Press conference

Survey about the future of match engine
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+4
Impossible to select only two updates. -- 91 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+9
I like where this is going (in theory).

I see a lot of tactical variations that will be possible this way.
But I also see that there is still a long way to go and a lot of work ahead until everything is put together and above all: balanced!

I hope everyone else is also aware of this and remains patient and constructive until the end, so that we all have a nice playing experience.

Let's make it happen together! :D -- 91 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+9
There is no need to choose a priority. Everything mentioned above, except the last one, should be implemented, no matter how long it takes.
The 12th suggested update will only ruin the game and make it less fun, more predictable, and possibly pay to win. It would be a disaster, in my opinion. -- 91 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+6
I have other suggestion - just give us one version of ME and allow us to play on it, not 20 different versions of engine during one season (in both WL and NL) and work on changes in testing engine. It's good you want to develop engine and improve it, but at the same time I'm tired that I don't know on which version of engine I'm playing (old/new/with newest update/without it) and the fact, that same player plays something completly different in his first few games, something different in the middle of the season, and again different at the end. -- 91 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+5
Demokracy is when the wolf ask rabit, what he want to be breakfast, dinner or supper -- 91 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
Wolf ask rabit -- 91 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0
Two suggestions that are not tatic related:
- on U16 and U18 national tournaments the Free Throw % should artificially raised
- on playoffs the revenue of the tiebraker should be split between the two teams -- 91 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0
Review plus and minus of height. Now taller is always more preferred. Everyone wishes to have a 200cm SG playing pg, and a 220cm C playing PF now. -- 91 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+9
GM could do whatever you want, just don't change match engine so frequently, but it seems impossible -- 91 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
If you want to enrich the player type so that something like Jokič or Magic Johnson can work, you should review the design of player height and pitentials. Not some unreliable "special skills". Why would people choose 201cm for PG, 206cm for SG, 213cm for SF, 220+ for PF/C? Why would most players only have one type of shot? Why are short players useless?This is all caused by the current unreasonable match engine and pitentials. You guys should really rethink how to redesign this piece. -- 91 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+9
I agree with coldmeow, the effects of height are over done. When our players are picked via scouts the height is too random, and some get stuck with C only with 209cm max height. He should be able to play PF at that height. Also I do like the #12 option, however I think there should be a 'hint' given to F2P and just a slightly better hint to premium members. Too much details would make the member not need to think on tactics. -- 91 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+5
The height bonus would be fine if they implement the weakness correctly

- The smaller player, the easier it is for him to dribble. Tall guards may often score more points but also make more turnovers.

196cm, 1.4 turnovers per game
https://www.basketpulse.com/en/Player/2413112/statistics
176cm, 1.5 turnovers per game
https://www.basketpulse.com/en/Player/2224628/statistics

I was like, ?????? -- 91 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+3
Man tai iskilo klausimas.treneriu itaka po varikliuko atnaujimo beveik nieko nebelemia?ar as klystu? -- 91 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0
Trenerių įgūdžiai sukurtų dar daugiau atsitiktinių situacijų, kurių suvaldymas akivaizdžiai nesiseka net dabar. Manau ko labiausiai trūksta tarp paminėtų dalykų - pabaigti visą šitą chaosą kuomet efektyviausi žaidėjai yra treniruojami vos vieną įgūdį iki begalybės. Tokie nelankstūs žaidėjai realiame krepšinyje kaip tik mažiausiai efektyvūs ir jų panaudojimas reikalauja didelių žinių. Dabar universalių žaidėjų žaidime labai mažai ir su jais siekti rezultatų beveik neįmanoma. Tą reikia keisti jau dabar. -- 91 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+3
I only wanted a stable version ！！！！！！！！！！！！because I knew that implementing these features would create more problems -- 91 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
Agree with TRX001, we need right now stable version in both WL and NL to play with it and devs could work on changes on separate engine designer for it and later only implement changes, but not every season with additional changes during season. -- 91 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
If they plan to implement all of these, there will be no more stable version until they finish.
I hope they will do it faster and enable free additional matches so we can test it more quickly. -- 91 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0
No game will deliver an update once every 10 years. League of legends rolls out new patch every month, millions of people are playing it and people even runs business with it, I don’t see any issues. As long as people learn how to read patch notes
A player requires 10+ seasons to train and everyone trains players every day. No matter BP delivers an update once every 10 seasons, people will always complain if the update does not favor them. Having an update every season is just fine -- 91 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+3
Pritariu formatas -- 91 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0
Couldn't you simply go back to former GE? That was fun. -- 91 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
I agree with some users above, the importance of height for players is way too strong! Especially in some things like 3p%...all short players are terrible at that (opposite of real basket!!!) -- 91 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+3
And also, weak skills should be punished more than they are now...there are players with 3/4 skills very high and all the others very low...they should struggle, now they're dominating instead! -- 91 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+5
I understand that there are more changes, corrections, modifications, etc., I still haven't seen the end of the tunnel of the new game engine, it will be many seasons with nothing defined and all random -- 91 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
Fouls need to be addressed asap. How can a team have 28 fouls pro and only 11 against? This is bs Matches -- 91 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
Also raise the effect of 2M skill.
I have two identical players (C/PF, both 215 cm). They have completely identical skills with one difference. One is 12 in 3p and the other one is 12 in 2m (and has 1 point higher exp.). The 3p guy is shooting 39% for 3p and the 2m guy is shooting 41% for 2p. The difference should be higher, because otherwise it doesn't make sense to develop midrange players at all and it further forces us to develop only one type of shooters. -- 91 S 47 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+5
As nofixations said, wouldn't be better to come back to the old ME? -- 91 S 47 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
A Crazy Idea...why dont you change whatever you want It, test It in several season yourself and implemented when you want It..but keep the engine for several season without changes? Its really crazy and annoying searching for talents, training for season and Discover all this time was a waste of time. Dribbling is not important, now its, rebounds now is key, middle Range matters...and changes and changes every few weeks. I never saw a Game like that, you want to change some things? Change It, even in people do not like It, but in the name of god, stop making changes and changes each 2 weeks, I do not know if its a Big CLUE that many users like me, playing this Game since years are really tired about the way everything its going on -- 91 S 47 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+15
The point is any changes of EM could be the reasons of wasteing time in training players. Who cares? -- 91 S 48 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
The game engine is broken, how do I have 90(!) less Free Throws in 4 games?? https://www.basketpulse.com/pb/Players/statistics -- 91 S 50 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0
I think the advantage of tall players is a feature of the game and should be preserved. The probability of tall players appearing in the game is very small, so it is reasonable to have some advantages. It increases the differentiation of players so that everyone is not the same -- 91 S 51 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
В перспективе очень хорошо все описано. Спасибо!) -- 91 S 52 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
Skamba gražiai, bet iš principo čia vos ne vėl mnaujas ME gaunasi :) vėl iš naujo ir kitaip ruošt žaidėjus. Gerai kad kaip nujausdamas jaunimėliui dribling skilus kilstelėjau visiem :) -- 91 S 52 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0