it sounds like the test world will be the first to see an attempt to address this issue.

tentatively it'll be a rapid decrease in offensive production (primarily shooting percentage and turnovers) if one player on the floor has taken at least 50% of the shots amongst the players on the floor at that time.

I sent my exact post to CS and this is the response they sent me:

"In the current game engine, players experience increased fatigue when they take a high number of shots. That's intended to curb the results you're worried about.

In the next version of the game engine, there will be a penalty separate from fatigue that will significantly decrease efficiency when a player is taking an unrealistic percentage of his team's shots. So, yes, that is something that will directly be addressed."

So it seems CS was aware of this and is addressing it, we'll see how it goes.

I still don't agree with having a "penalty". Where is colonels when you need him. I think he would agree that arbitrarily enforcing a penalty is not how a sim engine should run. It should be based on the actual teams and players.

Defense and how you guard the players should be the reason for a decrease in the level of success not just because you take a lot of shots.

Quote: Originally Posted By schroedess26 on 4/20/2010I still don't agree with having a "penalty". Where is colonels when you need him. I think he would agree that arbitrarily enforcing a penalty is not how a sim engine should run. It should be based on the actual teams and players.

Defense and how you guard the players should be the reason for a decrease in the level of success not just because you take a lot of shots

You seem to not get it, there is just no way you can possibly take 90% of the shots when your team is on the floor without forcing up a ton of bad shots. I would imagine it's really hard to code in forced shots. What kind of field goal percentage do you think LeBron James would have if he was taking 90% of his teams shots and 80% of those shots were 3s? It really doesn't even matter how good of a defender is on him, he would not shoot better than 40% playing against comparable athletes.

Also help defense is pretty much non existant in the engine, for example you will pretty much never read a big man block a guard's shot in the play by play. So since this stuff is obviously hard to code or else I'm sure this would be done the easier fix is to enforce penalties that will simulate what forced shots and help defense would do in real life.

Lets talk about the studs then that are twice as fast and athletic as those that guard them. They can blow by everyone and take every shot with no problem always getting open shots. How is it fair to penalize them just cause they can be that explosive all the time.

Next, so do we just randomly say because someone has 80% of a teams rebounds he is now penalized from getting more rebounds? I find this the same argument. It has nothing to do with the other teams ratings or the players or how their coach set up their team, its just a arbitrary penalty. I mean coaches would have their team focus more on boxing that guy out right?

By the way you talk about L. James well ever watch him down the stretch or Kobe for that matter in the 4th quarter when everyone in the whole building knows the ball is going to them? Yes they are two of the best players in history but still, they can make the game winning shots and carry their teams to victory. What about Wilt? or Jerry West?

I know most players can't handle having the ball that much but the point is I am trying to show that the "penalty" if you must have be such has to be related to the teams, defense and ratings of the players, as well as how the defense is set up.

I get the point that its hard to program for help defense and such, but were not paying $1 a season or something. Some people are paying what $12 a season. They make quite a bit of money off this game, I think they can take the 400-1000 hours most likely of work to get the defensive scheme to work. How would you like to play a racing game that slows your car down just because you are "to far ahead" of the computer racers?

The rebounding argument is completely irrelevant to scoring. You can't do much to limit a great rebounder, and the fact is if 1 player is getting 80% of a team's rebounds odds are the team is a terrible rebounding team where 1 guy has like a 90 rating and nobody else is over 40. It's not like it gives you an advantage for some reason. The scoring strategy allows average teams to be good teams, good teams to become excellent teams and excellent teams to win championship after championship.

The example of a guy being twice as fast as the person guarding him, that pretty much never happens, but when it does even if there is a penalty for shooting too much it won't all of a sudden stop that player from scoring. The penalty doesn't have to be huge, I'm not saying and I'm Seble isn't going to make the penalty so severe that 50% shooter all of a sudden becomes a 20% shooter because he's take 27 shots. I would think an appropiate adjustment would be to make that 50% shooter into a 40% shooter when he's taking a ridiculous amount of shots.

And I think you are worried too much about cosmetic stuff. Who cares if you can set up your defense in a way that it specifically goes all out to stop a player when instead the sim engine will put into a place a system in which your team does it without you coming up with an extreme defense but just in the form of a penalty to the player who is shooting too much. While in actuality it's a penalty it will look as if your players are playing better defense. Isn't that the point of this game, to create the illusion of reality?

Quote: Originally Posted By Iguana1 on 4/19/2010
it sounds like the test world will be the first to see an attempt to address this issue.

tentatively it'll be a rapid decrease in offensive production (primarily shooting percentage and turnovers) if one player on the floor has taken at least 50% of the shots amongst the players on the floor at that time.

Really bad idea. ALOT of basketball teams put certain lineups on the court that 1 guy carries them for periods of time.

At all levels, there are certain teams that just have studs that average lots of points. The one thing I cant stand about HD right now is how we dont have many guys averaging over 20, especially at the DI level. Only 1 guy in wooden averaged over 20 last season.

Even if they do decide to implement the idea, it should be more in the 70% range to start and see if it helps the issue. Change it less drastically.

But Chew you no matter how much a team relies on a player you will not find many who take 50% of their team shots when they are on the floor. Somebody posted in this thread that in the last 10 or so years Luke Harangody attempted the highest percentage of his team's shots when he was on the floor and that was only 37%.

They said 37% of all the shots both his team and the other teams. Also, that was just shots not possessions how HD calculates it.

