mmt, seble has come out and said that the engine is not working like it's supposed to on many levels.

So unless you know something he doesn't, this isn't even a debate.

im pretty sure that sable has said that it is pretty much a total re-write and that one of the reasons is that the current code is just not set up in a manner where he can make the changes/adjustments/ tweaks that may be necesarry from time to time. i think that seble definitely needs to feel comfortable with the way the whole things works/ is written. so if he needs to this, even if for just that reason, then i support it

mm, alot of what you have said has made sense, even the parts i disagree with. but ...

for you to suggest that slowdown is not out of control, too powerful, etc is just, well its just craziness. im sorry emmy, but it really is craziness.

i realize there are alot of different styles in D1, but when clashing styles meet, a variety of outcomes occur. would you agree?

usually that outcome in real life is dictated largely by talent (the more talented team is more often able to impose thier will) and/or IQ- to borrow hd-terminology (the team that is more disciplined and more well coached will have a better chance of imposing thier will)

but, in HD, slowdown allllllllllways prevails, 100% of the time. okay well, maybe not 100% of the time, but very close to it. to suggest otherwise is just not in touch with reality.

After my **** poor recruiting year at Illinois I ran slowdown almost all year. We only have 8 guys and while there is talent on the roster we only have 2 guards. Somehow we managed 9 conference wins. I have never ran slowdown before this year and i was shocked we made it to 9 wins.

another thing, and i realize this is an old hotbutton that has died down, but the minus 5 is broken.

Now, i do not agree that it is a magic button that leads to automatic W's.

it is just too risky, most of the time, if you are favored or a sligth underdog.

but if you are a big underdog, it really is the way to go 90% of the time. the reason is that you will definitely get the upsides (better rebounding and interior defense) and if you are lucky enough to avoid the downsides for that one given night (weak perimeter defense and foul trouble) then you have improved your prospects of winning dramtically. i realize that just becasue my opponent packs it in that doesnt mean all my outsude shooters are going to light it up. its not going to happen that way every night, but it should happen that way more often. there are too many ionstances ofa team going ice cold verssus the minus5

I forsee an apperance from Mr. -5.

Quote: Originally posted by oldave on 12/04/2009another thing, and i realize this is an old hotbutton that has died down,  but the minus 5 is broken.Now, i do not agree that it is a magic button that leads to automatic W's.it is just too risky, most of the time, if you are favored or a sligth underdog.but if you are a big underdog, it really is the way to go 90% of the time.   the reason is that you will definitely get the upsides (better rebounding and interior defense)  and if you are lucky enough to avoid the downsides for that one given night (weak perimeter defense and foul trouble) then you have improved your prospects of winning dramtically.   i realize that  just becasue my opponent packs it in that doesnt mean all my outsude shooters are going to light it up.  its not going to happen that way every night,  but it should happen that way more often. there are too many ionstances ofa team going ice cold verssus the minus5

i think its also that what you are primarily giving up is 3 point attempts, which generally add a lot of volatility to a team. a lot of coaches try hard to keep their 3 point attempts under wraps in general, because you can so easily go 4-17 on a night. i like to take 3s myself, but i definitely feel a point where you are taking too many, and exposing yourself to too much volatility, which is enemy #1 when you are trying to win it all, or when you are playing a game you should win by a lot of points on average

Quote: Originally Posted By oldave on 12/04/2009

• The minus 5 is broken.
• It is not a magic button that leads to automatic W's.
• It is just too risky, most of the time, if you are favored or a slight underdog.
• If you are a big underdog, it really is the way to go 90% of the time.

I fully agree with this argument against the -5.

Quote: Originally Posted By oldave on 12/04/2009
another thing, and i realize this is an old hotbutton that has died down, but the minus 5 is broken.

Now, i do not agree that it is a magic button that leads to automatic W's.

it is just too risky, most of the time, if you are favored or a sligth underdog.

but if you are a big underdog, it really is the way to go 90% of the time. the reason is that you will definitely get the upsides (better rebounding and interior defense) and if you are lucky enough to avoid the downsides for that one given night (weak perimeter defense and foul trouble) then you have improved your prospects of winning dramtically. i realize that just becasue my opponent packs it in that doesnt mean all my outsude shooters are going to light it up. its not going to happen that way every night, but it should happen that way more often. there are too many ionstances ofa team going ice cold verssus the minus5

I think ya broke down the -5 pretty well ole d

cornfused, if you ever have any free time, i have about 9,000 posts that could stand to be edited and cleaned up and , you know, concise-ified.

seriously, that was an excellent concise-ification job you did there... thankQ!

point well taken Doc Gil, cant disagree on that one

Quote: Originally Posted By mmt0315 on 12/04/2009
This control over our teams thing is perhaps the most overblown aspect of this game AND I fear the engine fix might destroy a relatively good product. Most of you math guys like to constantly lean on sample size (and with good reason) when one of these threads with a fluke box score pops up but in reality of the thousands of games which are simmed each night 99% of them get it right, just nobody talks about them. Even in real life you see results which simply make no sense on paper ie Cuse losing to DII @ home earlier this season, Wisonsin waxing Duke the other night. It happens.

If there was something wrong with the engine, you wouldnt see OR, Clone, Lost, Gill dominating across multiple worlds as consistantly as they have. Those guys understand how the engine works and build their teams around those pricipals.

Another constant complaint I see is regarding a dominant player. But this too is something the engine allows and is pretty much a user based decision but within the parameters of the engine. I dont track very many teams but can tell you on my Kansas team the last two years my leading scorer averaged about 16-18 ppg on teams that made the NT and were 20+ win teams. Sullys Gtown team just had a player average 16 PPG in winning the Big East and reaching the Sweet 16. The reason teams dont see more dominant players is because of player distribution. Meaning you gotta give a guy 30% or more distribution which most teams do not do. In real life most of the nations top teams dont feature guys who average 24-25 ppg and those players are usually found in the smaller conferences where one player can carry a team.

Ive also noticed more the last 2-3 seasons that gameplans are being executed in a manner youd expect them to, even in losses. A perfect gameplan doesnt always mean youll win the game.

I really worry that this engine overhaul is going to ruin the game. EDIT - Since some of you [name starting with MC :)]couldnt understand the comparison without taking it personally this sentence has been removed.

wisconsin waxed duke? the game i saw was a close competitive game throughout that wisconsin eked out at the end on their homefloor where they have a marked advantage.

wi played much better then duke overall in that game but duke kept within striking distance. but i agree wi did not wax duke.

Quote: Originally Posted By mmt0315 on 12/04/2009Talent will always trump all, thats the same in actual basketball. You cannot expect that simply because you know another team is going to fire 20+ 3s so you therefore play a +3 or 4 or 5 that you'll automatically stop them from making them. You might slow them down, you might not because talent again trumps all. What I would say however, is if this team that fires 20+ threes a game shot at a 40% rate over the course of the season playing various defenses. But that same schedule was replayed v. each opponent playing a +3, 4 or 5 regardless of defensive style, the % would certainly drop as Admin has show us in the past

Admins difference in % was very very very low when comparing the different settings. I don't have the actual percentage anymore but I don't think it was even 2%. The info he provided did not include any information on the teams or players that were used to come up with the percentages, something we asked about but was never answered.

Found the info on Admin's test:

"Admin posted that he took two teams sim'd 100 games at +5, 0, and -5. The difference in 3pt. shooting was the teams shot .03% better against a -5. He didn't offer IQ's for offense or defense, the skill level of those shooting 3's, or the number of 3's attempted."