Just curious.  Naismith only got 2 games in with the new engine and hasn't generated the new recruits yet.

How much higher are the new recruit ratings?

Is the FG% down too much, or about right?

FG% is definitely down a decent amount.  No question that REB and ATH attributes have become even more important.  With the lower FG% the teams that can get offensive rebounds and 2nd chance points are likely going to be the better teams.  Steals are up as well, but seble says it is only cosmetic (I guess more turnovers are being classified as steals now).

FG% is down  a lot

FG% is most definitely down & Stamina seems to be playing much less of a role as well.

fg% is waaaaaaaaay down and there is a much greater variance game to game.  you'll go 45% one game, 30% the next and 52% the game after that. 

my ft% has been way down too in spite of having teams that should be decent ft shooting teams.  i dont think that was supposed to be part of the change...as those teams arent relying on the new recruits...but it certainly feels like it as i've had many games in the 50's and low 60's despite 25+ attempts

Well of course there's going to be game-to-game variance.  Name a team that sit between 45%-50% every game.  Sometimes you shoot better, sometimes worse.  I'm hearing a lot conjecture.  Anyone have any facts?

Seems to me like the engine is running better since the change.  Just my opinion, of course.

Posted by isack24 on 2/16/2011 12:12:00 PM (view original):
Well of course there's going to be game-to-game variance.  Name a team that sit between 45%-50% every game.  Sometimes you shoot better, sometimes worse.  I'm hearing a lot conjecture.  Anyone have any facts?

Seems to me like the engine is running better since the change.  Just my opinion, of course.

i never said there wasn't variance before.  just that it's consistently greater from game to game.

You have no facts to support that, just your perception.

I can show you some crazy pre-change variance, too.  But you have no numbers to show the variance is now significantly wider.

And, even if you did, it would be such a small sample that it could be due to any number of things.  The only way to know is get world numbers both pre and post-change.

dude he asked if anyone noticed any changes.  he didnt ask for a scientific report to prove that anything had changed.  if you want to do that, go for it, otherwise it's a message board and people can offer their opinion whether it's scientifically proven or not.

almost afraid to respond after the last exchange.  anyway, i played 18 games before the change and failed to shoot better than 50% only 4 times.  After the change I played 9 games and only shot better than 50% 2 times.  I even had a game in them.30% range.  So that's 78% above .500 before and 23% after.  Small sample size I know but seems to show a big difference.

youre an idiot.  the title of the thread asked if people noticed any effects of the new engine and i stated my experience and my observation.  if you're SO sensitive to the issue as to think i was speaking on behalf of the entire WIS universe, then that is your perogative.  next time ill be sure to qualify every post with "this is my opinion" or "here is my dissertation and scientific analaysis on why this is unequivocally a fact"

to anyone who is actually NOT a troll, i will throw this out there.  my best D3 team, which in theory should be the most consistent and high performing, lost only 2 players from last years team that shot nearly 56% from the field.  this year's team is shooting 49% through non-conference while attempting a similar # of 3's.   last season those players shot close to 75% from the free throw line.  this season it is at 65% (one of the graduated players was a very good free throw shooter at about 80% for 150 attempts... which accounts for some but certainly not all of the variance).  i suspect the fg% will go up some during conference play because my conference is not very good, nor was it last year...but i think that is mitigated by the fact this team is FAR superior in terms of both perimeter and lp compared to last season.  In theory we should be more dominant offensively than we were last year, but we are obviously significantly less so to the tune of about 7% from the field and 10% from the line, which supposedly wasn't touched at all.

bow, i just wanna say first that i dont give a crap if you scientifically support your opinion, and I think you should abuse the first amendment liek its your Job if thats what makes you happy.

That bieng said, II think lower FG% may be a good thing. I mean, how many real teams shoot 56%?? i mean, even in the NBA, where everyone can shoot and theres no defense, the VERY BEST FG% teams are always in the low 500's. and game to game variance is also very realistic, I'd be interseted to factor in the level of defense you face during each game, then see if the variances correlate. but I'm guessin they will.

turtis, the realism of shooting 56% isn't the point....there a ton of other things in this game that aren't exactly like real life either.

the point is, we were told things would adjust by 3% and at least in my situation....IN MY OPINION... with the one team that is the most most talented and therefore  should produce the results most consistently similar to the desired change that was implemented have instead shown changes that are significantly higher than 3%. 

Seble gave us the numbers...  It was about a 3% change...  That's a fact, not an opinion.  He has access to all the numbers from all the games from all the worlds.  Overall 3% decrease.  Since it was applied to the base rate it shouldn't really impact any one type of player more than others, either.  Maybe you've just been unlucky?  The free throw abilities of existing players weren't touched, so that dropoff is probably just random and unfortunate.