What next to improve in HD? Topic

Posted by gillispie1 on 5/20/2014 11:45:00 PM (view original):
im sad nobody likes my idea to allow multiple offenses or defenses on a team, with less of a practice penalty :( in real life you can't be an A in man and an F in zone, which seems to matter to some people. many have argued for overall offense and defense IQ categories, but that is more complicated and has its own issues. i still think it would be great to allow people to get 2x minutes for non-primary categories, to open the door to multiple defense clubs, or even, multiple offense clubs. 
I like this. Big fan of bringing multiple looks on both offense and defense to the game.
5/21/2014 12:03 AM
I'm not gonna lie, I absolutely hate superclasses and/or teams with 10+ upperclassmen. So, if I had an extra wish, it would be to reduce class sizes from 6 scholarships to 5 scholarships.
5/21/2014 1:06 AM
One save button for practice plan.
5/21/2014 2:39 AM
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/20/2014 11:45:00 PM (view original):
im sad nobody likes my idea to allow multiple offenses or defenses on a team, with less of a practice penalty :( in real life you can't be an A in man and an F in zone, which seems to matter to some people. many have argued for overall offense and defense IQ categories, but that is more complicated and has its own issues. i still think it would be great to allow people to get 2x minutes for non-primary categories, to open the door to multiple defense clubs, or even, multiple offense clubs. 
There is some appeal to this idea, but I wonder whether there are simpler ways to get to this result - the doubled value thing worries me as a potential for unintended consequences

what if every player got better at ALL systems at a rate that corresponds to say 5 minutes of practice.  THEN if one wanted to invest 5 or 10 minutes in a second defense that would be equivalent to 10 or 15 minutes.....?   the one generic change would make this more feasible without other changes.
5/21/2014 6:22 AM
i know this seems trivial to some, but it drives me nuts that in the national tournament the #1 and #2 overall seeded teams are pitted to meet in the F4 instead of the #1 and #4 overall seeded teams (e.g., the highest and lowest seeded no. 1's). this should be such an easy fix of such an obvious error. and this is more than cosmetic, it affects the way the national tournament plays out. (probably the same for the PIT, but i didn't bother checking.)
5/21/2014 1:40 PM
Posted by nachopuzzle on 5/21/2014 1:06:00 AM (view original):
I'm not gonna lie, I absolutely hate superclasses and/or teams with 10+ upperclassmen. So, if I had an extra wish, it would be to reduce class sizes from 6 scholarships to 5 scholarships.
In D1, I have lost 6 underclassmen to the draft in one season.
I wouldn't even be able to recruit an entire class if that was the case.

Nba draft underclassmen would make this an awful idea. At least in D1.
5/21/2014 2:24 PM
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/20/2014 11:45:00 PM (view original):
im sad nobody likes my idea to allow multiple offenses or defenses on a team, with less of a practice penalty :( in real life you can't be an A in man and an F in zone, which seems to matter to some people. many have argued for overall offense and defense IQ categories, but that is more complicated and has its own issues. i still think it would be great to allow people to get 2x minutes for non-primary categories, to open the door to multiple defense clubs, or even, multiple offense clubs. 
You can do that today, I've got a couple of classes that have graduated with my mix of zone/press.  Granted, they're not getting to a high level of the secondary D, but it's absolutely possible to get A/A+ in primary defense and B/B+ in secondary today.

Now, when you have kids that are in high 80's and 90's and it's hard to squeeze out full capped growth, maybe those extra points are more painful, but you can play multiple D's, or at least have press as a viable backup for late game gamplanning now.

I don't know what difference it would make in offense, I suppose using FB as a secondary, but that doesn't seem as glaring to me as having press as a late game option.  I don't like the idea of guys getting to A's in multiple defenses.  Granted this isn't realistic, but I like how the engine sort of rewards you for practicing your chosen set.
5/21/2014 3:14 PM
Posted by guyo26 on 5/21/2014 3:14:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/20/2014 11:45:00 PM (view original):
im sad nobody likes my idea to allow multiple offenses or defenses on a team, with less of a practice penalty :( in real life you can't be an A in man and an F in zone, which seems to matter to some people. many have argued for overall offense and defense IQ categories, but that is more complicated and has its own issues. i still think it would be great to allow people to get 2x minutes for non-primary categories, to open the door to multiple defense clubs, or even, multiple offense clubs. 
You can do that today, I've got a couple of classes that have graduated with my mix of zone/press.  Granted, they're not getting to a high level of the secondary D, but it's absolutely possible to get A/A+ in primary defense and B/B+ in secondary today.

Now, when you have kids that are in high 80's and 90's and it's hard to squeeze out full capped growth, maybe those extra points are more painful, but you can play multiple D's, or at least have press as a viable backup for late game gamplanning now.

