AI is ridiculiously dumb, see what I mean...
Mon Apr 25, 2005 1:16 am
Probably not THE most important feature I would like corrected in the 2006 game but surely high on the list to make me post... and it hasn't been mention that often compare to other issues.
The issue is this: AI is dumbmer than my 6 year old cousin when it comes to drafting... Here is 2 example of what I mean. I have just completed off-season 3 and about to begin season 4 of my dynasty. See the result of the past 3 drafts:
Miami has Wade at SG with 92 ratings... so Miami should not draft SGs... atleast none with no PG ability (low passing skills) or no SFs ability or no small SG... So lets look at the past 4 drafts:
2004 : SG D.Wade 6'4 now 92 ratings
2005 : SG 6'3 now 67
2006 : SG 6'2 now 58
2007 : SG 6'3 now 65
None have good passing skills. None were traded also. (lack of trading is another issue but has been discussed many times elsewhere.)
Lets look at an even worst scenario: Milwaukee. The Bucks have had the 2nd, 5th and 12th overall picks during the past 3 drafts. They also have their superstar Michael Redd at SG. Lets see what they drafted:
2005: SG now 75
2006: SG now 63
2007: SG now 66
Why is this different, and worst, from Miami? Because take a look at their roster now:
Joe Smith and Radmanovic at C & PF with 71 & 66 ratings
Mason, Redd and Ford - all above 70 rated.
Bench - players 6 to 11: SG, PG, SG, SF, SG, SG Tallest player is SF Kyle Korver at 6'7.
So starting lineup weaknesses are the front court (C&PF)... what do they do?... they draft 3 small SGs and make no trade to correct that.
No wonder winning is so easy in this game.
The issue is this: AI is dumbmer than my 6 year old cousin when it comes to drafting... Here is 2 example of what I mean. I have just completed off-season 3 and about to begin season 4 of my dynasty. See the result of the past 3 drafts:
Miami has Wade at SG with 92 ratings... so Miami should not draft SGs... atleast none with no PG ability (low passing skills) or no SFs ability or no small SG... So lets look at the past 4 drafts:
2004 : SG D.Wade 6'4 now 92 ratings
2005 : SG 6'3 now 67
2006 : SG 6'2 now 58
2007 : SG 6'3 now 65
None have good passing skills. None were traded also. (lack of trading is another issue but has been discussed many times elsewhere.)
Lets look at an even worst scenario: Milwaukee. The Bucks have had the 2nd, 5th and 12th overall picks during the past 3 drafts. They also have their superstar Michael Redd at SG. Lets see what they drafted:
2005: SG now 75
2006: SG now 63
2007: SG now 66
Why is this different, and worst, from Miami? Because take a look at their roster now:
Joe Smith and Radmanovic at C & PF with 71 & 66 ratings
Mason, Redd and Ford - all above 70 rated.
Bench - players 6 to 11: SG, PG, SG, SF, SG, SG Tallest player is SF Kyle Korver at 6'7.
So starting lineup weaknesses are the front court (C&PF)... what do they do?... they draft 3 small SGs and make no trade to correct that.
No wonder winning is so easy in this game.
Mon Apr 25, 2005 3:57 am
I know wat u mean and I posted this issue in the wishlist too. They have to fix this if the dynasty mode is going to be any real. 
Mon Apr 25, 2005 11:32 am
That's been in the Wishlist the last couple of years - the CPU doesn't always draft this way, I have seen them make wiser selections but often they will draft the best player available rather than the best fit. That's realistic some of the time - think of the Bulls drafting Marcus Fizer when they already had Elton Brand - but teams generally draft out of need taking the best possible player (or the one with the most potential) who plays a position they are weak at.
Or if they do draft a player they don't really need, perhaps they could trade him. Having trades during the draft would really help here, not to mention add more realism and be pretty cool.
Or if they do draft a player they don't really need, perhaps they could trade him. Having trades during the draft would really help here, not to mention add more realism and be pretty cool.
Thu May 12, 2005 5:47 pm
I dont mind that they draft players in this fashion, but they should definately be able to do off-season trades, so they can maintain a fair roster. That is, e.g. trading their best draft for a much need center or power forward, to maintain roster depth.
Cheers, Flix
Cheers, Flix
Wed May 25, 2005 3:48 am
CPU could follow this rule:
1.) If the game had team specific styles of play, select a player that fits a specific need( if you run & gun then you need good perimeter players and rebounding, it you have post dominance then you need perimeter shooting, if you have perimieter shotting then you need a low post player, etc)
2.) Select a player that has the best rating
3.) Select a player that has a high rating if you can trade for depth.
1.) If the game had team specific styles of play, select a player that fits a specific need( if you run & gun then you need good perimeter players and rebounding, it you have post dominance then you need perimeter shooting, if you have perimieter shotting then you need a low post player, etc)
2.) Select a player that has the best rating
3.) Select a player that has a high rating if you can trade for depth.