These are rough estimates of possessions
34.7% - Michael Turner 2010
37.67%- Stephan Curry 2009

These are just two of the big players in the last couple years. This is based on the whole game and their estimated possessions compared to the rest of their team. So it doesn't take into account when they are not in the game and sitting on the bench.

Also, this is only D1 meaning a higher caliber of player. We are missing the big picture with D2 and D3 not here. I think we all agree that most players at D1 are much closer together than those at D2 and D3 with who they play.

Also, if its just 50% of the shots on the court than it is obvious that Turner and Curry would have both been on the floor when the 2nd scorer would have been sitting and they most likely would be over the 50% mark.

Final question what happens at the start of the game? A player hits his first 4 shots and no one else has shot. Is he now over the 50% mark and get penalized?

So I realize that its pointless to try and stop the penalty but I hope I can change minds on it. HD will take the shortcut and make it a penalty but I won't back off that it should be multiplied by the defensive ratings.

So they add up the players guarding him and possibly the next player over like the PG and SG to get a multiplier for penalty. The thought is that if he is shooting that much a player would be "help" defense.

Here is my suggestion:
3 types of penalties
1. He is below 40% poss nothing happens
2. He is 40% to 50% poss there is a max of 10% FG loss
3. He is above 50% poss there is a max of 15% FG loss

Calculate:
Shooter FG%= 52%
Shooter Poss%= 55%
PG DEF= 82
SG DEF= 76
Combine= 158
Average DEF= 79
A max of 15% loss = 100 DEF Average

The loss of FG% would equal .79*15= 11.85

Shooters new FG% = 40.15%

This is very basic and would need to be more in-depth but you get the idea. Let the defense get a lower or higher penalty on the player.

kmasonbx - Okay, maybe not 50% of a teams' shots, but there are many college programs that rely heavily on a shooting guard. That has a lot to do with the smaller 3-point arc in college as opposed to the pros.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=273392429

HD right now has a bad bell curve. Whereas many college teams have a recipe of success by using a Jimmy Chitwood-type at shooting guard to play equalizer against a talented foes, HD's recipe for success is to play at either end of two extremes: either play a hyper-balanced distro where scoring champs have difficulty cracking 12ppg. or give ALL your distro to your shooters.

Like chewchad said, HD right now doesn't have many guys averaging over 20ppg. And HDs solution to bingball is to make star players LESS effective? I don't like it at all.

It's like, "Hey! I'm David going up against a Goliath of an opponent. What should a good coach do? Should I try to beat him on the outside and live/die by the three? Should I give the ball to my best player and set all kinds of screens, challenge them, and hope my player has a career game?" HD: "Nah, we put a stop to such possibilities. Just play at a low tempo and hope for a flaky result. Enjoy coaching your hoops dynasty team!"

Nonsense. And I'm not a fan of the triple-team option at all , either. It's like Spinal Tap where they get amps that go up to '11'. Why not make '10' louder? But these go up to 11!

Why not make the double-team more effective?

One more thing: I don't thing Bing/Nash or myself could get one player over 50% of the shots unless we really messed around with the fatigue settings. Even if we gave 2 shooting guards all the distro, teammates would still get their opportunities. One SG might have gotten 22 shots, another SG 18 shots, and 10 teammates may have combined for 12 shots.

So a team decided to give a ton of distribution to one of their players and you consider this a "glitch"? I just do not understand this thread. Why do you want to take the "whatif" out of HD?

Every time you eliminate one of these "glitches", you get rid of another strategy someone is using.

I could think of over 60 things that should be fixed before they even respond to a ticket you wrote about this. A "glitch" that needs to be fixed ASAP should be defined as something that is ruining peoples enjoyment of this game. An error that is being exploited by a couple of coaches who are winning when they shouldn't. That is not the case here IMO.

Quote: Originally Posted By porkpower on 4/20/2010
So a team decided to give a ton of distribution to one of their players and you consider this a "glitch"? I just do not understand this thread. Why do you want to take the "whatif" out of HD?

Every time you eliminate one of these "glitches", you get rid of another strategy someone is using.

I could think of over 60 things that should be fixed before they even respond to a ticket you wrote about this. A "glitch" that needs to be fixed ASAP should be defined as something that is ruining peoples enjoyment of this game. An error that is being exploited by a couple of coaches who are winning when they shouldn't. That is not the case here IMO.

How is this any different then the press working too well or double teams being too affective?

Quote: Originally Posted By porkpower on 4/20/2010
So a team decided to give a ton of distribution to one of their players and you consider this a "glitch"? I just do not understand this thread. Why do you want to take the "whatif" out of HD?

Every time you eliminate one of these "glitches", you get rid of another strategy someone is using.

I don't think someone giving all the distro to one player is a glitch. The glitch is that the player performs at, or near the same level whether he shoots 10 shots or 50 shots. And many of these guys score 40 points a game and shoot 40% from 3pt.

At some point a defense full of decent IQs is going to offer a little help to that one defender. Or the zone slides a few steps to his side of the court. The way it works now is the four offensive teammates go stand by the sidelines and the defenders follow them. Which makes the what-if a players shoots every shot and what-if a defense doesn't react.

I think seble is trying to stay away from making the straight double-team option too effective for a defense, as many felt it was in the past.

So this reduction in an offensive player's efficiency may in part be the results of a defense actually noticing one player is taking an overwhelming large majority of the shots and reacting according.