Classic Teams Easy to Beat? Issue with game or...?

[antdoggydogg]

So i'm loving 2K20. To me its a masterpiece. But has anyone noticed that the Classic Teams are easy to beat? I'll start off by saying I am in no way bragging about my stick skills, i'm average at best. Every year I usually start off by playing 48 minute games against some legendary teams because I don't want to "play out" the current years rosters. I've played the 2007 Warriors, the 1993 Hornets and the 1998 Bulls. I used the 2020 Celtics.

I beat the Warriors by 5. Close game, they were a tough cover and Baron was awesome but I felt like I had it in control for the most part. (All-Star Difficulty, default sliders). I decided to try one more game on All-Star before increasing the difficulty.

I beat the 1993 Hornets by 39 on All-Star. I get it, they're a flawed roster, with a tiny point guard and very little spacing. But I abused them. I decided I'll go up to Superstar Difficulty.

The ultimate test, the 1998 Bulls. Surely I'll lose to them on this higher difficulty. Starts off tough, down 6, I'm thinking i'm in for a tough fight. I blew them out by 20.

I'm not sure what the reason for this is. I remember this happened last year too when the game first came out, I think someone explained that ACE for the classic teams hadn't been updated to be smart enough to handle adjustments and gameplan's yet. And that it was later fixed. Or am I remembering this wrong?

If it's not that, is it just the 3 point discrepancy then? The Bulls took 17 threes and only made 3 of them. I made 11 more threes than them on Superstar difficulty. That's a difference of 33 points in the game. Could it really just be the difference between a modern offense and an older one? I find it interesting that the game against the Warriors was the closest one and they're also a more modern team who takes more threes.

Could the explanation really be that simple? Even if it is, I imagine the Bulls would've put up more of a fight on defense. I'm guessing the classic teams haven't had their adaptive coaching engine updated yet.

[Real2KInsider]

Re: Classic Teams Easy to Beat? Issue with game or...?

Humans today are better than humans 20-30 years ago, news at 11

Anyway this post doesn't really explain how you beat them, only by how much, and thus isn't very effective at conveying any fixable issues.

The Classic teams have major depth issues because all the role players are super-underrated, low stamina ratings, awful Pass Perception ratings, etc. Beyond the obvious that some of them don't even have a fleshed out 10-man roster.

[antdoggydogg]

Re: Classic Teams Easy to Beat? Issue with game or...?

They're also over rated in some areas and given crazy amounts of badges to make up for some of the things you mentioned.

The 98 Bulls are a pretty decently rounded out roster and I managed their smart rotation accurately before the game. I just don't see why I've been able to beat 2 90s teams by an average of 30 points, and one of them was on Superstar difficulty. I don't know what other specifics you were interested in. The gameplan wasn't anything advanced, sag off all their below average shooters, like Ron Harper, Rodman etc to help on Jordan. He still got 30+, but they lost by 20. The biggest difference was threes.

I did mention they both employed the full court trapping scheme that OG mentioned is going to be fixed in the next day or so. I got a lot of easy baskets out of that so maybe that is the culprit.

[RockHogan]

Re: Classic Teams Easy to Beat? Issue with game or...?

the problem is that 2k compares players from the 80s with players from today. Todays players are way more athletic and the rules of the game are way too soft. I just adjust the ratings of the legends because i think it's unfair to say todays players are better than players of other decades

[Pizarro24]

Re: Classic Teams Easy to Beat? Issue with game or...?

...

I'm not sure what the reason for this is. I remember this happened last year too when the game first came out, I think someone explained that ACE for the classic teams hadn't been updated to be smart enough to handle adjustments and gameplan's yet. And that it was later fixed. Or am I remembering this wrong?

If it's not that, is it just the 3 point discrepancy then? The Bulls took 17 threes and only made 3 of them. I made 11 more threes than them on Superstar difficulty. That's a difference of 33 points in the game. Could it really just be the difference between a modern offense and an older one? I find it interesting that the game against the Warriors was the closest one and they're also a more modern team who takes more threes.

I think ACE does work for Classic Teams, it was the Player Movement that wasn´t implemented for Classic Teams in year 1 (if I remember Czar´s Blog correctly, 2K18 I think).

As for your "problem": I do believe the 3-Pointers are a big part of that, the Classic Teams just don´t have enough shooting, so the modern Teams just have a big advantage in that aspect of the game.

