Quote: Originally posted by hurley711 on 5/28/2008If in 90% of the games it has NO BEARING, your words not mine, than get rid of it. You can't cover your butt and have it both ways in that first line, it's double talk. How can you say it has no bearing 9 times out of 10 and than say that it does not mean they are unimportant??? It's either important or it isn't!

Quote: Originally Posted By kfunk on 5/29/2008
note - 90% because the default is 0, not because the sim engine only pays attention to those things 10% of the time. If more owners/coaches actually used the settings, then it would matter more.

Quote: Originally Posted By benjihall on 5/29/2008I think its funny that "you put a lot of work" into the changes. You haven't even fixed the owner ranking that has been busted since the beginning. How hard is it to change it to a decent formula.

And isn't most of the "hard work" done by your customers? They make all the suggestions and often will even tell you how to do it!!! You should be happy to have such a giving group but when they complain about the changes you get all defensive and make excuses.

Amazing


SO...what you are saying is that this site is sooo great because of the customers and our constant "whining" and suggestions for improvements that make this SIM better than others?????



I AGREE

Quote: Originally Posted By seble on 5/28/2008Guys, honestly all I can say is some of the attitude here is pretty ridiculous. We've done a lot of work to add new layers to the game and all we get on here is complaints. Is it perfect? Of course not, it never will be. But it's a lot more useful to provide constructive ideas instead of rehashing the same examples over and over.

There are some here (qistat for example) who don't say "these ratings are stupid, you guys suck", but instead look at the whole picture and make useful suggestions about how to improve the system. Creating a sophisticated sim isn't rocket science, but it's also not trivial, especially when there are so many components interacting.

I think we do a tremendous job as a company of listening to user feedback and implementing as many of the suggestions as make sense for the games. But things can't always happen overnight as development is not always a quick process.

Just had to get my 2 cents in there, so you may resume complaining now

Quote: Originally Posted By tinmanpb on 5/28/2008




Usmoo, yes. I would guess that in 90%+ of the games played in the sim, the o-ranges have no bearing on anything in the engine because all default settings and all simmatchup games use the defensive positioning of 0. Obviously, that does not mean they are unimportant.

typical hoo ha - since we dont use the defensive settings they have no impact

well 1) speak for yourself I definitely do use the settings 2) the way your offensive ranges are distributed it makes it more likely to have an impact - I mean if Barkley is a perimeter player and Jordan is a perimeter player (plainly laughable designations btw) I will use that to my benefit on defense

The offensive ranges relate to how a player scored his points in real-life based on our best approximations (every individual explanation can be found in the numbers from the player in that season)

god you're in love with your numbers - here's an insight: you plainly weight assists too heavily and have made the wrong assumption as to how assists are generated in real life

more often than not assists come from the inside out and are caused by penetration (of one kind or another) that draws extra defensive attention (which means that setting up to play perimeter D on a guy like Chris Paul in real life would be a bad idea but in the sim would be a good idea - what's the opposite of realism?)

and are intended to add another wrinkle to consider when crafting a team. A team where the scoring is highly unbalanced in either the perimeter or paint direction can be significantly affected by defensive positioning.

f-ng A and that's the problem

These factors do not affect from where or when players shoot in the game, just how the defense adjusts their likelihood of making the shot with its positioning relative to that player's o-range.

more hoo ha - let me translate for those following along at home

these factors do not affect from where or when players shoot in the game (largely because the sim only knows if a shot is a trey or a 2 and does not think in terms of "where" in that way)

all these factors do is help determine whether or not the shot is actually made

Balance is a little more important than it was before;

and a little harder to attain as most of the great paint players are now listed midrange and most of the great midrange players are listed as perimeter players

coaches have another option they can set against each team; and, there are more tangible variables to use when building a team.

all of which is great but none of which addresses the issue that we, your customers, have raised

your range classifications are not realistic

(in the spirit of seble's request my constructive suggestion is that you change the weighting of assists in whatever equation you have set up to determine ranges - or better yet just listen to Q)

Quote: Originally Posted By monkee on 5/28/2008

Quote: Originally Posted By seble on 5/28/2008




Guys, honestly all I can say is some of the attitude here is pretty ridiculous. We've done a lot of work to add new layers to the game and all we get on here is complaints. Is it perfect? Of course not, it never will be. But it's a lot more useful to provide constructive ideas instead of rehashing the same examples over and over.

There are some here (qistat for example) who don't say "these ratings are stupid, you guys suck", but instead look at the whole picture and make useful suggestions about how to improve the system. Creating a sophisticated sim isn't rocket science, but it's also not trivial, especially when there are so many components interacting.

I think we do a tremendous job as a company of listening to user feedback and implementing as many of the suggestions as make sense for the games. But things can't always happen overnight as development is not always a quick process.

Just had to get my 2 cents in there, so you may resume complaining now.

suggestions

1)review the equation that outputs offensive ranges - it is plainly out of whack

2)review the way you assign defensive ratings - as above

3)fix the arbitrary def/off distro or whatever it is that is making the DefRBD% of 50s/60s players so high - I thought the idea was to standardize rebounding across eras you have achieved the opposite

4)be more responsive quicker and criticisms such as above will not devolve into repetitive complaints - you went 6 days without responding to some of the notes above and then when you did respond you and tinmanpb acted defensive and arrogant about it

5)the criticisms above have nothing to do with sampling sizes dont try to throw your customer base off with hoo-ha

6)instead of complaining about your customers try be glad you have an income - when should a customer service representative complain about his customers to their faces? how about never

7)if you are going to bring up qistat it might have been nice to see you respond to his suggestion(s) at any time prior to your little whine-fest (see link below)

http://www.whatifsports.com/forums/threads.asp?ForumID=9&TopicID=355391&PagePosition=1&ThreadPage=1

Quote: Originally Posted By seble on 5/29/2008To give a little preview of the survey results:

How do you feel in general about the new Defensive Ratings?
Choice 1 Better than the old ratings. 193 of 583 33%
Choice 2 About the same as the old ratings. 141 of 583 24%
Choice 3 Worse than the old ratings. 74 of 583 13%
Choice 4 No opinion. 175 of 583 30%

So the argument that "everybody" feels a certain way because of a few forum posters just isn't accurate. We have to consider the entire user base, not just those vocal few in the forums, which is why the surveys are useful


That is ridiculous results! Lebron is a 100? The Stop % isn't an actual indicator of defensive ability. I really would like to know how many of the veteran owners feel this way. If this doesn't change; I will drastically cut back my sim teams.

Quote: Originally posted by seble on 5/29/2008To give a little preview of the survey results:

How do you feel in general about the new Defensive Ratings?
Choice 1 Better than the old ratings. 193 of 583 33%
Choice 2 About the same as the old ratings. 141 of 583 24%
Choice 3 Worse than the old ratings. 74 of 583 13%
Choice 4 No opinion. 175 of 583 30%

So the argument that "everybody" feels a certain way because of a few forum posters just isn't accurate. We have to consider the entire user base, not just those vocal few in the forums, which is why the surveys are useful.