I’m the villain, the jerk, the awful soul that makes everyone quit HD. No worries though, I got a few credits remaining after that, I’ll be out and everything will be amazing in HD again.

Posted by zagsrulez on 12/24/2018 2:09:00 PM (view original):
I’m the villain, the jerk, the awful soul that makes everyone quit HD. No worries though, I got a few credits remaining after that, I’ll be out and everything will be amazing in HD again.

It’s not about you specifically, it’s about the bigger picture. We want to recruit and retain active owners.

Merry Christmas! Play triangle!

Posted by Trentonjoe on 12/24/2018 2:59:00 PM (view original):
Merry Christmas! Play triangle!

I am. Triangle was popular in the vote and among the people I have talked too. Merry Christmas to you too! Lol

I'm a Triangle/zone guy for no particular reason - I've often thought about changing either or both of the O or D, but I hate the idea of waiting for the IQ's to get to a good level again.
That being said I've not been that successful so I have nothing to add other than for all to enjoy the holiday.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0Hds-ZXeQQ

This post is the women.

That's all I have to add. This sh*t is hilarious. Merry Christmas!

Rather than building your team from the top down by pre-deciding on a system you might try working from the bottom up.

In DIII chucking is very hard to stop when you run into 90+ spd/90+ per monsters. If your guards average low-mid 70s speed in the 3-2 you could be at a 20+ speed disadvantage. That's going to lead to 50%+ effective fg% from deep even with mitigating factors in your favor.

It's not hopeless or anything but the long view is about FFs and NTs rather than minor synergies between offense/defense pairs.

The big thing is always talent, but don't underestimate getting the right talent. To illustrate, how good was my 94 ath/69 spd/91 def guy in my 3-2 zone? Maybe not as good as I thought on paper.

Posted by zagsrulez on 12/24/2018 1:34:00 PM (view original):
Never said that he would never make it or that he would be unsuccessful. You’re making stuff up topdog, that never happened. Look at his resume , he’s the best HDer in the making. Sportsbull is in his infancy. He is on track to have at least 2 NC before he reaches Season 10.

Merry xmas Zags! I'm not making things up tho. I'm just saying that we can't help new people stick around by shitting on them. That's it.

And I really don't have much more experience than you. My profile says so. But I left the game in 2010 with 58 seasons played. When 1.0 was around and completely different. And I had no grasp on the game.

I just came back in April 2017 and I have less than 40 seasons. I'm pretty much right there with ya. I'm still learning myself.

Some of the best threads in the HD forum are discussing how people think zone works, and different interpretations of seble’s kind-of-vague but still very enlightening clues dropped a few years ago in this thread. A lot of attitudes about zone being weak or somehow inferior to man or press are leftovers from folks who either don’t know about these threads or just haven’t bothered to try to understand them. Don’t listen to folks who tell you certain sets are inherently more powerful; they’re not (the developers likely have spent quite a bit of effort to make sure it’s not unbalanced). But people’s gameplay choices do matter. The sets weigh attributes differently - not dramatically enough to turn mediocre players into superstars or vice versa, but significant enough for many coaches to find value in putting together their team building strategies.

Posted by shoe3 on 12/25/2018 9:41:00 PM (view original):
Some of the best threads in the HD forum are discussing how people think zone works, and different interpretations of seble’s kind-of-vague but still very enlightening clues dropped a few years ago in this thread. A lot of attitudes about zone being weak or somehow inferior to man or press are leftovers from folks who either don’t know about these threads or just haven’t bothered to try to understand them. Don’t listen to folks who tell you certain sets are inherently more powerful; they’re not (the developers likely have spent quite a bit of effort to make sure it’s not unbalanced). But people’s gameplay choices do matter. The sets weigh attributes differently - not dramatically enough to turn mediocre players into superstars or vice versa, but significant enough for many coaches to find value in putting together their team building strategies.

Tis true. I feel like sets have different strengths and weaknesses at the different levels. But in general, they are all fairly equal. For reasons that shoe stated about the developers making sure it's not completely unbalanced.

It would be pointless to make a game where you have 4 choices to make on how you play it, but 1 is known to be "the best" by its participants. The rest would never get used. Creating a game with no options. Which isn't much of a game if you ask me