By swish.thesweetestsound »

1. At some point people will have a lot of premium rewards and they will have a huuuuge advantage because for example Amy Kiri + Amy JR will have a 600 cap hit combined while Wes Unseld has 1200! Big Spenders are royally rewarded through cap, am i right?

 

2. has anyone ever Seen the CPU defend a play with multiple off ball screens without totally Screwing up and giving up a Open shot? When i think about it, i think have never. Not when i didnt interfer in some way. 

2b Anybody feel CPU screens are waaay more effektive for them in comparism to the ones you get on offense?

By ollowain »

1. Yes

2. CPU teammates cannot defend offball screens and give up open shots all the time. I cannot understand people who only play on ball only to get killed by off ball screens.

3. Especially in domination. Iverson or Chris Paul can brick wall Cousins or Mutombo.

By Fra44 »

1. Exactly. I have seen Kirilenko is already at 200-something. That's a steal for a card such good. Big spenders will be the only ones allowed to run god squads, while budget grinders are fucked because rewards have a 1000+ salary and are worse than new cards. I mean, that new Kevin McHale is WAY better than my Antonio McDyess.

 

2. Again, exactly. You HAVE TO go off ball to defend off ball screens. I do it all the time, I don't care at all if some idiot considers this cheesy or whatever. While they complain I lock them down.

 

3. Here I have to disagree. I can consistently shut down screens set by the cpu while mine are most of the times super effective. Just make sure to run your defender hard into the screen

By rhelbringer15 »

Isn't it true that the longer players are available to get, their cap goes up? For instance when I got the Unseld reward, he was only a 300 hit, but now he is a 1200 hit. Maybe that's just how it works for rewards but I'm not sure.

By Amargaladaster »
rhelbringer15 said in Wednesday, November 15th, 2017 0:34 am

Isn't it true that the longer players are available to get, their cap goes up? For instance when I got the Unseld reward, he was only a 300 hit, but now he is a 1200 hit. Maybe that's just how it works for rewards but I'm not sure.

Salary is based on usage of the players.

Super expensive set cards like AK or JR arent that much used, not many people lock them. On the other hand, e.g. Unseld is by far the most popular pick after All-time domination and you can see it on his salary, Dumars or Hardaway are way lower.

By ThePeddler »

You don’t have to play off ball. You have to manually rotate your players. Once you learn how to do it those off ball screen become cake. 

By Harry L »
Fra44 said in Wednesday, November 15th, 2017 0:30 am

1. Exactly. I have seen Kirilenko is already at 200-something. That's a steal for a card such good. Big spenders will be the only ones allowed to run god squads, while budget grinders are fucked because rewards have a 1000+ salary and are worse than new cards. I mean, that new Kevin McHale is WAY better than my Antonio McDyess.

I wouldn't say that the Ruby McHale is blanket "WAY better" than Amethyst McDyess:

http://2kmtcentral.com/18/players/compare/8729/8070

They're ultimately two different players with respective pluses and minuses. Depending on one's gameplay preferences, McHale may very well be much preferable and I think he fits better into the meta of the game, but McDyess has his pluses.

That said, it's true that expensive auctionable/packable cards have a higher ceiling than reward players, in general. This was definitely the case last year. And not only does the SM cap structure give a big advantage to big spenders, I'm sure that this is on purpose.

They should impose a much lower ceiling to the salary cap of a card so that there is some relative advantage of choosing, say, Tim Hardaway over Joe Dumars over Wes Unseld, but not to the point that a super-elite, super-rare, super-expensive god card is drastically cheaper in salary than a free card that is common and popular simply because it's an especially effective free card in its tier.

It's ridiculous for Amethyst J.R. Smith to have a lower salary than Ruby Jim Jackson, for example.

By Fra44 »
Harry L said in Wednesday, November 15th, 2017 2:23 am

I wouldn't say that the Ruby McHale is blanket "WAY better" than Amethyst McDyess:

http://2kmtcentral.com/18/players/compare/8729/8070

They're ultimately two different players with respective pluses and minuses. Depending on one's gameplay preferences, McHale may very well be much preferable and I think he fits better into the meta of the game, but McDyess has his pluses.

That said, it's true that expensive auctionable/packable cards have a higher ceiling than reward players, in general. This was definitely the case last year. And not only does the SM cap structure give a big advantage to big spenders, I'm sure that this is on purpose.

They should impose a much lower ceiling to the salary cap of a card so that there is some relative advantage of choosing, say, Tim Hardaway over Joe Dumars over Wes Unseld, but not to the point that a super-elite, super-rare, super-expensive god card is drastically cheaper in salary than a free card that is common and popular simply because it's an especially effective free card in its tier.

It's ridiculous for Amethyst J.R. Smith to have a lower salary than Ruby Jim Jackson, for example.

Well, as much as I love McDyess, he is just more athletic and can dunk off a drive: McHale has similar speed, similar midrange, an actual 3ball, better post moves and way better defense. And he's taller. If I could swap them I'd do it immediately, and not for the cap. I'd swap them even if McHale had a 1000 salary. 

 

At this point I feel it's more convenient to stick to juiced rubies with 30 intangibles for salary reasons rather than running amethyst rewards.

By Amargaladaster »
Harry L said in Wednesday, November 15th, 2017 2:23 am

I wouldn't say that the Ruby McHale is blanket "WAY better" than Amethyst McDyess:

http://2kmtcentral.com/18/players/compare/8729/8070

They're ultimately two different players with respective pluses and minuses. Depending on one's gameplay preferences, McHale may very well be much preferable and I think he fits better into the meta of the game, but McDyess has his pluses.

That said, it's true that expensive auctionable/packable cards have a higher ceiling than reward players, in general. This was definitely the case last year. And not only does the SM cap structure give a big advantage to big spenders, I'm sure that this is on purpose.

They should impose a much lower ceiling to the salary cap of a card so that there is some relative advantage of choosing, say, Tim Hardaway over Joe Dumars over Wes Unseld, but not to the point that a super-elite, super-rare, super-expensive god card is drastically cheaper in salary than a free card that is common and popular simply because it's an especially effective free card in its tier.

It's ridiculous for Amethyst J.R. Smith to have a lower salary than Ruby Jim Jackson, for example.

It isnt, considering JR is rare (or more like noone has him atm) while Jackson is owned by everyone, thus his salary is on ruby max (400). If JR was owned as much as Jackson, he would have 1000 salary (see Artest, Lever).

By Knezius »
Amargaladaster said in Wednesday, November 15th, 2017 1:04 am

Salary is based on usage of the players.

Super expensive set cards like AK or JR arent that much used, not many people lock them. On the other hand, e.g. Unseld is by far the most popular pick after All-time domination and you can see it on his salary, Dumars or Hardaway are way lower.

No no no, dude when you played me you told me it was your 4th supermax game, i played like 40 or more game last round and nearly every team who i faced who ended up in PD or near by had Kirilenko and a lot of them had Yao, so trust me, on PC, with prices being so low and sniping so easy, seeing god squads all over the place will be the norm.