Ban attributes exceeding 90? Poll. Vote please

[Rob ITST]

When you don't have more arguments.. you question ability?

Trust me, Djarvik and I never run out of arguments.

[safe_as_milk_]

I have NEVER lost to a 100 power guy in ms.

Same here. I didn't want to say it, because I thought it might be a bit insulting, but most problems people have against certain setups are due to their lack of ability to counter it.

Re: limitations, i've been saying pretty much the same thing you guys have... but have you played a good 98/98 player post-patch? It's very early and hard to gauge but it feels... different. I've been tanked by extreme power guys before and always accepted my own shortcomings (and still do with the recent beating i took), but it did feel like that build's a different beast altogether now- so insanely unforgiving. What are other peoples' experiences of it after the patch?

p.s. just to clarify i'm not calling out for a ban yet, just think it needs keeping an eye on.

[LokiSharpShootr]

I have NEVER lost to a 100 power guy in ms.

Same here. I didn't want to say it, because I thought it might be a bit insulting, but most problems people have against certain setups are due to their lack of ability to counter it.

Re: limitations, i've been saying pretty much the same thing you guys have... but have you played a good 98/98 player post-patch? It's very early and hard to gauge but it feels... different. I've been tanked by extreme power guys before and always accepted my own shortcomings (and still do with the recent beating i took), but it did feel like that build's a different beast altogether now- so insanely unforgiving. What are other peoples' experiences of it after the patch?

p.s. just to clarify i'm not calling out for a ban yet, just think it needs keeping an eye on.

its because power slices are useless now, before it a 90+ power guys was mashing on that power shots you could slice and made him to a ball close to the ground which would have resulted in a less accurate and less powerful shots, now with my DFB i feel i need to be like Nadal on every point running and running and running.

PS: im a pretty good player so this isnt skill related to me.

[Ary1g]

When you don't have more arguments.. you question ability?

Trust me, Djarvik and I never run out of arguments.

But you haven't answered my last post yet. What do you think?
What's the best, unrealistic players or overpowered players?

[Rob ITST]

Unreal is better than overpowered.

Everyone can use a different unrealistic character - only one character will be used if it is overpowered.

[VillaJ100]

now with my DFB i feel i need to be like Nadal on every point running and running and running.

Ermmm....

[Crotatsuya]

Since the new update, I don't even think that the banned coaches need to be banned anymore... Pretty even now, I have no trouble in beating TI/MD now, which was completely unthinkable months ago.. Honestly, I really think that limiting stats above 90 or maybe 85 should be sufficient to ensure a fun and varied tour, even beyond the SIM tour (which also sounds great so far).

[Ary1g]

Unreal is better than overpowered.

Everyone can use a different unrealistic character - only one character will be used if it is overpowered.

Great, we agree that those player builds are unrealistic. That's one step closer to trying some new things here on ITST.

Let me have a little quote from the home page of this site. "In short, we do our very best to blur the line between gaming fantasy and tennis reality."

Key word: Reality! If we're going to blur the line between gaming fantasy and tennis reality, we have to start with banning unrealistic setups. Or much easier put, we have to limit stats. And I just can't believe that there would be no difference if you limit stats. Just take a look at the coach calculator. http://www.intertopspintour.net/forum/v ... hp?t=14169
When I found it recently(dont know why I havent seen it before), I just can't imagine that some players will be so very overpowered if you limit the stats. It will be the same difference anyway, except that they're all realistic. No more 140 mph forehands and backhand or insane volleying as a major tactic in a match.
To add to this I have taken a very quick peek through the coach list. Looking at 20-0-0, 0-20-0, 0-0-20 and all of these builds have one possibility of being used if we limit attributes at 91, only with a little exception on the SV 20-0-0 where reflexes would be 93. So maybe not banning reflexes would be an idea? Can't imagine that it would be very unbalanced by doing that.

With all this said, there are tons of setups! I was really surprised actually of how many setups there is in the game. By looking at the coach calculator, there are so insanely many different setups which go under 90/91 or even 85. That by looking at it, I can't really understand why this attribute ban hasnt been made for a very long time ago.

I have absolutely no understanding of how such an attribute ban could not make gameplay and the experience of ITST so much more competetive and deep. Matches would be based on real skills, and the difference between intermediate players and expert players would be much narrower. Yes, it would potentially mean that matches become longer, more demanding and decided by smaller margins, but honestly! Would not that be a much greater experience? Imagine to battle out a grand slam final, knowing that probably the only thing deciding this match outcome, is by your skill, your stamina and your experience on the court. Knowing that you can't loose or win a game just based on a pure rush of luck. Take a moment and think. Just imagine the fantastic feeling you would have after battling it out in a 4 or 5 set epic, and finally scoring that match point which you have earned through being the greatest player of the tournament. Not because you had the greater setup for the match.

