Quote: Originally Posted By furry_nipps on 2/11/2009What?

Way to play dumb...

Im watching you...

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

Sounds good to me. I hope it works out.

This change should not go in affect until season end. It is not realistic for you to change performances in middles of seasons . I have spent over 1500 to 2000 in last year and have 14 teams all over the place and I think that all changes should have to waite until end of the year you have to battle in DivIII for recruiting between that and actively game planning you take your lumps and you learn every body cant start off with dynasty numbers . You play with what you have and you coach your backside off to do the best you can win or lose. MAKE YOUR DAMN ADJUSTMENTS IN THE OFF SEASON. Once things are set you should be stuck with it. Sounds to me like a bunch of whining about game makers set standers .Its a game of law and averages study the averages that what makes the game adicting the ups and downs. If anything make it harder for the older guys to stay on top. when on top its small space and everyone trying to get there some worlds the first team to get there becomes the duke of that world and is never tested that is crazy. If anything fix it so new player have it easier to work up the mountain at least half way. This inturn works to keep teams active and for marketing. As you move up make the average favor weaker teams so you have to earn your 29-3 each season to oppose it being auto matic. everybody entitled to their opions the makers of this game are going to do as they see fit. So really this is just a smoke screen to make everyone feel heard. Just retired from military did a stint in recruiting and if this isnt a marketing tool, lets focus on won that makes it better for the long run. The Center wasnt supposed to dominate as well as he did at UCLA as a Freshmen. Then he was suppose to have great numers as a rookie both have been I popping surprizes.

this is crap... recruited geared toward potential... not happy with WIS

potential isn't going anywhere

Will this affect only the newly generated players? Seems unfair if it doesn't. Also, what really is the difference? I'd rather have players max out early if they are going to max out. Wasn't the point to make FR and SO more competitive?

Overall, I would like the changes to be TESTED thoroughly before being IMPLEMENTED.

with my idea there is no need to change anything with the current players. they can just be labeled as quick to reach potential and all new recruits could be different.

Quote: Originally posted by seble on 2/11/2009If there's a majority sentiment to wait longer we can, but we've gotten the impression that immediate is better in this case.

I could not disagree more.

The standard WIS protocol is to immediately overreact and break something else.

You're going to try to develop, test and implement all in less than a week?

You should let this run a full 4 seasons in each world THEN implement your change, otherwise different people managed to "time" this to their advantage.

I would like to see players potential be based on practice and game time. Very few players have a true cap in real life until they are simply totally amazing. Think of the great ones who continued to improve though more slowly once they enter the pros.

I do have to admit the timing could not be worse for me personally. If I had know this I would have stayed at DII as my team there was set to have an amazing run.

Changes are going to happen and I must admit I really don't have much to complain about the current settings as they are.

1. What i don't understand from some of your arguments or just statements is the fear on a soft cap to a hard cap. So many of you are fighting a soft cap of 2-3 point gains a season which is nothing like the old system unless a player was below 20's or above 85 or so.

2. Why are you arguing that this is not real when the reason for this change was to make the game more like real life? Isn't that the big reason they moved to the potential system? We all know it's not real life. You don't have to tell us, but don't use the argument that the changes were made to make the game more real and then argue against it.

3. By the definitive terms of low potential does not mean 0 gain. Low potential means there is very little potential to be gained, but if they want to make it no more gains, then there needs to be a new category of no potential.

4. Hard caps are ridiculous. There is no random factor except for when will his potential run out. Potential is no different than the old system except they advance faster and then stop going up at all. Once you get a message saying he's maxed, then that's it. I'm sure many coaches here can still get a guess to within about 10 points of how high there player's ratings will get. Under a soft cap you may not be satisfied with a 57 perimeter shooter in DIV III, but if you can get him to the low - mid 60's over a 2 year period you might be satisfied. This is not a major change to make this player godly. It just so people feel they still have some control over what the players can do.

I have no problem with the changes. Hell, I'd like to see it so that teams don't have 12 players with 85+ on Defense and 5 post players with 90+ on REB & LP. That's not realistic. There are no teams in real life that play that good of individual defense. Top 10 teams in real life are lucky to have 2 or 3 "top end" defenders on a team--not 10 or 12 or even all 5 startesr. In real life, teams have weak links on defense--even the top teams in the nation. Christian Laettner, Larry Johnson, Jamal Mashburn, Mike Miller, etc were all great college players that were average at best on defense. Throw in JJ Redick and you have a great shooter/offensive player that was horrible on defense. So, I'd love to see only about 2 or 3 defensive players over 80 on defense per team. Or if you want to sacrifice some offense, maybe 5 or 6.

On top of that, there is such a thing as a 4 or 5-star recruit that is a BUST. Actually, it happens quite often. So, maybe that is the case with a 5-star post player that caps out at 67 on LP or 80 on REB. That's REAL LIFE. Dean Smith had them, John Wooden had them and even Coach K has them.

Quote: Originally Posted By seble on 2/11/2009We've gotten a large amount of feedback since player potential was introduced that indicates a need to tweak player improvement. We're implementing and testing some changes now.

The overall effect of the change will be slower development of players. Currently, most players are developing over about a 2 year period. We'd like that to stretch that out so most players peak as juniors and seniors. Of course every player has a different combination of potential, work ethic, and practice plan, so that peak will vary from player to player.

We're not planning any changes at this time to potential itself.

This change will likely be released some time next week and will immediately take effect in all worlds

We've gotten a large amount of feedback since player potential was introduced that indicates a need to tweak player improvement. We're implementing and testing some changes now.

The overall effect of the change will be slower development of players. Currently, most players are developing over about a 2 year period. We'd like that to stretch that out so most players peak as juniors and seniors. Of course every player has a different combination of potential, work ethic, and practice plan, so that peak will vary from player to player.

We're not planning any changes at this time to potential itself.

This change will likely be released some time next week and will immediately take effect in all worlds.

You really think slowing it down is some major change that can't be done in a week? C'mon now. Should only take a day tops to run tests to get a player who would improve 100 down to 80 or whatever they decide to do.