比賽分析: Panthera Wheels vs Nea Halkidona BC

遊戲新聞: 比賽分析: Panthera Wheels vs Nea Halkidona BC

-- 91 賽季 58 天

Match analysis: Panthera Wheels vs Nea Halkidona BC

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

+46

2.1 3.2 fourkings

I would like to know whether the inference derived from this news is the reason for the reverse deduction of the result or the result of the reason. Are these competitions accidental examples, or are they inevitable consequences of the game engine itself? In other words, can I think that the factor that determines the rebound in the game is the average rebounding ability of players in five positions on the field? Or will there be a coefficient based on the rebounding ability of players in each position? Because my low post players themselves are very tall, and only one player has obvious shortcomings in rebounding technology, but in most games this season, my team is at an absolute disadvantage in rebounding competition, and even the total number of rebounds of my team is not as good as that of my opponent's offensive rebounds. I would like to know whether this average rebounding ability can be used as a standard for future games.

Believe me, this is very important. It takes a long time to cultivate a player. I must know whether my small forward, attack guard and point guard really need rebounding ability, and what is the opportunity cost if I train them.

As for the ability to steal the ball, this is my most disappointing point this season. Because it cost me a lot of training time. Now it seems that it is very unwise to train a player's defense IQ to 12 o'clock. This did not exist in the past. In the previous games, it was very important to have more than 10 points of defensive intelligence. But now there is such a sudden change, which has ruined a lot of my efforts.

Since the beginning of the game, we have been faced with the problem that Darius always gives a vague conclusion every time the game engine is changed, while in other games, we usually give specific data such as how much an attribute is weakened and how much percentage is weakened. But in basketpulse, this has never happened. Because Darius' modification plan is very vague, players have to spend a lot of time and money on repeated practice. This situation may still work in the previous season, because engine changes are not very frequent. However, in recent seasons, changes have been made too frequently, resulting in many club managers, including me, not knowing how to train young players in the team. On the one hand, we don't know how to train correctly, on the other hand, we don't know whether Darius's idea will suddenly change tomorrow morning. This is a very disturbing problem. My suggestion is:

1. Clearly give the direction and scale of the modification.

2. The modification should not be too frequent.

3. Before making changes, it is necessary to provide a platform for players to practice for a long time, so that players can enter into the real game after reaching certain conclusions.

In short, don't let us always rush to deal with your changes, and don't let us always worry about your new ideas tomorrow morning. -- 91 賽季 58 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

+13

a-darius By "Average rebounding skill", does it mean only rebounding or are you saying "jumping, strength, rebounding, height" as a whole like what dwyane3 mentioned in previous article? if it's the former, why only rebounding is being compared here but not jumping and strength too? Does it mean things are changed?
> Rebounding - describes how well the player can rebound the balls. This skill describes how well the player feels where the ball is going to fall, rather than the possibility for the player to rebound it (depends also on other skills).
> Jumping - the better the skill, the higher player can jump. Good jumping skill helps to get rebounds.

fourkings This is exactly why they want to balance the game engine as quick as possible and thus as frequent as possible. You don't want to train DIQ for 20 seasons and one day they tell you things will be changed tomorrow. But instead, they made all the changes in a few seasons and so you can adjust your training plan easily without a huge loss -- 91 賽季 58 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 2.2 mancuso

fourkings, excellent analysis, and you have also said it, we cannot expect serious conclusions from the Administration, so unfortunately we will have to continue experimenting. They have been testing the engine for two seasons and they do not seem to be clear about where they want to go -- 91 賽季 58 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

Kiek laiko užtrunka tokios analizės? Ar verta analizuoti, tai kas ir taip akivaizdu?

https://i.imgur.com/wHIcTlB.png

1. Kamuolys atšoko tiesiai į rankas.
Pirmose rungtynėse buvo 4 tokie įvykiai, visi jie buvo Halkidona komandos naudai.
Antrose rungtynėse toks buvo tik vienas įvykis Halkidona komandos naudai.
Sėkmė abiem atvejais lydėjo Halkidona komandą, tačiau antrose rungtynėse kur kas mažiau.

Šis įvykis chronologijoje nėra priklausomas nuo sėkmės 100% tad taip teigti iš žaidimo administracijos yra eilinį kartą labai žema -- 91 賽季 58 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 2.2 lantieheuser

One simple common sense: if you want to discuss the strength and weakness of the causality and relationship of an event, you need to first clarify the variables.