[King Ken]

Re: Classic Teams Easy to Beat? Issue with game or...?

the problem is that 2k compares players from the 80s with players from today. Todays players are way more athletic and the rules of the game are way too soft. I just adjust the ratings of the legends because i think it's unfair to say todays players are better than players of other decades

If the very good teams from the 90s are getting dusted by the decent teams of this generation then the game is working properly. The players of today are MILES better on average than in 1993. Just much better training, coaches, money, talent pool, systems, etc. The game evolved. Most pro sports have. Look at tennis now to 30 years ago. Miles better. Football, the average OL was 250 in 1993, today 300. Just miles better. There is a lot more money in pro sports. The only sport that saw a decline is Baseball and even then, they saw a massive skill upgrade. Bo Jackson even noted it.

[aloncho11]

Re: Classic Teams Easy to Beat? Issue with game or...?

One of the problems I've seen in recent years is that classic teams don't have a proper playbook to make use of their strengths in a correct way.They don't have "true identities" or are somewhat generic (offensively and defensively), and role players are usually underrated.

[jmarcguy]

Re: Classic Teams Easy to Beat? Issue with game or...?

I’m a huge fan of 80’s & 90’s NBA. I mostly play with classic teams every year. NBA was my favorite sport back then while I rarely watch a full game anymore.

However, I can’t see any of those teams matching up well with modern teams & I think 2k does a decent job of showing that. Way more offensive talent on teams today. Not many guys that you can just leave open. Nearly everyone can shoot the ball now. The old school game was more aggressive when it comes to attacking the paint but I don’t think that would beat a team that can shoot from the perimeter.

2k also doesn’t flesh out the classic playbooks well. Tendencies are usually pretty bad also.


Sent from my iPhone using Operation Sports

[antdoggydogg]

Re: Classic Teams Easy to Beat? Issue with game or...?

One of the problems I've seen in recent years is that classic teams don't have a proper playbook to make use of their strengths in a correct way.They don't have "true identities" or are somewhat generic (offensively and defensively), and role players are usually underrated.

I think this is a big part of the problem. I noticed this most when I started MyTeam this year and the only playbook I had available was the 65 Celtics playbook. I couldn't produce any offense and it was very limited. I went and sought out a modern playbook from the auction house, got the 2020 Nets playbook. And won a game on All-Star Difficulty. I felt like I could finally free up my players to score, it really opened up the game for me.

I think I remember what the issue is now, the new playbooks are smarter, and are equipped with multiple options, so players can either curl off a screen or fake and cut to the basket. If I'm remembering correctly I think Czar mentioned last year that this type of smart logic hadn't been implemented into the classic team plays. I don't want to put words into his mouth, but I'm pretty sure that's what the issue is.

This is probably what's causing the blowouts against old school teams. I didn't mean to turn this into a discussion on evolution. I expected the 90's offenses to be easier to guard, but I didn't expect it to be so easy to score on the 98 Bulls. I was expecting them to play lockdown D, which I guess they were doing outside of the full court trapping scheme that OG said is already going to be fixed.

[ojandpizza]

Re: Classic Teams Easy to Beat? Issue with game or...?

Not sure on this years game but a lot of those classic guys were overrated in lots of areas to try and make sure they reached a certain overall. 1998 MJ was still playing defense like it's 1989 in last years game for example.

[RockHogan]

Re: Classic Teams Easy to Beat? Issue with game or...?

If the very good teams from the 90s are getting dusted by the decent teams of this generation then the game is working properly. The players of today are MILES better on average than in 1993. Just much better training, coaches, money, talent pool, systems, etc. The game evolved. Most pro sports have. Look at tennis now to 30 years ago. Miles better. Football, the average OL was 250 in 1993, today 300. Just miles better. There is a lot more money in pro sports. The only sport that saw a decline is Baseball and even then, they saw a massive skill upgrade. Bo Jackson even noted it.

I have to to disagree. The game of today is not better. It's faster and more athletic but not better. Defense is not the same as in the 80s or 90s. Todays game is way too soft and so are the players. A lot of games today are played mostly from the free throw line. In the 70s/80s/90s and the first years of the 2000s there were so many very good games where most players played their hearts out and fought for every ball. There was a lot more Passion and emotions than today

[CaseIH]

Re: Classic Teams Easy to Beat? Issue with game or...?

So i'm loving 2K20. To me its a masterpiece. But has anyone noticed that the Classic Teams are easy to beat? I'll start off by saying I am in no way bragging about my stick skills, i'm average at best. Every year I usually start off by playing 48 minute games against some legendary teams because I don't want to "play out" the current years rosters. I've played the 2007 Warriors, the 1993 Hornets and the 1998 Bulls. I used the 2020 Celtics.

