What new features do u hope to see in the Dynasty mode?

[Colin]

They should add a some sort of an injury rating to players like in NHL-series. Cause some players get hurt more then others and that's a fact.

They already have a rating, hardiness.

[Metsis]

They already have a rating, hardiness.

What does this effect anyway??? There are no injuries in Live 2003 so there is not implementation of an injury rating, so what does this effect.

I thought it effected the players game...

[Andrew]

Hardiness affects the likelihood of a player getting injured when simulating.

[Power And Proud]

I like the idea of having players gain muscle during the off-season, like Kobe did last off-season when he added 15 pounds of muscle, and also have players make a real effort to lose weight that is just plain old fat, not muscle, like Shaq is now doing. He has a personal trainer to help him lose weight and get back to peak fitness (man are the real Lakers gonna be scary next year)

As for the whole injuries thing, only have major injuries a minor thing in the franchise, coz you don't want to lose so many players to long term injuries (ie- season or career ending). Sprained ankles should be a common thing. Especially if a plyer is returing to land and lands on another players foot.

[Metsis]

As for the whole injuries thing, only have major injuries a minor thing in the franchise, coz you don't want to lose so many players to long term injuries (ie- season or career ending). Sprained ankles should be a common thing. Especially if a plyer is returing to land and lands on another players foot.

This is solely a basketball issue... Only a NBA team can have 15 players signed to their roster and that's few. If you loose a couple of guys to a long term injury, you could be ruined for the entire season. This is just fine in hockey where you dress up 18 players for each game and have about 25 on the roster. You can easily afford to loose a couple of guys.

It needs to be random, but less random and it shouldn't be that rare as it is at the moment. If you have Hill, he should get injured every now and then. With a small injury quite often. So he could play a couple of games and then be out for a couple of weeks. This isn't exactly realistic, but it would be just fine. The players do get hurt sometimes, and I'd just like to see it in the game too, not just on simulation.

[Andrew]

Collision detection is supposed to be improved in NBA Live 2004, with injuries a definite possibility if a player attempts an acrobatic move in traffic. Hopefully it's not too frequent, but an occasional injury would certainly provide a challenge, and shake things up a little.

[rudogg33]

having a player ingured for 2 months is a dream. Injuries are part of the game, having a player out is great, it chllenges me, plus lets u play rookies. season ending injuies aint bad, but career thats a lil 2much. Im praying for in game injuries becuz i dont simulate.

[Metsis]

Injruries can be good for a game. And many have said that career ending injuries have worked ok in Madden series (I've never played, but that's what I've heard). So if implemented correctly, well even career ending injuries could work out fine. Once every 2-3 seasons would be great. Think about this year: Jay Williams crashed a bike and Todd Macculloch has some sort of a disease that threatens his NBA career and that's just this season alone. Also injuries shouldn't be that absolute. I mean that you should only get an estimate when a player is expected back like in NHL, like 1-2 weeks. I've seen players be out in NHL for 3-4 months and that's realistic. But again a hockey team can take a hit like that, but a basket ball team will certainly feel the effect.

Good injuries are always great, but too frequent or too few are not good. Again one of these hard to balance out things, but it can be done. NHL injury system is great. You can have a couple of guys out almost all the time, but in the NBA it should be like 1-2 players and 3 players almost at max at one time. Unless you have collected the most injury prone players in the league... Again this would fix the rookie weakness "likely to spend time on the IR list" to mean something. It is not a weakness at the moment.

Injuries change the game, every time... You need to shuffle your lineup and perhaps even need to play a little differently. Think of how would Orlando play without Tracy??? It would be a whole new ball game for them.

[Andrew]

Injuries from reckless play and to injury-prone players would be great. Season-ending injuries would be fine, as long as they didn't occur too often and in a realistic manner. Career ending injuries would be fine as long as it wasn't too random ie. it happens to a player who gets a series of serious injuries.

[volatile]

Are they going to finally have dolllar values for salaries instead of the ridiculous point value system? Not to mention the point value system wasn't even accurate because you have players like KG with his crazy salary and it was equal to other players according to the point system? I know other players weren't earning his 25 mil a year or whatever he gets in real life.

[TRUball]

Are they going to finally have dolllar values for salaries instead of the ridiculous point value system? Not to mention the point value system wasn't even accurate because you have players like KG with his crazy salary and it was equal to other players according to the point system? I know other players weren't earning his 25 mil a year or whatever he gets in real life.

This has been discussed about before, and I think they had to do the point system because of something the NBA said or something that they can't use the real salaries or something I am not sure...

[ShowMeTheMoney]

I think the entire Trading system needs to be worked out. Maybe this has been discussed before already but...

Aside from the ability to trade draft picks etc... blah... blah...

I think there should be some way to work around the trade restrictions all because of the 15 man roster.

For example:

I want to trade two of my players for a player on a team with already 15 players, the trade is automatically refused just because there is no room for two players on their roster, no matter how advantageous the trade is for the AI.

[Andrew]

I think that you should be able to make uneven trades when one team (or both teams, or all teams if there's multi-team trades) has 15 players on their roster. The team(s) would then have to select a player to waive immediately after the trade goes through.

During the offseason, the 15 player roster rule shouldn't be in effect. You would have to cut your roster down to 15 before the season started.

[Metsis]

I think that you should be able to make uneven trades when one team (or both teams, or all teams if there's multi-team trades) has 15 players on their roster. The team(s) would then have to select a player to waive immediately after the trade goes through.

During the offseason, the 15 player roster rule shouldn't be in effect. You would have to cut your roster down to 15 before the season started.