In the first question, you didn't list the variables and their weights that are involved in rebounding, you only talked about the team's average rebounds skill and height, and then gave us a conclusion that seems reasonable. So, would my PG getting 12 rebounds and C getting 2 rebounds have the same result as my PG getting 2 rebounds and C getting 12 rebounds? Do jumping and resilience not affect rebounding at all?

To be frank, I completely don't understand what you are analyzing, because you haven't even learned the basic research methods.

The second foul question is the same. What are the variables that affect fouls? Is it because defensive skills have an advantage and other skills are at a disadvantage, making it easier to foul? Is this statement expressing that defensive skills encourage players to get defensive opportunities, and poor skills in other areas force them to rely on fouling to stop opponents from shooting? Or, although defensive skills are good, the opponent's comprehensive offensive ability is stronger, forcing the defender to use fouls to stop the opponent? If so, why not just say that fouls happen when your defensive skills are inferior to the opponent's offensive skills and you get defensive opportunities, so you have to use fouls to stop the opponent?

The conclusion is that you analyzed for a long time, but the more I read it, the more confused I get.

I'm sure you're willing to use analysis to respond to players' questions. But I implore you to learn to clarify your own thoughts and learn the correct research and expression methods. -- 91 賽季 58 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

fanling3:
I only used rebounding skills because they are the most important for rebounds. If the rebounding skills were similar, I would also look at other criteria, but the difference is quite significant.

By the way, the idea that rebounding is required for all players (not only C/PF) is not new. You can even find this in the game's help FAQ section: "Why my team, even being better, gets less rebounds?”

This season, this was more visible. In the next season, everyone will notice this a bit less because of changes in 1.4-b.1.

dragiux:
I once again checked the code, and I don't see how it could work differently. However, if you really believe that something works not the way we described, please use the "message to administration" function and explain your opinion in as much detail as possible.
Writing conspiracy theories is not a good way to help us. -- 91 賽季 58 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 2.2 mancuso

Darius nobody talks about conspiracy or things like that, but nobody understands the direction in which you are trying to take the game, we don't know how to train the players to adapt to the new engine. Instead of looking for enemies, it would be good if you explained how we would have to work to be able to play as before. Basketpulse was by far the best online basketball game, you are destroying it -- 91 賽季 58 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

+13

1.1 4.8 elprof

I'm gonna be a bit of a devil's advocate here. What if the administrators could promise that within X seasons the engine would work as intended and all the big issues would be dealt with. Would that satisfy all of you? How many seasons would you be willing to tolerate? -- 91 賽季 58 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 3.2 Liverduk

Completely off topic, but I think we really need an in game forum, so we can discuss issues on site. Discord is OK, but as we can clearly see, any time there's an article from devs, there are tons of comments and the debate is constructive. Not sure how many users even use discord. I don't really like it ... -- 91 賽季 58 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 Cesarrr

A game forum is needed here since day 1. It would be veru useful for all users. -- 91 賽季 58 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 HeyHoudini

For those who are waiting for "final" version of the ME, please read it again:

https://www.basketpulse.com/en/News/article/62bae5d10e91d/match-engine-update-roadmap

It clearly states, that not to repeat past ME mistakes of users finding 1 working tactic, setting it and then logging back at the end of the season, it will be updated at some points.
Currently it's still in a phase, where some major bugs come out and hot fixes need to be applied. In future, ME will have updates to "balance" itself out, so there wouldn't be only 1 or 2 working tactics and rest useless. -- 91 賽季 58 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

Darius
Atsakau beveik kiekvienam, kuris pasiteirauja. O tau prasmės nėra atsakyti. Nes dažniausiai pabėgi nuo problemų ir klausimų. Geriau eik kokias rungtynės išanalizuoti, nes daugiau ne ką ir gali padaryti -- 91 賽季 58 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

RaZeev

https://www.basketpulse.com/de/Team/33745/description:
I personally understand the *theoretical* argument that in the future more tactics should lead to successful results instead of the 1-2 established approaches of the past.

The issue I (and probably many others commenting and reading here) have is that there's only a thin red line between "multiple working tactics crafted with user skill" and "any tactics work or don't work and nobody really knows why" is thin. This leads to frustration for many users who have planned future success many, many seasons in the future (and even multiple years IRL) that see their team's peak now quite wasted or left up to a lot of luck (me included).

