2K needs to patch player roles NOW and not wait until next year.

[Gosens6]

Re: 2K needs to patch player roles NOW and not wait until next year.

Where have you read this? All the impressions I got centered on aspects outside of MyGM. I think its great if they actually do something but I keep hearing about them fixing saves, inability to use rosters, crashes and a few bugs.

I won't call it unplayable but all these irrational trades and the fact that you can't really have a true 6th man really hurts the ability to build a team.

Leftos, the developer in charge of this mode has said in this thread and others that they've fixed the problem, and it's being pushed out to us ASAP.

Now, if the tweak really does make a big difference is yet to be seen, so hopefully we get the patch this is in sooner rather than later.

[Sundown]

Re: 2K needs to patch player roles NOW and not wait until next year.

Where have you read this? All the impressions I got centered on aspects outside of MyGM. I think its great if they actually do something but I keep hearing about them fixing saves, inability to use rosters, crashes and a few bugs.

I won't call it unplayable but all these irrational trades and the fact that you can't really have a true 6th man really hurts the ability to build a team.

I believe MyGM tweaks will be coming in the patch after this next one.

[jeremym480]

Re: 2K needs to patch player roles NOW and not wait until next year.

It was davez not Leftos. Here's the quote.

FYI, we're working on some tweaks to Player Roles for Patch 3. We obviously can't re-design the system, but Leftos has worked on some tunes that we're in the process of testing right now that should improve it.

Also I completely agree about there being too many trades. Trades should be few and far between. When they happen it's normally a big deal because they're so rare. If they were happening all the time (like they are in 2k 14) then no one would care.

It's kind of like when I give flowers to my wife. Occasionally I'll pick some up for her for no reason. She loves it that ****. However, if I did it every day (or even once a week) then she would come to expect it and it would lose it's luster.

The same thing goes with trades. They should only happen once in a while, that way when they do you have a "wow factor". The exception, of course, would be around the trade deadline. Other than that there's shouldn't be more that a handful of trades through Nov-Jan and probably double that number for February.

[Sundown]

Re: 2K needs to patch player roles NOW and not wait until next year.

This is EXACTLY what they should be trying to accomplish, and it should be based off of your 3 best players and their ages.

Even then, the volume of trades is way too high, and the player roles are asinine for 1st and 2nd year players to be demanding trades.

Yes, age, potential, and role on team should definitely be taken into account. This would also simulate the attachment/overvaluing of young cores by teams that see them as their future. Not every trade is based on pure box scores. You don't trade a Harrison Barnes for a Corey Brewer just because Brewer scores 2 more points per game. It's better to see the game hold onto young cores and stars too long than too short.

I also think potential should decrease every year, if it doesn't already.

It would be a start if the trade engine did a quick simulation for years down the road of where they think the player would be, what his salary is, and whether that matched the organization's goals. The CPU should look at worst and best case scenarios, and perhaps the quality of the team's scouts should determine the accuracy or randomness of that prediction. Would be even more interesting if the quality/personalities of the GMs and assistant GMs determine whether they tend to overvalue their own players, or whether they're willing to make the hard decisions when the analysis is clear.

Players shouldn't be traded straight up for their OVRs. If that still breaks badly, then it'll expose the problem with potentials (which has been another legacy issue, as I understand it).

You know what would be nice? Trade criteria and role sliders. Think teams are trading too much? Turn that down. Think teams aren't looking at the future or contracts enough? Crank that up. Think teams aren't retaining their top end talent enough? Want to simulate homer overvaluation? Give those a bump.

Then there's the other thread where Durant wants a 4 year deal for $18 million dollars total...CRIMINY!

Ahaha. I thought this whole time he was asking 18 per year and thinking "I guess that's a little low".

[BobbyColtrane]

Re: 2K needs to patch player roles NOW and not wait until next year.

Ahaha. I thought this whole time he was asking 18 per year and thinking "I guess that's a little low".

I know I thought the same thing until I read the thread!

[dpower15]

Re: 2K needs to patch player roles NOW and not wait until next year.

It was davez not Leftos. Here's the quote.



Also I completely agree about there being too many trades. Trades should be few and far between. When they happen it's normally a big deal because they're so rare. If they were happening all the time (like they are in 2k 14) then no one would care.

It's kind of like when I give flowers to my wife. Occasionally I'll pick some up for her for no reason. She loves it that ****. However, if I did it every day (or even once a week) then she would come to expect it and it would lose it's luster.

The same thing goes with trades. They should only happen once in a while, that way when they do you have a "wow factor". The exception, of course, would be around the trade deadline. Other than that there's shouldn't be more that a handful of trades through Nov-Jan and probably double that number for February.

So that means we have atleast another couple weeks before MyGM becomes playable


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Gosens6]

Re: 2K needs to patch player roles NOW and not wait until next year.

