons to learn the ins and outs of recruiting and gameplanning, you might actually enjoy what HD has to offer.
4/1/2013 3:03 PM
Posted by darnoc29099 on 4/1/2013 12:58:00 PM (view original):
Graff-last time I checked, WIS doesn't advertise HD as "the most realistic simulation you'll ever play."  There's a huge disconnect between what the game offers and what your expectations are.  Based on several of your statements and desire for realism, I'm guessing you never read fiction books, don't allow your kids (if you have them) to believe in Santa Claus or the Easter Bunny, and you certainly never play video games with cartoon characters in them.  Because after all, none of those things are "real" or "realistic."  If you curb your expectations of the game and accept it for what it has to offer, stick around a few seasons to learn the ins and outs of recruiting and gameplanning, you might actually enjoy what HD has to offer.
+1 btw thx for smacking my team around a bit hopefully it will motivate them to play harder lol
4/1/2013 3:07 PM
I know I'm kinda late to the game on this thread, but wanted to chime in with my 2 cents.

First off I am very new to HD, but think I have a good grasp on how it works.

I too like it to be as close to real life as possible.  With that being said, I think that keeping it at conferences of 12 teams is in the best interest of HD, for conpetitive and simplistic reasons. (I also am not a fan of more days off, I like having a game a day to look forward to.  The 2 games/day would be great, but there are just some times during the money I couldn't keep up.  Also, fewer days off means more seasons, which I also like).

NOW, with all of that being said I would like to see a few changes made.  If it were my call, I would move Utah and Colorado to the Pac-12 (also renaming the conferece the Pac-12 would be a nice face lift).  I would move Nebraska to the Big 10 (thus giving them their real life 12 teams).  These 2 changes would leave the Big-12 with only 10....to get them back to 12 I would add TCU and Notre Dame to the Big-12.  Yes, I know Notre Dame in the Big-12 seems CRAZY, but it makes just as much sense as having them in the Big-10, but at least after these changes, we have a more real life look of the conferences.  These changes also leave Hawaii and Fresno St without a home, so you have to keep adjusting.  Without going into too much depth put Hawaii in the Big Sky, then move a team like Southern closer to their geographical conference, maybe putting them in place of TCU......and so on from there.  A "new conference" might need to be added to have all the real life D-1 teams who are currently D2 in the game make the jump.  And when I say new conference I mean one like the WAC which is not currently in the game.  Obviously it's a lot more complex than just these changes, there would be several dominoes that would keep falling, but I think getting it closer to real life would be a plus.

Obviously this sucks if you're a coach of a team like Hawaii or Fresno St, as you are now no longer a part of a Major Conference, so that has to be taken into some consideration.

Again this is just my 2 cents (sorry it was somewhat rambling) and I can understand why a lot of people would not be in favor of any changes.

Either way I look foward to playing several seasons of HD, I've had a blast so far! 

of 8

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.