So in the end it all leads back to the very general question that I'm not the first to bring up:
Why change the game engine in the first place? There were user surveys in the past and the game engine wasn't on top of the priority list at all (not to talk of all the other, ahem, "minor" changes like killing the scouting system or introducing a wholly new tiredness system that).
Coaches system, federation reform were much higher up the community wishlist in the past (and game engine reform only in the form of clearer game log explanations as to why certain things happened in the game - certainly NOT a completely new engine). Why ask the users then if the results are disregarded in the end anyhow? Why bother explaining all the changes taking place in the last few seasons in article after article if the majority of reactions (esp. of loyal long-term users) is criticism/confusion? I mean, it suggests that the users have a say in where the game is headed and while for details it may be true, for the grand scheme of things it's just an illusion ...

To end my 2 pence on a high note, however, how about that:
1) As the new game and still pretty raw game engine and all other changes of recent seasons are turning Basketpulse into a whole new game, why not make it a separate browsergame altogether from scratch? You could call it Basketpulse alright; as a more veteran user I'm not glued to the name. Monetization could be much easier, esp. if you bring it on an app in the first place with nice pay-to-win features beyond buying game money for creds as is possible now. This would also do away with the practical and very nasty problem of old code in the game that makes necessary changes in other departments such a pain (like implementing the new design throughout the game - I think that project started when I started to play Basketpulse many years ago : D).
2) Revive Basketballzone with the "old" match engine, scouting system etc. and let it run on a low flame for the die-hards like me. We loved the game, still somewhat do - or we wouldn't argue so passionately in the comments - and I'm sure this game could still be succesful even with a small-ish community if investments are kept low. Seriously, the complex yet decipherable BasketballZone match engine in combination with the scouting system was why soo many users stayed in the game for IRL years and years - what app can show such user retention these days any more? -- 91 賽季 59 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

RaZeev:
Take a look:

https://www.basketpulse.com/en/News/article/60310bcf5d8a4/survey-results-and-direction-of-further-game-development
ME update was first choice in the survey. -- 91 賽季 59 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

RaZeev

Thanks, Darius. I'm referring to this first community involvement in 2019:

https://www.basketpulse.com/de/News/article/5c8bbfa3a23de/further-game-development

Almost nobody mentioned the Match Engine in the comments there. You yourself wrote in the comments back then, and I quote:
"Match engine updates do not bring more fun, and after each update users are upset because they have to adapt to the changes."

That was quite visionary.

Regarding the survey in 2021. I remember the survey. And yes, "Updating match engine" was the top choice. But as in 2019 in the article it was not specified in the survey what "updating match engine" would actually mean for the game. That was only specified *after the voting results* in the article you refer to - and also this is only still very sketched out.

So really I think everybody answering "updating match engine" just had a totally unclear and very differing understanding of what it would actually mean. (Same as with the draft update that everybody found sexy before it was implemented because they liked the general concept of drafts - but didn't have a clear grasp of the actual implementation and then were quite unhappy for a long time. Actually, the draft is still not a real draft as only promoted teams get better picks, but that's another topic ...) Some just wanted the most annoying bugs to be fixed, others wanted certain established features in the existing overall framework to work better (like fast breaks that were there but just didn't work at all) and others again just didn't understand the game engine and were losing and thought that a change would make them win more.

So actually in hindsight it would've been better to make a second survey then to find out what should be changed about the engine concretely instead of just going full monty and nowadays not really updating the game engine any more but creating a whole new engine logic altogether that goes wildly back and forth every season these days.

What happened in the last seasons is not an update any more.
It is a whole new game altogether, especially combined with all the other changes I mentioned like the scouting system devaluation and the health system changes. -- 91 賽季 59 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

+11

1.1 2.2 lantieheuser

a-darius
If you have so much confidence in this survey and respect players' opinions so much, why not conduct another vote with the question being: Should the current way of game engine updates continue? Use the latest public opinion to shut up those who oppose it? :) -- 91 賽季 59 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 2.2 lantieheuser

Please don't misunderstand me. I think it's reasonable to give designers space to realize their ideals, and I'm not against the game vision you have outlined. What really disgusts and is difficult to tolerate is the process you used to achieve it; the game experience in these two seasons has been terrible. This is not the opinion of a minority, yet your response always seems unilateral.

Even if you tell us that the engine's performance can eventually be improved from a 70 to an 80, the fact is that veteran players have experienced several consecutive seasons of 30, and this chaos still has no end in sight. How can you think that supporting this change is a rational choice?