I beat the Warriors by 5. Close game, they were a tough cover and Baron was awesome but I felt like I had it in control for the most part. (All-Star Difficulty, default sliders). I decided to try one more game on All-Star before increasing the difficulty.

I beat the 1993 Hornets by 39 on All-Star. I get it, they're a flawed roster, with a tiny point guard and very little spacing. But I abused them. I decided I'll go up to Superstar Difficulty.

The ultimate test, the 1998 Bulls. Surely I'll lose to them on this higher difficulty. Starts off tough, down 6, I'm thinking i'm in for a tough fight. I blew them out by 20.

I'm not sure what the reason for this is. I remember this happened last year too when the game first came out, I think someone explained that ACE for the classic teams hadn't been updated to be smart enough to handle adjustments and gameplan's yet. And that it was later fixed. Or am I remembering this wrong?

If it's not that, is it just the 3 point discrepancy then? The Bulls took 17 threes and only made 3 of them. I made 11 more threes than them on Superstar difficulty. That's a difference of 33 points in the game. Could it really just be the difference between a modern offense and an older one? I find it interesting that the game against the Warriors was the closest one and they're also a more modern team who takes more threes.

Could the explanation really be that simple? Even if it is, I imagine the Bulls would've put up more of a fight on defense. I'm guessing the classic teams haven't had their adaptive coaching engine updated yet.

For a couple yrs now, if you play against a classic team, before the 3pt shot was introduced, its easy to beat them, because they wont shoot 3's. I dont know why they started not giving guys like Jerry West a 3pt shot tendency, because as did others took perimeter shots back in the day, they just didnt have the 3pt line in place.


I go thru and edit the classic players like Jerry West, so they take 3's in the game. I asked a couple yrs ago if they would make the option to turn off the 3pt line in the game, if you wanted.



So basically unless you edit the early classic teams, they arent worth playing, because they will just attack the basket every time. I havent played with any of them this yr, but I did notice guys like Jerry West had 0 for 3pt tendency still. And I just dont feel like editing the classic teams this yr, because Im making fictional draft classes, till we get to Opening night. Im also enjoying playing with the WNBA teams in a season, so I doubt I play any classic teams this yr, unless someone fill in the missing players, and edits the classic players for better gameplay.

[CaseIH]

Re: Classic Teams Easy to Beat? Issue with game or...?

I have to to disagree. The game of today is not better. It's faster and more athletic but not better. Defense is not the same as in the 80s or 90s. Todays game is way too soft and so are the players. A lot of games today are played mostly from the free throw line. In the 70s/80s/90s and the first years of the 2000s there were so many very good games where most players played their hearts out and fought for every ball. There was a lot more Passion and emotions than today

Its impossible to compare previous era's, to todays players, the game has changed so much. Its the same way with Football due to all the rule changes. So while people may try and argue why 1 era, is better than the other, the fact is, its just a opinion, and not fact based, because its impossible to know.


Your definitel right about today players not having that same aggressiveness, and physicality. Now some of that is due to its not allowed in todays game, so its not that todays players are all sissified, they just cant get away with clothes lining a player, LOL. Although as a whole I would agree, previous era players were tougher, because they grew up not having it easy, life was just tougher back then for most people.




Players also get away with alot more today, ball handling wise, players werent getting away with that in the 60's or even 70's. Starting in the 80's those rules got loosened up, with dribbling styles.




Personally I prefer the 80's and 90's basketball to that of today, I just liked the physical play of those era's, and my favorite players to ever play were in that era too.



Another thing as to why its make no sense to compare players, is the older era's didnt have the benefits of technology as well as the advancments to the game. You cant say that if the Big O, Jerry West, Wilt, Bird, Magic, etc, if they would have had the advancements of technology as well as how the game has evolved, that they wouldnt have been able to adapt. Back then, even players like Bird, didnt work alot on shooting the 3, because it wasnt a big part of the game back then.



I still enjoy watching basketball, and in many ways its just as exciting as those previous era's when it was more physical and you have to be tough to make it in the league. The physical play has been take out, for a more perimeter oriented game, and its fun to watch guys knocking down deep 3's.

Heck now days even high school games, are more perimeter oriented. Back in my day, when the 3pt line was 1st put in the high school game, I was the only 1 who had the green light to shoot the 3 at any time. Now days they are all jacking up 3pt shots. I remember having a game where I shot 8 3's, hitting 5, and the coach was like damn, you took enough 3's, you need to drive more, LOL. I hit more in that 1 game, than our entire team took the entire season, LOL. In some ways, I wish I was a kid in todays game, I may have averaged tripled my scoring average