If 2k wants to make association mode good, they need to focus on logic and reasoning

[Ejfalcon9]

I'm an association head, but I just can't play more than 1 year without getting bored. The mode is so Unrealistic. Like the OP said, give these guys personalities. Have guys tell me they wan't a trade and under what conditions they will be traded. Have a guy tell me he's a max player and I have to make the executive decision of what to do with him. Let's have contract restructuring and more negotiations than "My client has accepted your offer" or "My client is insulted by your offer"

The mode is just in dire need of some attention. If it isn't tuned up by next year I feel like it might be thrown out all together.

[Phreezy P]

Quote: Originally Posted by Ejfalcon9

I'm an association head, but I just can't play more than 1 year without getting bored. The mode is so Unrealistic. Like the OP said, give these guys personalities. Have guys tell me they wan't a trade and under what conditions they will be traded. Have a guy tell me he's a max player and I have to make the executive decision of what to do with him. Let's have contract restructuring and more negotiations than "My client has accepted your offer" or "My client is insulted by your offer" The mode is just in dire need of some attention. If it isn't tuned up by next year I feel like it might be thrown out all together.

Exactly.

This may sound wierd, but NBA Live 10 association/dynasty was actually the best association based on the setup. Sure the trade logic was kind of weird, but when I owned Live 10 and 2k10, I actually enjoyed playing Lives. You got to choose your team direction (Rebuild, Compete, and Contend) There was a training camp and you could improve players while actually playing instead of clicking and seeing the ratings improve. Not only that, but I actually LOST games realistically.

[cgalligan]

Great post. I agree completely and It bothers me that there are "no busts" either... This leads to half the teams in the league having players that are mad about their minutes when you get a few years into association because, everyone is good enough to start lol.

Logic with roster moves and trades would be good too, because, controlling all 30 teams just to ensure realistic roster moves can be / is a pain in the A$$ for many people...

[baller768]

Players do chase rings in the game. I chose melo in the 2014 offseason and it told me he was willing to take less money for a shot at the title so i signed him and we won the title that following season.

[cgalligan]

Quote: Originally Posted by baller768

Players do chase rings in the game. I chose melo in the 2014 offseason and it told me he was willing to take less money for a shot at the title so i signed him and we won the title that following season.

Same thing happened in my association, he took about $25m less to leave NYC and sign with the Clipps...

Oh, crap... I just gave away an interesting fact about my association that I haven't posted about

Check my sig for more details

[kwabalicious]

Quote: Originally Posted by baller768

Players do chase rings in the game. I chose melo in the 2014 offseason and it told me he was willing to take less money for a shot at the title so i signed him and we won the title that following season.

Except it should coincide with personalities and age. Melo, at his age in 2014, would never take a discount to chase a ring. Same with J.R. Smith, who in my association took a 3 million dollar per year deal from a contender when his market price was 8 million. I know he could never get that much money, but if he could, J.R. would go get it.

[BluFu]

association definitely needs improvement however if you have the time, making your own draft classes and loading it into your association works wonders. also tweaking potential league-wide is a big part too.

in my opinion if they fix potential/development, give college stats and make scouts less accurate but still smart, we'd be looking at great drafts. for example, if team A was hovering around 80/90 ppg + Oppg, they would be looking at Player C that can light it up even if he's not projected to be a top pick or isn't great overall instead of Player B who's a defensive minded center because their defense is already great. stuff like that.

there should still be surprises but no stupidity. dion waiters was a surprise because everyone expected barnes but the pick still made sense.

or maybe the rating system is too basic..?

[241mavsrule]

huge fan of that austin rivers scenario where the percentage chances would be based of some sort of potential rating. But would how good they would be be based off of their play?? or completely random