Isn't it more in line with players' wishes to stick with something that may have some flaws but we were already enjoying? -- 91 賽季 59 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 2.2 ak904

＠a-darius
Maybe you can try not to put all the focus on the engine update. It would be better for BasketPulse to try to expand the game community. I don’t know if you have noticed that the proportion of new registered users staying is quite low. You have been spending time updating the engine, but new players don't have a sense of the engine's condition. They care more about the first impression after entering the game after registration.
Why not spend more time making some updates that make new players willing to stay after registering? After all, a larger community can bring you more profit, isn't it? -- 91 賽季 59 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 nofixations

Why don't you just open a league played with the old game engine, so that the romantics that liked it better can sign in and still have fun. So you can do whatever changes and experiments you want - without taking out the fun of the game as it used to be. -- 91 賽季 59 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

kip88363

If there is a test ME played in sandbox that we could define every player in roster by our own in order to test every situation which we can figure out how the game changes, we players may know how to play well when new ME upload. Because every time we played the testing ME, we only allowed to use our existing roster. That means whether we realize how the things changes in new ME or not, we cannot find the way to improve our roster to adapt those changes. Please don't let us act like a blind feeling the elephant. -- 91 賽季 59 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

4.2 4.4 Formatas

Man visai patiktų jei būtų sugrąžintas kokio 10 sezono varikliukas. Jei gerai pamenu, jame bene vienintelė rimta klaida buvo, kad likus 4 minutėm ne visada įeidavo suplanuoti žaidėjai. Tiek rungtynių stebėjimas tiek žaidėjų auginimas tada buvo kur kas smagesnė veikla nei šiandien. Sakyčiau net žaidėjai buvo kur kas arčiau tikrovės nei po visų dabartinių reformų. -- 91 賽季 59 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

2.1 6.16 steijnarr

So, most of the active players have been playing this game for years, and as ak904 mentioned new players don't last very long. If the active players didn't like the ME, they wouldn't stay this long right? I remember voting "update of ME" on that survey, but this wasn't what I thought when checking that box. I thought it was going to be more detailed, maybe more visual; not "We will waste your next 10 seasons so why do you even play?"
We are not your enemies Darius. We are not conspiring against you. We are just telling you what we enjoy, and why we don't enjoy what's happening right now. We are literally telling you how to make more money, and you are getting mad at us. This brings me back to my first sentence: why are the new players not lasting?
You take your old players' loyalty for granted. You know we love this game. You know that we'll stick around whatever you will do. But if you keep disregarding our opinions and feedbacks, remember that people get divorced after 30 years of marriage and several children. Nobody wants to be in a toxic relationship. Please have a more constructive communication with us. Don't think "They'll hate me whatever I do anyway" -we won't. We are still here, aren't we? -- 91 賽季 59 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

+10

7.64 8.59

We saw Rebound skill and height comparison in match analysis. So it means that other skills or positions are irrelevant. Let's watch to my team:
Player; Rebounding; Height; Rebounds per minute
Gongsun 11 211 0.22
Kurpius 9 207 0.30
Lima 10 214 0.28
Zukauskas 9 219 0.28
Raudeika 9 210 0.27

The best rebounder in my team has lowest height and rebound skill. The worst rebounder has the best rebound skill and average height. What does it mean? Other skills and other reasons are important too. So A-Darius did low quality match analysis. -- 91 賽季 59 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

DarjusKleins , means nothing, this Game change to a blackjack or other casino Game. You could play 3 times with same opponent without change anything from anyone, and results are totally opposite. I did It last year, total random! -- 91 賽季 59 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

TheWizardKs

I have played for years, and never have I suffered from the changes as I have since the ME changes. Three seasons in a row now, we are ranked in the upper half ( once #7 ) only to finish in either 25th or 26th each season, avoiding demotion barely. It is not fun any longer continually watching my higher salaried, better skilled players LOSE repeatedly. Something is seriously wrong. -- 91 賽季 62 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

3.1 3.1 ekstrasensas

Something is definitely wrong, but owners don't have answers what and how to solve it. -- 91 賽季 62 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 Zolininkas

visiem blogau, bet vistiek visi zaidzia, cia kaip su bolto wolto ikainiais, visi verkia, bet vistiek visi dirba:D -- 91 賽季 62 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

Pilni šilainiai :/// -- 91 賽季 62 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

