Was it worth the wait? Topic

haasdr
Posts: 99 (0)
Hall of Famer
163 2 41 4
Prospect
This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.
6/8/2010 12:29 PM
dalter
Posts: 71 (0)
All Star
25
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By mlatsko1 on 6/08/2010
Quote: Originally posted by pinkeye on 6/08/2010
Quote: Originally posted by hitman1979 on 6/08/2010Even though my team playing under the new engine (New Haven) is playing better, I don't like it. It does not seem significantly better than the old engine. For every problem it addressed, it created at least one new one.
Haven't recruited under the new system yet, but I imagine that won't be as fun either.

And as many have said, no way should we have to pay to beta test for them. We should be seeing free seasons galore until they get this worked out.


why would recruiting be less fun?

Recruiting has been fun since potential was introduced. It was more fun to imagine what I could make a player into, as opposed to knowing what he'd become
Really? Didn't we know exactly what a player was going to become before?

What we had before was hugely unrealistic. Every player could continue improving in any category until he maxed out. We had DII teams filled with bigs that had 90+ reb. Improvement before was completely linear. I think the current system is way better than the old one and way more interesting.
6/8/2010 12:41 PM
isack24
Posts: 1566 (0)
Hall of Famer
81 19
Prospect
On that note, I think it would be interesting to have a feature like HBD's diamonds in the rough. I could be based on WE, personality, or something else. I agree that potential with caps is good for most part, and more realistic (if that's what we're going for). But if we're going for realism, plenty of players have become much better than anyone could ever have imagined. I think it would be interesting to throw that little twist in. I'm sure no one else agrees.
6/8/2010 12:55 PM
mullycj
Posts: 2737 (0)
Hall of Famer
214 1
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By bbunch on 6/08/2010




I like the new engine for the most part - Scoring is up, there's more room to gameplan (I have a perimeter PF scoring tons of points from 3P land).

No surprise there. Evreyone and the grandmas are shooting 40% from the arc with this new "realistic engine".



The problem is that there's always a new tweak/update. It makes the current season not feel legitimate.

Agreed - it's like the steroids era in baseball. The stats for the season should have an asterisk. "* Season XX played with engine on steriods."



6/8/2010 12:55 PM
haasdr
Posts: 99 (0)
Hall of Famer
163 2 41 4
Prospect
mully - i agree, the 3pt shooting is a big beef of mine with this current engine. i have pretty solid perimeter defenses (based on a combination of IQs, DEF, and SPD) on two different teams. one team plays the same 10 guys as least year (i.e. better SPD, DEF, and IQ), the other is slightly different but 4 of the 5 core perimeter players remain the same, and the ratings are actually slightly better defensively than last season.

last season these teams gave up 35% and 33% from beyond the arc. this is pretty normal for my two teams who are currently playing in the new engine.

this season (half way through) - 44% and 37%. it may not seem like much, but considering that both teams should have stronger PER defense this year and both nearly always play a + defense, AND i'm seeing a lot more teams take 3s based on the new engine results (and i think we'd all agree that teams who shoot more 3s tend to miss them because of shot selection), i would argue it's actually a pretty big difference.
6/8/2010 1:13 PM
hughesjr
Posts: 3175 (0)
Hall of Famer
492 154 8 2
Prospect
Quote: Originally posted by isack24 on 6/08/2010On that note, I think it would be interesting to have a feature like HBD's diamonds in the rough.  I could be based on WE, personality, or something else.  I agree that potential with caps is good for most part, and more realistic (if that's what we're going for).  But if we're going for realism, plenty of players have become much better than anyone could ever have imagined.  I think it would be interesting to throw that little twist in.  I'm sure no one else agrees.
I agree that some percentage of guys could just "have a revelation" and get better in a couple of categories. I think it would add a nice wrinkle to the game.
6/8/2010 1:20 PM
oldresorter
Posts: 646 (0)
Hall of Famer
1110 1
Prospect
blaank - recruiting is near 100% in high end d1 basketball for some teams - calipari ball if you will - but coach k at duke noticably finds 4 year kids and he still coaches them, my son is part of the program at uwgb, and they coach up there, and their stuff works, my son and I coached a very good u16 aau team this spring to 3 titles in 8 tries running the college offense and more importantly the college defense, the stuff just plain and simple works, it is much different than I thought is would be, and the coaching is very important in most d1 programs.

second, no matter what HD does recruiting is the most important thing, the problem is what you want makes the degree of importance such that it is all that matters, give or take a few moves we can still make here or there.

