Am I the only one who isn't thrilled to see more injuries?

It's OK in HBD because of organizational depth and, well, one baseball player generally has less impact on a game. Plus, you can't get fired and, worst case, your season is lost but you get a high draft pick.

But this is different. This can make or break a season, which means recruiting, promotions, etc.

Anyone else have a problem with increased injuries, both in frequency and severity?

Personally, I think they should be eliminated - I don't think they add anything.

Agreed

I agree.

Seble posted in another thread that it was easier to get rid of unpopular aspects than in introduce new ones. (this is roughly paraphrased). I hope he takes that to heart and gets rid of injuries.

It adds nothing to the enjoyment of the game.

Yeah, I don't mind em too much if they just encourage depth and create another stratgeic element in recruiting higher durabiity players. If you have depth and decent durabilities, injuries don't hurt you much, and if you have 2-3 walkons and low DUR ratings, you are going to get burned.

Sure, reinsel, that's a good point, but should we really have to recruit for durability on the hope that the player won't get hit by the RNG bug?

And you can still get burned by having a superstar get hurt, even if you have depth. You can easily go from a top-tier team to a second-tier team because of one injury.

I just don't see the point and as frustrating as they are in HBD, injuries in HD are absolutely maddening.

I'm sure the real NCAA teams don't appreciate injuries much either.

Of course they add something to the game. They are injuries. Many a player got their first start because someone was injured.

A sports game with no injuries ... why not take out people getting tired too. And why be bothered with needing to recruit a player with high PER to shoot from the outside? Turnovers suck, I don't like 'em. Lets get rid of turnovers too.

Quote: Originally Posted By hughesjr on 5/25/2010I'm sure the real NCAA teams don't appreciate injuries much either.

Of course they add something to the game. They are injuries. Many a player got their first start because someone was injured.

A sports game with no injuries ... why not take out people getting tired too. And why be bothered with needing to recruit a player with high PER to shoot from the outside? Turnovers suck, I don't like 'em. Lets get rid of turnovers too.

You are a WiS-plant, aren't you?

We pay to play the online simulation game.

If you can't make that distinction, I guess I don't know what to tell you.

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

I don't mind injuries. I'd rather have them then not have them. I'd also like fatigue to play more of a factor and role over game to game. A guy who played 42 Mins in a double over time game shouldn't play as good the next game compared to a guy who only had to play 18 in a 35 point blow out win.

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

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

Quote: Originally Posted By ll316 on 5/25/2010

I love the thought of teams actually needing to recruit a full roster instead of just skating by with 10 or 11 guys every season

I would bet there are plenty of people who recruit full teams who don't like injuries. And I'm not sure how it would affect anyone with 11 players to have one injury.

I try to recruit full teams. It's not like I don't understand that injuries can happen. It's not going to affect my strategy. That doesn't really change any of my points. If you actually read my complaints about injuries, having a scholarship FR isn't really going to alleviate the problems.

Like I said, if people are fine with injuries, that's cool, but it's not about depth to me, and it certainly doesn't make the game I pay for more fun to me.

Yeah it sucks to have your star player get hurt, but it happens in RL, and a good team can deal with it. Happened to me last season in Allen my 1st Team All American got hurt twice! Both times he was down to about 80% only, but one of em came at the start of the conference tournament and we lost the opening game, got a worse seed, and only made it to the second round.

Random? Unfun? Probably, but the whole game has randomness to it and I like the challenge of having to deal with shifting the depth chart around, and I just assume some day I will get the benefit of beating a good team when their best player is hurt.

i am pro-injury.

yes, they are annoying, particularly late in the season. But they do add an element to the game-- I had my best big man get hurt last season about 3 or 4 games in, and he was hurt badly, Health of 20 or so.

I had to decide how soon to bring him back at all, how many minutes to let him get, and how to replace him. Who gets the minutes? More slowdown? at RPI 50 and his health at 60, how much should he play?

I enjoyed the need to think a little in-season. Now, do i want to face another major injury soon? no. but this is the second major (half-season or so missed) injury I've had in roughly 100 seasons of play. Doesn't seem to rough to me.

(Now i'll probably read the box scores and get 3 or 4 tomorrow morning.)

Quote: Originally posted by isack24 on 5/25/2010We pay to play the online simulation game.

Yes we do, which is why injuries are in the game.