Ryt 12h draftai mano. Kazin spesiu uz Visvalda prabalsuot -- 91 賽季 62 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 superdzonis

Isankstiniuose reikejo balsuot :D -- 91 賽季 62 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

2.1 3.4 Intelygentas

Manau, Kaunui, nieko nenutiks jei nesuspėsi, bet nenutiks ir jei spesi… -- 91 賽季 62 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

Im going to send 1000 créditos of someone could give me a GOOD explanation out of "that Life" "GM sucks"

1Q +7
2Q +4(+11 general)
3Q +8! (+19 in general)
LAST... -25, WTF.
My team tiredness 87, his 91!!!
Best players
No player outs
Less tiredness
Best defensa
Winning all Q with some difference.
This 4Q comeback happens a few times in the history of NBA
After 40 seasons im really Close to leave this Game, is a nosense GM

a-darius

dwayne3 any explanation? Things like this happens? -- 93 賽季 4 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

That’s the issue of relaxation, you got most of the shot quality close to -4, while another team has that close to 4 or 5, because your team is leading -- 93 賽季 4 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 nofixations

They tried to simulate last Euroleague Madrid - Partizan game... -- 93 賽季 4 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

fanling3 why? Where appear that issue? Because I was playing for 40 seasons and all the matches in the 3Q +19 like this, ends with more difference.
ALL my players have at least 10CS 12Jump, 12 Speed. They do not want to defend in the last Q? They took holidays? And thanks for the answer. -- 93 賽季 4 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

There are multiple reasons how a team can make a comeback in latest engine. There are a few others I didn’t mention, but in Q4 of your particular game, I can see relaxation is the major cause. Another team has 15 shots with positive shot quality out of 17 shots, not counting fastbreaks. Your team had 2 shots with positive shot quality out of 11 shots. There were other issues with tiredness and turnovers but I think that’s minor -- 93 賽季 4 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

ulipulido this is an engine balance problem. When one side leads too much, it will miss all kinds of goals, and then the opponent will score all kinds of miracle goals, even if the shot ratio is negative. This is the balance engine designed for us by gm -- 93 賽季 4 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

ulipulido when you look at the game seriously, you will find that your players are very good, but they still play hard against each other, the opponent will score in various ways, even if their shot ratio is negative, now the engine shot ratio is not so important, more is luck, so for your situation, please don't overreact, just keep calm，then get used to the new engine -- 93 賽季 4 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

I don't think he overreacts. It IS a problem.

The maths will balance itself when your team is losing because of 5 unlucky shots. You will eventually make a comeback when your opponent makes 5 unlucky shots. You don't need bonus shot quality FOR FREE to do it

I don't care if it uses relaxation to turn a 200:0 game into 100:50, but turning a 90:80 game into 85:86 is NOT ok -- 93 賽季 4 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

TRX001 overreact? No my friend, why the hell Im going to have a better team, train good defensive players, if Game DECIDE I have to lose BECAUSE OF REASONS. Not a single reason, just his players shoots like stepahn curry and mine defence like stepahn curry as well. Thats what Im complianing. I could understand tiredness, arena effect, player out for fouls...but not this way, in a match I should (or have to) win for 25-30 points, losing this way -- 93 賽季 4 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

This is the current status of the engine, even if the attributes of the players will be a big difference, the performance of the role may be similar, I think the engine can increase the impact of the shot ratio, reduce some negative ratio of luck, otherwise the current defensive ability and shooting ability can not be reflected -- 93 賽季 4 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

In that match, your team RT was about 5% larger (244 vs 231).
Your team had an advantage in some skills while the other team had an advantage in others.
At first glance, it looks like a fight between two teams of the same level.
It seems a bit strange that you believe you should have won by 20-30 points.

You mentioned tiredness, but I believe that in the last quarter, you played with more tired players than your opponents. I cannot check the players' shape levels, but that might also be a factor.

