If You Built a Team Like the Warriors in Previous Years, Would You Have Considered it Sim?

[alabamarob]

People would go crazy if you ran kd or bron at center. Cheesers were ahead of the curve. Ha. Analytics 2 years ago would be called cheese.

[isdatyt]

No and it's quite boring just like in real life. I remember making a thread about how easy it is to rebuild in 2K17 even on the hardest settings the CPU will offer you hilariously bad trades. It never took me more than 3 seasons to become the best team in the league and it sucks. That plus the wack tendencies in the game make it a little boring so I've been trying to stay more realistic, but with the warriors, man, you almost have to build a super team just to contend. It's crazy.

[Godgers12]

Before the Celtics ruined the NBA by starting the super team fad, yes I would think it unsim. Now, anything goes if I can fit it under the cap. I find it's much harder to sign elite talent in 2k than other sports games anyway.

What most people fail to realize is that the Warriors built their entire core through the draft, and added Durrant to it.

[FixEverything2k]

I've built teams like this in every MyLeague on HOF with 70 Trade difficulty, and in every MyGm, Through the DRAFT. And because of this, I had enough money If I wanted to (Rarely did) sign an Allstar during free agency. If you stick to one team and build through the draft you'll be able to do the same thing. If you pull a LeBron and combine 3 players with 20 mill contracts your team won't have cap space.

[mryan2]

This is a great question. I definitely would not have considered it "SIM". Hell, I wouldn't have considered the Heat adding LeBron ""SIM". I love franchise modes. All I do. But sometimes I have trouble continuing if I don't have a struggling underdog team. I feel once I add a couple stars I feel like I'm cheating. For instance I'm in my third year of my Phillies franchise. In my second offseason I signed McCutheon. In my third offseason I signed Machado and then trade Nola, Franco, Herrera, *Moniak, a top 50 prospect and andother prospect who was 19 *with B potential and already a 58 for Trout and a bottom player. And 30 games in I just don't feel right.*

[scottyp180]

"People would go crazy if you ran kd or bron at center. Cheesers were ahead of the curve. Ha. Analytics 2 years ago would be called cheese."

This is why I don't understand when people complain about 2k not being Sim, not being realistic, or there being "cheese" in the game. Who is to say what is sim or cheese? What Steph Curry was doing last season wouldn't have been considered realistic or Sim if it was being done in a videogame. If you were to have a My Player that could pull up from just about anywhere and jacked up 3s at will people would be complaining about how "cheesey" that My Player is and how the user controlling him doesn't play "real basketball." Durant himself isn't quite realistic. A 7ft player that moves and shoots better than just about any 2 guard in the game? Westbrook basically "cheesed" his way to a triple double average this season.

The lines between sim, realistic, smart basketball and non-realistic, videogame cheese have really been blurred over the years. The more athletic and talented players get the less sim the league seems to get.

[scottyp180]

Quote: Originally Posted by Godgers12

Before the Celtics ruined the NBA by starting the super team fad, yes I would think it unsim. Now, anything goes if I can fit it under the cap. I find it's much harder to sign elite talent in 2k than other sports games anyway. What most people fail to realize is that the Warriors built their entire core through the draft, and added Durrant to it.

I can't blame the Celtics. In order to form a superteam two other teams (the Sonics and Twolves) had to be complicit in trading away their star talent. I think the Sonics ended up drafting Durant because of the trade so not a total loss on their part.

[Junior Moe]

Quote: Originally Posted by mryan2

This is a great question. I definitely would not have considered it "SIM". Hell, I wouldn't have considered the Heat adding LeBron ""SIM". I love franchise modes. All I do. But sometimes I have trouble continuing if I don't have a struggling underdog team. I feel once I add a couple stars I feel like I'm cheating. For instance I'm in my third year of my Phillies franchise. In my second offseason I signed McCutheon. In my third offseason I signed Machado and then trade Nola, Franco, Herrera, *Moniak, a top 50 prospect and andother prospect who was 19 *with B potential and already a 58 for Trout and a bottom player. And 30 games in I just don't feel right.*

Until the ai is sophisticated enough to differentiate players i think we have to have some house rules if you want to enjoy a long "realistic" franchise. The ai doesn't know that LeBron is the best player of his generation. It doesn't know that Mike Trout is a complete monster on a hall of fame track. It's one reason why I don't trade for or sign good players to my team. Is just too easy to manipulate the game and that kills the fun of building a team.