A bit large post this one. Thank you very much if you read all of it. Looking forward to reading replies to my vision.

[jayl0ve]

He never said he agreed with anything.

[Ary1g]

He never said he agreed with anything.

I'm being sarcastic.
He is talking about unrealistic builds, which by saying that they are unrealistic, we agree that they are, since that's what I think they are and he stated they are.

[tigerofintegrity]

@ary1g

Lots of coaches and/or combinations does not mean they are all equally viable. I don't see how pushing the bar down to 90 stats achieves anything you're implying. There will still be a disparity in quality between some coaches compared with others.

I have absolutely no understanding of how such an attribute ban could not make gameplay and the experience of ITST so much more competetive and deep. Matches would be based on real skills, and the difference between intermediate players and expert players would be much narrower. Yes, it would potentially mean that matches become longer, more demanding and decided by smaller margins, but honestly! Would not that be a much greater experience? Imagine to battle out a grand slam final, knowing that probably the only thing deciding this match outcome, is by your skill, your stamina and your experience on the court. Knowing that you can't loose or win a game just based on a pure rush of luck. Take a moment and think. Just imagine the fantastic feeling you would have after battling it out in a 4 or 5 set epic, and finally scoring that match point which you have earned through being the greatest player of the tournament. Not because you had the greater setup for the match.

It would do none of that. I think you're confusing idealism with reality. What has been going on so far will still continue to go on. Some coaches will be better, most players will use one of those... matches are rarely ever won by skill, stamina or experience alone on court in TS4 (unless there's a relatively big skill difference), it usually just comes down to who's in better form on the day. I don't see how lowering stats affects luck. And if you won a grand slam then you were the best player of the tournament regardless of the build you used. Sure it might have been a strong one but you still have to play damn well to win it otherwise lesser players would randomly stroll in and win them.

What it would probably do is lessen the severity of the stronger builds. That's the only sensible reason I see for campaigning for this. However, I actually think lowering the stat limit to 90 would favour power players more. The drop in power at that high threshold would affect their game a lot less than the same drop off the wings or a high stamina and speed game. Plus there are a lot of strong offensive coaches just under the current top tier and less impressive defensive ones. You might actually just see lots more power game instead of forcing variety.

[Ary1g]

@ary1g

Lots of coaches and/or combinations does not mean they are all equally viable. I don't see how pushing the bar down to 90 stats achieves anything you're implying. There will still be a disparity in quality between some coaches compared with others.

It would do none of that. I think you're confusing idealism with reality. What has been going on so far will still continue to go on. Some coaches will be better, most players will use one of those... matches are rarely ever won by skill, stamina or experience alone on court in TS4 (unless there's a relatively big skill difference), it usually just comes down to who's in better form on the day. I don't see how lowering stats affects luck. And if you won a grand slam then you were the best player of the tournament regardless of the build you used. Sure it might have been a strong one but you still have to play damn well to win it otherwise lesser players would randomly stroll in and win them.

What it would probably do is lessen the severity of the stronger builds. That's the only sensible reason I see for campaigning for this. However, I actually think lowering the stat limit to 90 would favour power players more. The drop in power at that high threshold would affect their game a lot less than the same drop off the wings or a high stamina and speed game. Plus there are a lot of strong offensive coaches just under the current top tier and less impressive defensive ones. You might actually just see lots more power game instead of forcing variety.

Thank you for your reply.
I see your points and will respond much more deeply another day. I'm tired of writing for tonight, going to play some top spin before bed
My big BUT to your reply is that you did not reply to anything about realism which is a big argument for my "campaign"
What are your thoughts on that aspect of the game?

[tigerofintegrity]

TS4 is a simulation game, not a stand-in for realism. It tries to give as good a representation of real tennis as it can but in a computer game world. This automatically means lots of things, for example faster than realistic tennis gameplay. It's not trying to mimic real tennis exactly but trying to blend aspects of it into a game so that it can have the best balance of both.

The mechanics of the game, the stuff that will govern how 'realistic' it is is already in place and not something we can alter. The only thing we can do is try to make the game more fun, more fair and more balanced by imposing restrictions. To make it more realistic we would have to be able to change the core of the game, not merely ban things. So arguments of 'more realistic' to me don't make any sense.

[jayl0ve]

If it was totally realistic we would not be having fun games. A lot of the fun in real tennis is in the intangibles...being outside, laughing with your friends, feeling the breeze all that BS. Take those away and you have to compensate in some way, to keep us interested.

We've all seen how the average person with no real talent plays tennis. It ain't pretty and it ain't something you want to simulate on a video game screen. If it were totally realistic nobody would be able to serve over 100 mph, you'd all be shanking maybe 3 out of 4 balls, volleys? haha you can forget volleying, weekend warriors have no idea how to hit a volley, etc etc etc....

[jayl0ve]

btw


LEVEL 9 EDBERG STATUS, MY NIZZLES!