I agree that the last quarter really looks strange, but these things happen. And there could be multiple reasons for that (I don't think relaxation is the main reason) -- 93 賽季 4 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

A-darius, thanks for the answer, but you know RT sometimes means nothing.
ALL my outside players have at least 12-12-10 in Jump/Speed/CS except one
ALL my inside 12-12-10 in Jump/Strenght/CS.
Defensa was a Big difference between the teams, normal Develop was another +3/6 for my in the last Q as in the rest of the match.
In the 4Q I shoot 2/14 and the other team 12/20. Thats not normal when the rest of the match the shooting was: 23/51 VS 21/51 -- 93 賽季 4 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

And I have 6 players in perfect shape and 3 out of best shape -- 93 賽季 4 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

2.2 2.2 coldmeow

a-darius We are all very confused about the current ME and would like you to come up with an article explaining it. We all know that there is a protection mechanism in ME that keeps the score from pulling too far apart. But is it so influential that it can sway games and make player skills meaningless. Like fanling3 said, you want a 200:0 game to become 100:50, but in fact it's a 90:70 game that becomes 80:75, or even 75:80.
It's very frustrating, we can accept losing because the players and coaches are worse than the people, we can accept losing because of tactical restraint. But now that randomness has taken over the game, it's no fun at all. -- 93 賽季 4 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

I can try to write one or two more detailed articles in a season about specific matches (similar to this article). However, both teams must give permission for this, as some skills and tactics might be revealed.

Most of the time, I think users can do a better job investigating their own matches themselves.
The starting point should be to be realistic about your team. Being 5% better in RT or having better skills in one area does not mean that your team is significantly better and should win by 25-30 points. Other skills matter as well! -- 93 賽季 4 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

I Accept to analyse this match, I could learn things about ME -- 93 賽季 4 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

2.2 3.2 joancrumor

比賽
I still try to know or understand free throws vs fouls and offensive rebounds, the great mystery of this game engine. Currently fatigue does not work, but the ranges are very wide -- 93 賽季 4 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

Hi everyone, and hi

a-darius I spent the 1000 credits and is the last time doing that, because I even more angry that before.
IN THE LAST Q
Mi Team has a PSR of 4,05! My SQR is -2,6
Ripis has -2,71 PSR and 2 in SQR
WHOLE MATCH
MY team 3,96 and -2
Ripis -2,89 and 1,13.
So yes, despite of the RT, as I said before, my players are MUCH Better than his players. You have this HUGE difference in PSR.
His players where shooting in the first 3Q in 1,79 (mine -0,88) and last Quarter Magically change to 2 and my team change from -0,88 to -2,6.
I mean...is a Nosense, whatever you could analize. I have 3 players in shoot as much as possible, but the rest in average and good situations.
Where is my friend of do no overreact?
Best regards
I really hope if you could analize this match, because the only thing I could see is the game decide I have to lose -- 93 賽季 4 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 HeyHoudini

Dragiux gal kokį komentarą? -- 93 賽季 4 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

Ulipulido,

Once again, you are only focusing on your advantages.

Why do you think you lose rebounds despite having "much better" players? Is it due to randomness or because your players are not as skilled in this area?

Do you believe that the few skills that almost all your players lack should not be visible during the match? For example, what about DIQ, which your team is incredibly low in?

Yes, you have advantages in some areas, but your opponent has advantages in others. The skills that your team is lacking should be visible on the court.

At this point, I don't think analyzing the match would be helpful, especially since you don't even agree that your team is at a similar level.

Let's look at it from the other side. What if the other team were to argue that ME is bad because he was supposed to win by 30+ points due to his better players and huge advantage in some skills -- 93 賽季 5 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

a-darius You just admitted winning by +20 points can lead to free points for opponent? Can you explain why this even exists? How can i make never lead by +20 so my opponent won't score easy points? -- 93 賽季 5 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 1.1 史塔克

In the current game, if you win too many points in the first half, you have to worry that the engine will help you lose the game, which is amazing. My player has a 20-point lead. Why should I relax? It's to make the game more "wonderful", which is too bad. -- 93 賽季 5 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

a-darius Now with this engine, randomization, and balancing, the gap is so small that the best teams somehow lose games that they don't have to lose, and the player can't get feedback from the game and improve because you don't know how to lose a lot of games. We used to be able to see how good a player was at shooting by looking at the shot ratio, but now the 3 ratio and the -3 ratio For players, it's not that big of a difference, because you can miss a lot of times with a 3 ratio, you can make three 3point in a game with a -3 ratio, and if you're saying it's the quality of the shot that affects the percentage, then please tell me what skills affect the quality of the shot, it seems to me it's random, it's not related to offensive IQ or defensive IQ or anything else, It's a balanced result, as long as you are the weak team and you are behind by a certain number of points, even if your shot ratio is very low, the system will give you 5 quality, let you catch up quickly, also as the strong team, even if many shots are 4 ratio, you are ahead, the engine will have all kinds of ways to make you not score，If most of the players' performance is related to skill, then I can learn from the game and improve, but right now, I don't know where to start. What I see is random, balanced, not related to skill -- 93 賽季 5 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