So that means we have atleast another couple weeks before MyGM becomes playable


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Probably longer, we still have to wait for Patch 2 to release.

[TheRealHST]

Re: 2K needs to patch player roles NOW and not wait until next year.

I used to disagree with you guys pointed out bad trade logic etc. Now I see I was completely wrong. I totally agree

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk

[RED BULL]

Re: 2K needs to patch player roles NOW and not wait until next year.

For the people asking about 30 team control, how many gms in the league manage more than one team?......

So isn't it unreasonable to ask for that control in a mode that is at least attempting to be realistic?

[Gosens6]

Re: 2K needs to patch player roles NOW and not wait until next year.

For the people asking about 30 team control, how many gms in the league manage more than one team?......

So isn't it unreasonable to ask for that control in a mode that is at least attempting to be realistic?

Not when the attempt at realism is a colossal fail in almost every aspect.

[bamalam]

Re: 2K needs to patch player roles NOW and not wait until next year.

For the people asking about 30 team control, how many gms in the league manage more than one team?......

So isn't it unreasonable to ask for that control in a mode that is at least attempting to be realistic?

i would like to keep it as a separate mode from mygm-

rename it classic association and add it back for 2k15-i would settle for a straight port from ps3/360 gen feature wise- at least 30-team control would keep all these issues to a minimum, and allow work-arounds

keep mygm for those that want to play as a single gm

options always good

[RED BULL]

Re: 2K needs to patch player roles NOW and not wait until next year.

i would like to keep it as a separate mode from mygm-

rename it classic association and add it back for 2k15-i would settle for a straight port from ps3/360 gen feature wise- at least 30-team control would keep all these issues to a minimum, and allow work-arounds

keep mygm for those that want to play as a single gm

options always good

It makes no sense to have 3 modes that are essentially the same thing but with minimal differences (season, association, mygm)

[nuckles2k2]

Re: 2K needs to patch player roles NOW and not wait until next year.

It makes no sense to have 3 modes that are essentially the same thing but with minimal differences (season, association, mygm)

Dunno if I agree with that.

More options = more people satisfied.

[JazzMan]

Re: 2K needs to patch player roles NOW and not wait until next year.

Regarding potential...

Why not work out something like what the MLB2k games had? A guy has a max potential (2, 3, 4, or 5 stars), and if he's playing well and he's young, he can reach it. But if he's struggling or not playing as well, he won't realize his full potential yet.

It's kind of tough to explain.

1 Star = Decrease in ratings next season.
2 Stars = Small Decrease in ratings next season.
3 Stars = No increase or decrease next season.
4 Stars = Small increase next season.
5 Stars = Large increase next season.

Say a guy like Anthony Bennett has 5 star potential. Obviously, he won't realize his full potential while shooting 22% from the field. So his potential will be, I dunno, 2 out of 5 stars full, with the other 3 stars empty, but still there, showing he can still be a 5 star potential player. But since he's at 2 stars, his ratings dip down a little (SKILLS, not athleticism).

So obviously, once Bennett reaches his prime, he loses the 5th star. After his prime is over, he loses his 4th, so he can no longer have large increases. As he grows older, he loses his 3rd star and his athleticism will deteriorate.

[dpower15]

Re: 2K needs to patch player roles NOW and not wait until next year.

Regarding potential...

Why not work out something like what the MLB2k games had? A guy has a max potential (2, 3, 4, or 5 stars), and if he's playing well and he's young, he can reach it. But if he's struggling or not playing as well, he won't realize his full potential yet.

It's kind of tough to explain.

1 Star = Decrease in ratings next season.
2 Stars = Small Decrease in ratings next season.
3 Stars = No increase or decrease next season.
4 Stars = Small increase next season.
5 Stars = Large increase next season.

Say a guy like Anthony Bennett has 5 star potential. Obviously, he won't realize his full potential while shooting 22% from the field. So his potential will be, I dunno, 2 out of 5 stars full, with the other 3 stars empty, but still there, showing he can still be a 5 star potential player. But since he's at 2 stars, his ratings dip down a little (SKILLS, not athleticism).

So obviously, once Bennett reaches his prime, he loses the 5th star. After his prime is over, he loses his 4th, so he can no longer have large increases. As he grows older, he loses his 3rd star and his athleticism will deteriorate.

Seems like a great idea. I'm all for potential being tied completely to actual in game mode performance and age. If these could be done during the season that would be ideal, that way if a guy breaks out on your team or any other team, their ratings and trade value will reflect that.

I also think they should separate potential into a maximum and minimum rating, with the difference between their minimum and current rating being the prime factor in how their ratings deteriorate as they are near the end of their career. Add this to their increase/decrease in potential being tied to stats/age like I said above and I think you have a pretty solid next gen type of dynamic rating system.