I sort of like FSS, or have grown to like it, but the old system required much more practice planning skill, and the best coaches had a huge advantage over the worst, IMO that is real life, much more so than the forum fact the real life college ball is only about recruiting.
6/8/2010 1:33 PM
mlatsko1
Posts: 61 (0)
Hall of Famer
299 1 13
Prospect
This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.
6/8/2010 4:12 PM
summerteeth
Posts: 52 (0)
Hall of Famer
83
Prospect
This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.
6/8/2010 4:14 PM
mlatsko1
Posts: 61 (0)
Hall of Famer
299 1 13
Prospect
Quote: Originally posted by oldresorter on 6/08/2010I sort of like FSS, or have grown to like it, but the old system required much more practice planning skill, and the best coaches had a huge advantage over the worst, IMO that is real life, much more so than the forum fact the real life college ball is only about recruiting.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
6/8/2010 4:16 PM
antonsirius
Posts: 2567 (0)
Hall of Famer
167 135 9 20
Prospect
Quote: Originally posted by isack24 on 6/08/2010On that note, I think it would be interesting to have a feature like HBD's diamonds in the rough.  I could be based on WE, personality, or something else.  I agree that potential with caps is good for most part, and more realistic (if that's what we're going for).  But if we're going for realism, plenty of players have become much better than anyone could ever have imagined.  I think it would be interesting to throw that little twist in.  I'm sure no one else agrees.

Nope, I'd be all for that.
6/8/2010 4:31 PM
mniven
Posts: 37 (0)
Hall of Famer
767 33 1
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By mmt0315 on 6/08/2010
+1 and I'm happy to see more vets coming out of the woodwork the last couple of days, after basically being told I was alone last week. Its sad that my prediction of coaches leaving is growing in number each day.

Serious question: How many of these "vets" who are leaving/threatening to leave run a press defense?
6/8/2010 4:45 PM
summerteeth
Posts: 52 (0)
Hall of Famer
83
Prospect
i run a zone/press combo - i like running zone defense, and the only reason i ever switched to a combo was because of the extra practice time that became available because of the ratings caps created from potential. my players tended to be on the fast/athletic side for zone, so it seemed a natural transition with the extra minutes.

of the two teams i have in the new engine, i am going to keep one as a combo and switch the other (w/ lower stamina) back to zone only. i am interested to see how going zone only pays off.

i have two other teams still in the current engine (one season just finished and the other is nearly done). not sure what i'm going to do with those teams yet, but a switch (even to press only) is possible.

for me, the issue was never that the press got bad. it seems successful in the new engine with the right personnel. i am leaning towards leaving because of mounting frustrations, beginning with potential and what seems bad (so far) of the new engine. this morning i was 98% sure i was quitting, but now i've cooled off and it's probably 50-70% likely. i am definitely scaling back teams though.
6/8/2010 4:59 PM
blaank182
Posts: 67 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 125 6 54
Prospect
see i only have 3 teams, 1 of which i actually care about and that's Ole Miss in Smith. My investment is not as high which is probably why i am not more put off by all of this. I'm just very tired of all the sky is falling stuff, even though I respect a number of the people saying it and know they are better coaches than I will probably ever be.

I'm not disagreeing about the 3 point shooting being far better, but in the past it seemed awful. I'm not disagreeing about the fouls being high, but they were too low before.

I'm not disagreeing with anything you've said OR. We don't have a way of running D1 recruiting in HD like Calipari ball though or Coach K to be honest (though I would say you can get a good idea of who will stay when they could go early based on some criteria in recruiting). I don't want recruiting dynasty, but I think that like D1 NCAA basketball, HD has people who can really recruit but are suspect planners and vice versa. I don't think my views support this forum fact about recruiting being the only thing that matters.

6/8/2010 7:04 PM
reinsel
Posts: 927 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 130
Rookie
I can't see how anyone would want to go back to the pre-potential days. I have a pretty good run at D3, and at Lebanon Valley in PA I recruited players from Washington State, Alaska, New Mexico, Texas, you name it. I didn't need to scout, and it was just as simple as checking the 10 drop downs each cycle til I hit on the players I wanted, and then I set my practice plans and never changed em.

Now, you have to be constantly changing practice plans since improvement isn't linear (not that it was before, but the cap on every stat was 100), there is more challenge to everything involving player development....do I max out my SF's passing or bh first? I need more rebounding, so should i develop my guards 10+average rebounding?

Before you could never improve a 1 reb in a guard....never, and people didn't complain about that much. Now a guard is maxed at 20 rebounding, and people complain that how could someone not improve at all with 20 minutes of practice in rebounding...

6/8/2010 8:10 PM
◂ Prev 123 Next ▸
Was it worth the wait? Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.