Tue Aug 26, 2003 6:48 pm
ReyJ obviously plays with player lock... Without it, well the guards are never there although they should be. This is something the 10-player free style could fix. The inactivity of AI controlled player while playing switch.
I meant that if a guard averages 7 rebounds while simulating, well he should be there to get some rebounds in the game too. And the AI had never quite handled it like it should.
I've averaged about 5 rebounds with a bad rebounder in Live 2003 with player lock on. Almost 3,5 of them were offensive. Which is again way too unrealistic.
But I still say that when you get the scores right, you don't get the other stats right. Like those rebounding numbers. Why I mentioned long rebounds, well the lack of long rebounds results that the forwards collect all the rebounds and none are left for the guards that only seldom go in and fight for the rebound.
But there's no point in arguing the point... Rebounding can be done, but it is not implemented right *period*
ReyJ, well you averaged 8,5 rebounds with Tim Thomas... How much did the other guys average? And what length quarters did you use?
I meant that if a guard averages 7 rebounds while simulating, well he should be there to get some rebounds in the game too. And the AI had never quite handled it like it should.
I've averaged about 5 rebounds with a bad rebounder in Live 2003 with player lock on. Almost 3,5 of them were offensive. Which is again way too unrealistic.
But I still say that when you get the scores right, you don't get the other stats right. Like those rebounding numbers. Why I mentioned long rebounds, well the lack of long rebounds results that the forwards collect all the rebounds and none are left for the guards that only seldom go in and fight for the rebound.
But there's no point in arguing the point... Rebounding can be done, but it is not implemented right *period*
ReyJ, well you averaged 8,5 rebounds with Tim Thomas... How much did the other guys average? And what length quarters did you use?
Tue Aug 26, 2003 7:06 pm
Actually I did, and they were 7 minute quarters, and Tyson Chandler averaged 5.4 I think, Quentin Richardosn averaged 3.6, and Eddy Curry had 4.7 off the bench. I get about 35 rebounds a game, and 16-18 will be offensive.Metsis wrote:ReyJ, well you averaged 8,5 rebounds with Tim Thomas... How much did the other guys average? And what length quarters did you use?
Tue Aug 26, 2003 7:18 pm
[quote="colin826] Actually I did, and they were 7 minute quarters, and Tyson Chandler averaged 5.4 I think, Quentin Richardosn averaged 3.6, and Eddy Curry had 4.7 off the bench. I get about 35 rebounds a game, and 16-18 will be offensive.[/quote]
Player lock on or off? I get around 20 rebounds a game with switch in Live 2003. And it ain't because AI takes all the boards...
Player lock on or off? I get around 20 rebounds a game with switch in Live 2003. And it ain't because AI takes all the boards...
Tue Aug 26, 2003 10:31 pm
Actually, I've never liked player lock. Never used it, never have and never will.
On another note, it wasn't me who uses Tim Thomas.
I'm able to rebound well with guards only because I switch players quickly or I'm controlling the guards when the CPU takes a shot, that's when I move that player into the post for a rebound.
Like I said, I use the Hornets, a very good rebounding team, so obviously that helps. I don't get many offensive rebounds with B Diddy, I leave that to the big men to do their dirty work. B Diddy's rebounding avg are mostly from defensive boards.
As for what the other guys avg, I can't give an exact number, but to estimate here's what i probably get... Keeping in mind that I play 10 min quarters.
Magloire - 9.7 rpg
Brown - 10.3 rpg
Mash - 4.6 rpg
Wesley - 1.1 rpg
B Diddy - 5.0 rpg
Lynch - 4.7 rpg
Traylor - 4.6 rpg
Armstrong - 0.6 rpg
Alexander - 0.5 rpg
West - 2.4 rpg
Rooks - 2.7 rpg
Augmon - 1.6 rpg
The total would probably be meaningless since these are estimates, so you can add that up yourself. I also happen to put a strong emphasis on rebounding because it's the way I play the game and because I know the Hornets are a big team that CAN rebound.
On another note, it wasn't me who uses Tim Thomas.
I'm able to rebound well with guards only because I switch players quickly or I'm controlling the guards when the CPU takes a shot, that's when I move that player into the post for a rebound.
Like I said, I use the Hornets, a very good rebounding team, so obviously that helps. I don't get many offensive rebounds with B Diddy, I leave that to the big men to do their dirty work. B Diddy's rebounding avg are mostly from defensive boards.
As for what the other guys avg, I can't give an exact number, but to estimate here's what i probably get... Keeping in mind that I play 10 min quarters.
Magloire - 9.7 rpg
Brown - 10.3 rpg
Mash - 4.6 rpg
Wesley - 1.1 rpg
B Diddy - 5.0 rpg
Lynch - 4.7 rpg
Traylor - 4.6 rpg
Armstrong - 0.6 rpg
Alexander - 0.5 rpg
West - 2.4 rpg
Rooks - 2.7 rpg
Augmon - 1.6 rpg
The total would probably be meaningless since these are estimates, so you can add that up yourself. I also happen to put a strong emphasis on rebounding because it's the way I play the game and because I know the Hornets are a big team that CAN rebound.
Wed Aug 27, 2003 3:37 am
I don't use player lock, having the AI make stupid desicions pisses me off to much.
Wed Aug 27, 2003 3:51 am
colin826 wrote:I don't use player lock, having the AI make stupid desicions pisses me off to much.