For once this is going to be short: Yeah...

[DaManFromGapo]

i do hope that they fix the trading system as well as being able to make a trade with teams that have 15 players. We wouldn't want to see a trade where you dump 5 guys for a Garnett + a nobody.

Cheers!

[Metsis]

CPU is quite good with when it comes to trading. It rarely takes a sucker punch with leaving you with a much better player then it does.

The only problem is that there seems to be very little effect with the players age in the matter. So you can trade your has been veterans for up and coming rookies and that's probably the only problem. If they factor in the age difference, well the system is almost perfect.

If they add the chemistry, well then it gets even trickier, but I've ranted lots about that on these boards already and I'm not about to start it here too.

[Andrew]

Team success should have an impact on trades. A team at the top of the standings on a 20 game winning streak shouldn't be looking to dismantle their team.

[chipper]

Team success should have an impact on trades. A team at the top of the standings on a 20 game winning streak shouldn't be looking to dismantle their team.

I think NBA LIVE 2003 already had this programmed in AI so that bad teams will look to rebuild and good teams will try to add more talent at an expense of prospects and money.

BTW one thing I want the most of couse is, trading for draft picks!!!

[Andrew]

If it was in NBA Live 2003, it wasn't really apparent. In my Wolves Franchise the Wizards are at the top of the Atlantic, and they traded Christian Laettner in a fairly pointless trade.

[Metsis]

If it was in NBA Live 2003, it wasn't really apparent. In my Wolves Franchise the Wizards are at the top of the Atlantic, and they traded Christian Laettner in a fairly pointless trade.

Aha, now you see one of the benefits of my much praised need for a team chemistry thingy in the game. If the team was on a good winning streak and topping the charts, well they wouldn't make a trivial trade cause it would effect the team chemistry.

Again this is what I'm talking about... It doesn't really matter now how much you trade or who you trade or how hard would it be to fit 8 super-stars into one team... And that is just sad and it just sucks that all the great players seem to flock into one or two teams in Live 2003 and thus making the team unbeatable in simulation and quite hard to beat playing as well. This summer has shown that there is some of that mentality in the league (Payton, Malone thing), but it's usually from the veterans that really want the title before they quit. I don't think T-Mac would sign for Lakers at the moment... There are just so many shots taken in a basket ball game.

But this is again one good thing to add to the list of good things that would come out of the team chemistry implementation.

[Andrew]

Aha, now you see one of the benefits of my much praised need for a team chemistry thingy in the game. If the team was on a good winning streak and topping the charts, well they wouldn't make a trivial trade cause it would effect the team chemistry.

Oh, I agree with your ideas about team chemistry (I've just wondered how some of them would be implemented ). But beyond the whole chemistry element, it would just be foolish to tinker with a team that is having a great season. In some respects it's more a case of intelligence and good management rather than chemistry.

[Metsis]

Oh, I agree with your ideas about team chemistry (I've just wondered how some of them would be implemented ). But beyond the whole chemistry element, it would just be foolish to tinker with a team that is having a great season. In some respects it's more a case of intelligence and good management rather than chemistry.

Intelligence, good management, good chemistry... No matter what you call it, it's still pretty much the same thing. The chemistry would influence a team with a good one to not go ahead with trades that don't really benefit the team and make it better. You can call this anything you want but it would still be the same off paper and it would show as all of the above.

Chemistry would be a tool for making the AI think more of the team as a team and not just a pile of players, and when a seemingly better player would be offered to them, well they just wouldn't always go for it. The game is a team effort and some teams are better then their parts and some teams are worse, and this is just a fact. But you are not arguing with that... (I'm ranting again)

But the fact is that many things could be handled with the chemistry, even more then one might think...

[Andrew]

Intelligence, good management, good chemistry... No matter what you call it, it's still pretty much the same thing.

Well, intelligent management would consider team chemistry when making transactions. But you're right, by any name it's the same idea - that trades shouldn't happen just for the sake of having trades.

If chemistry is implemented, I wonder if Live would feature different teams treating the chemistry aspect differently. Some teams would look to make a star studded lineup work (the Lakers), some would look to blend a star with a bunch of capable role players (the Spurs), and some teams just wouldn't care (the Clippers).

My only complaint would be if chemistry became too much of an issue ie. it was impossible to have a big three (or big four). Some teams that look good on paper do not perform as expected, while others do.

[Vins15]

i agree with u Andrew just one point..i'd like to see styles of play persepctive included in the trade too...like for eg if Larry Brown was to stick around with the Sixers there was no way he could have let the Glen Robinson trade happen cuz Glen Robinson just don't play D...and teams like Dallas would try to get sum Defense i know they're trying to get sum..but mostly pefer a dangerous offensive player to help them boost their offensive fireworks....and Utah would perfer more of a solid fundamental type player so we know there is know way for the Jazz to try to get Jason Willams

[Metsis]

It shouldn't matter all that much unless the team chemistry is extremely good or extremely bad. You possibly could have some minor fluctuations, but they would iron out in the long run. You could actually see, if Tim Duncans scoring average dropped a couple of points in a season that the man is not happy with the team, it wouldn't nessecerily mean that he is getting worse at his game, he just could use a change of scenery or a couple of new team mates to make him more comfortable.

A team with good chemistry would win a couple more and a team with bad chemistry would loose a couple games more then what's in the ratings. But most of the time you could see that your team is shooting a little low or shooting a little better or you get a steal more per game then last season or something like this. It would effect all, but just slightly. Effecting a lot of things slightly compiles into a big change with the very good or bad chemistry.

This is what I want to see in the game...