I don't know what difference it would make in offense, I suppose using FB as a secondary, but that doesn't seem as glaring to me as having press as a late game option.  I don't like the idea of guys getting to A's in multiple defenses.  Granted this isn't realistic, but I like how the engine sort of rewards you for practicing your chosen set.
it is possible, but very few people practice multiple sets on defense or offense, because it is really costly. the idea would just be to lower that cost, so more people could do it, increasing the number of options people had for how to build a team, and bringing more to game planning.
5/21/2014 7:11 PM
Posted by jtt8355 on 5/21/2014 1:42:00 PM (view original):
i know this seems trivial to some, but it drives me nuts that in the national tournament the #1 and #2 overall seeded teams are pitted to meet in the F4 instead of the #1 and #4 overall seeded teams (e.g., the highest and lowest seeded no. 1's). this should be such an easy fix of such an obvious error. and this is more than cosmetic, it affects the way the national tournament plays out. (probably the same for the PIT, but i didn't bother checking.)
this isn't true, is it?
5/21/2014 7:11 PM
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/21/2014 7:11:00 PM (view original):
Posted by jtt8355 on 5/21/2014 1:42:00 PM (view original):
i know this seems trivial to some, but it drives me nuts that in the national tournament the #1 and #2 overall seeded teams are pitted to meet in the F4 instead of the #1 and #4 overall seeded teams (e.g., the highest and lowest seeded no. 1's). this should be such an easy fix of such an obvious error. and this is more than cosmetic, it affects the way the national tournament plays out. (probably the same for the PIT, but i didn't bother checking.)
this isn't true, is it?
I'd never noticed it, and I usually try to follow both the NT and the PIT fairly closely each season.
5/21/2014 8:34 PM
1.  Purely cosmetic suggestion.  Have a preseason Top 25 poll and then DO NOT update the poll again until conference play starts.  There is nothing dumber than seeing a Top 10 team win and drop multiple spots. 

2.  Let me assign the primary position.  If I recruit a high school PG and play him at SG, let me change his freaking position to SG.  This would be fairly impactful, so it is not a purely cosmetic suggestion. 
5/21/2014 8:52 PM
Posted by gomiami1972 on 5/21/2014 8:52:00 PM (view original):
1.  Purely cosmetic suggestion.  Have a preseason Top 25 poll and then DO NOT update the poll again until conference play starts.  There is nothing dumber than seeing a Top 10 team win and drop multiple spots. 

2.  Let me assign the primary position.  If I recruit a high school PG and play him at SG, let me change his freaking position to SG.  This would be fairly impactful, so it is not a purely cosmetic suggestion. 
I like #2 a LOT. I've never understood why position classification isn't more flexible like that. Seems like it would be a simple change to implement.
5/21/2014 8:54 PM
I'll add one more.  Forget about the .425 winning % for post-season qualification.  The regular season conference champion (however you want to define that) should be guaranteed a spot in the PIT if they fail to qualify for the NT.
5/21/2014 9:23 PM
Posted by wildcat98 on 5/21/2014 8:34:00 PM (view original):
Posted by gillispie1 on 5/21/2014 7:11:00 PM (view original):
Posted by jtt8355 on 5/21/2014 1:42:00 PM (view original):
i know this seems trivial to some, but it drives me nuts that in the national tournament the #1 and #2 overall seeded teams are pitted to meet in the F4 instead of the #1 and #4 overall seeded teams (e.g., the highest and lowest seeded no. 1's). this should be such an easy fix of such an obvious error. and this is more than cosmetic, it affects the way the national tournament plays out. (probably the same for the PIT, but i didn't bother checking.)
this isn't true, is it?
I'd never noticed it, and I usually try to follow both the NT and the PIT fairly closely each season.
Go look at the history of any world - the nt seedings and brackets are there.
5/21/2014 9:28 PM
Posted by gomiami1972 on 5/21/2014 9:23:00 PM (view original):
I'll add one more.  Forget about the .425 winning % for post-season qualification.  The regular season conference champion (however you want to define that) should be guaranteed a spot in the PIT if they fail to qualify for the NT.
even with like 10 total barren wasteland conference? if HD was even like, half full, i could see it - but already coaches with 1-2 per conf have a huge advantage, they basically split a NT auto bid between them, unless they can't beat the sims. i'd hate to see them get an auto PIT bid, too! i guess the conf champion will often win the CT, so its not as bad as wrecking 10 PIT spots with total **** teams, but still... i could support it for conferences with at least 6 humans, i guess? or if the HD world was 50% or more full, even? i wonder if any divisions qualify as half full...
5/21/2014 9:29 PM
◂ Prev 123456 Next ▸
What next to improve in HD? Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 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.