Same.
sometimes, if I just want to use one player and get him lots of points or something like that, i'll use player lock....
Wed Aug 27, 2003 11:28 am
You know come to think of it, if I used player lock with B Diddy, I'd avg more than 5 rebounds per game.
But I think colin said it best.
But I think colin said it best.
Wed Aug 27, 2003 3:08 pm
Yeah, Colin summed it up quite nicely... Especially in Live 2003's cool stealing thing the passing is always fun. (please note that this could be sarcasm)
I couldn't play Live 2003 with 10 minute quarters. I'd always have scores around 150-160... And still I wouldn't get the realistic rebounding numbers. It is funny how you can make a bball game with these kinds of statistics: FG% .750 3PT% .550 FT% .450... What's wrong with this picture??? Everything. The field goal/ 3 point ratio is about right, but the field goal percentage should be dropped by 30% and the FT percetage upped by that 30%. Then it would be a little more realistic. And it would work wonders in rebounding stats too.
But with sliders, this shouldn't be as tough of a problem as it is in Live 2003.
The AI would need to play smarter... I mean like the players realistically do and I have high hopes for this. I certainly don't hope that the 10-man freestyle thing is something that is correctly implemented for the player lock only. Cause the AI on switch is pretty dumb, no offense... The AI has always been quite turned off when you play switch and that is just wrong. You have to do all the defending yourself... And the AI will just look on as an enemy player takes a shot, which is just not realistic and further more looks just dumb.
I couldn't play Live 2003 with 10 minute quarters. I'd always have scores around 150-160... And still I wouldn't get the realistic rebounding numbers. It is funny how you can make a bball game with these kinds of statistics: FG% .750 3PT% .550 FT% .450... What's wrong with this picture??? Everything. The field goal/ 3 point ratio is about right, but the field goal percentage should be dropped by 30% and the FT percetage upped by that 30%. Then it would be a little more realistic. And it would work wonders in rebounding stats too.
But with sliders, this shouldn't be as tough of a problem as it is in Live 2003.
The AI would need to play smarter... I mean like the players realistically do and I have high hopes for this. I certainly don't hope that the 10-man freestyle thing is something that is correctly implemented for the player lock only. Cause the AI on switch is pretty dumb, no offense... The AI has always been quite turned off when you play switch and that is just wrong. You have to do all the defending yourself... And the AI will just look on as an enemy player takes a shot, which is just not realistic and further more looks just dumb.
Wed Aug 27, 2003 3:44 pm
I couldn't play Live 2003 with 10 minute quarters. I'd always have scores around 150-160... And still I wouldn't get the realistic rebounding numbers.
Out of curiosity, which rosters did you use? Your own or developed by someone else? Coz I have my own rosters which I use and I get good scores with 10 min quarters.
On a good FG shooting day, I'd score around 100-110 pts. But as an avg I'd get around 96 ppg. Of course, overall scores would ultimately depend on the style of game you play.
Wed Aug 27, 2003 4:49 pm
It really doesn't matter that much in 2003 who or what I play... I just rack up points and blocks like there is no tomorrow. And it just sucks. I'd rather have 20 taken out of the blocks column and add that to the rebound column and I'd have quite realistic stats in live 2003.
I usually fantasy draft a team, but you can do it with pretty much any team. When every shot falls, well every shot falls. I've done this with the original rosters as well. It doesn't even have to be a top notch team. And ofcourse with super-star level. Have you ever seen a basket ball game with shooting percentage of .850... In 2003 yes, elsewhere, not a chance.
With a good game I can score 110 points in 6 minute quarts. Even more sometimes. But usually I get something like 90 points.
I think most people have got results like I have... Dunking the ball is too easy. All you need is a good big dunker and you can get 30 points with him in every game.
Maybe I'll play a game with 10 minute quarts and post the results here on these boards.
I usually fantasy draft a team, but you can do it with pretty much any team. When every shot falls, well every shot falls. I've done this with the original rosters as well. It doesn't even have to be a top notch team. And ofcourse with super-star level. Have you ever seen a basket ball game with shooting percentage of .850... In 2003 yes, elsewhere, not a chance.
With a good game I can score 110 points in 6 minute quarts. Even more sometimes. But usually I get something like 90 points.
I think most people have got results like I have... Dunking the ball is too easy. All you need is a good big dunker and you can get 30 points with him in every game.
Maybe I'll play a game with 10 minute quarts and post the results here on these boards.
Sat Aug 30, 2003 4:57 am
well i play 5 min quarters, and my problem is, i want 2 put the computer 2 be simulated in 5 min quaters and get similar stats like im scoring 50 ppg and the cpu should be right there. i usually have 2 put 5 mins for me and 8 for cpu 2 get similar stats but then i can have a top 3 rebounder and be top 15, and shot percentages are off.
the game should be made for 12 min quarters as the simulation so if im playing 6 min quarters the game should be half in the stats so if the mavs score 100 a game in real life (12 min quarters) if im playin 6 min quarters they should avg 50. Thats the best way 2 do it imo.
the game should be made for 12 min quarters as the simulation so if im playing 6 min quarters the game should be half in the stats so if the mavs score 100 a game in real life (12 min quarters) if im playin 6 min quarters they should avg 50. Thats the best way 2 do it imo.