1.1 4.8 elprof

The reason your team lost that game was Q3 and the reason you lost Q3 so bad was because your backup C (Mármol) fouled out somewhere in Q2, leaving you with only 2 bigs (Isasaga and Anuncibay). Then early on in Q3 Isasaga gets his 3rd foul, subbing him out until Q4 7:12. In his place comes a 193cm SG (Feyjo) who is shifted to SF and your 205cm SF (Orive) is forced to play PF where he's matched against either the 215cm Ko or 210cm Tang, putting him at a disadvantage. Orive then proceeds to cause 4 turnovers in 2.5 minutes from fast breaks and allows one shot with 5 skill ratio from Ko and 3 shots with 3 skill ratio from Tang, of which one was an unlucky miss. So basically, fouls and failed fast breaks probably cost you this game. -- 93 賽季 5 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

TRX001 You just answered yourself but probably didn't realize :) -- 93 賽季 5 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

I'm just stating my own team's understanding of the engine. What player is rebounding better, scoring better, defending better, or organizing better now, is a mystery, and the skills don't match the actual performance -- 93 賽季 5 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

The problem in most cases is not relaxation or randomness. It is just the easiest thing to blame.

Look at the match in this link:

比賽
Basically, relaxation and randomness should be increased, not decreased.

I hope to find some quality time to write an article about relaxation and "safeguards" - why we need them and how they work -- 93 賽季 5 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

2.2 3.1 timmy296701

Relaxation doesn’t apply to any matches vs Bot. Same as lower leagues matches. This match sample is not even relevant. -- 93 賽季 5 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

3.3 3.1 benislovas

And what is wrong with given example? Imagine Celtics playing with amateur players from your yard.
This result is far from how the game should really end. -- 93 賽季 5 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

2.2 3.1 timmy296701

Agree with benislovas, if I can get a good team, I am expecting my team beat my opponent as hard as they can everyday. It’s ridiculous to have a good team then punished by the engine. Then why don’t I have a worse team, saving salary and roll the dice everyday? As the engine will help me to keep the score close. -- 93 賽季 5 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

2.2 2.2 coldmeow

Isn't the example given by the GM an example of how stupid "safeguards" are. A top league team scoring 106 points against a bot team of amateur players and allowing 12 easy points is completely impossible in reality. 348RT vs 45RT, this should be a 200+:0 game. I don't know how a 45RT player would match up against a 348RT player, I think dribbling past half court would be a huge challenge for him. Yet GM thought they should have been evenly matched and should have battled until end of the game,then 348RT's team won by a slim margin, I don't know what to say. -- 93 賽季 5 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

Hello

a-darius
I perfectly understand that my rival has more defiq or rebounds than my team, my main complaint comes because the difference in defense and attack in shooting situations is enormous, and the same engine in the previous three quarters has decided that this enormous difference was + 19, that is to say, despite his better rebounding or defiq skills, my superiority in attack and defense for 30 minutes, and in ALL quarters without exception has been positive for my team and in just 10 minutes, it has been worth it to make me a +25, with a shooting percentage of 70% (despite my defenders being great) and instead I shoot with a 2/14.
If this tonic had been throughout the game, nothing to object. When it's 30 minutes in one way, and for 10 ALL THE OPPOSITE at UNREAL levels, the explanation is that you have less iq and rebound is not worth it, I also had them for 30 minutes.
In fact, you start by acknowledging that the last quarter is very strange, and then, I imagine when you feel attacked (which is not my intention, since I'm just trying to understand how this new engine works) you come to defend the indefensible, when I'm just looking for an explanation not a defense -- 93 賽季 5 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

顯示隱藏回應: 63

timmy296701 thats my point all the time, during 3Q, 30 minutes and even using analize tool too check quality players and shoot situations, during 30 minutes Game engine SHOWS my players are better attack and defence (12-12-12 in attack and 12-12-10 in defence mostly all players) and GE decide that I have to lose the Game. Nothing else.
If Game works like this, I wanted to know and decide if I want to keep playing -- 93 賽季 5 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)

Reminds me this

https://youtu.be/n_DtpY9wbGg
I wonder how 50RT can score a single point from 300RT -- 93 賽季 5 天

-- (翻譯) (翻譯 EN)