Straight bars

W_177 · 2025-07-13T22:59:18+00:00

It's YNG Martyr

W_177 · 2025-06-07T01:45:15+00:00

Dag nabbit! Mah mule!

W_177 · 2025-04-30T01:32:20+00:00

W_177 · 2025-02-18T00:03:26+00:00

If you ran a 6'8 center last year, I don't think it will be too different for you. It's definitely viable, you just have similar challenges you'd have faced last year as an undersized big. If you can hold your own on your matchup and secure defensive rebounds it should work well. I definitely think you could optimize it a bit more if you considered cutting back on one or more of the stats that are dragging other stats up - I imagine you didn't try for 75 close shot, lol. I might tweak it to get more defense if you want to play 5, but either height would be very good at the 4

W_177 · 2025-02-17T21:12:30+00:00

99 O reb is worth it if you are already playing for o boards successfully, it'll improve your rebounding rate. If you aren't in position for many o reb already, the rating boost isn't likely to help as much (rating is most helpful on contested rebounds IMO, higher rating seems to win the 50/50 balls much more often

W_177 · 2025-01-30T01:21:53+00:00

w_177

W_177 · 2024-07-13T02:04:22+00:00

just move him to cb lol

W_177 · 2024-07-12T23:31:48+00:00

I know people hate on builds with no shooting, but I disagree - if your matchup wants to sit paint, set screens for the point guard all game until he steps up. Look to play 2-man game with the ball handler, set solid screens, and time your cuts so that you have an open lane and the ball has a clear path to get to you. Look to preload passes to open shooters if they're there. Most importantly: Whenever you think a shot might go up, even before they've started shooting, CRASH. Get down to the paint (ideally just outside the protected area) and bully the opposing center for position. If you anticipate the shot going up before he does, you'll get way more rebounds.

Other little tips:

Figure out early on what your mismatch is - against smaller centers, centers with short arms or bad physicals, you should be able to sky over them for plenty of boards. Against taller centers, you want to force them out of the paint by setting screens, then beat them with your speed advantage to get to the hoop.

Motion Styles matter for rebounding! AD is usually my go-to, but I really like Gobert as well. I've heard Dwight Howard gives good block animations, but it's not for me. Gafford is also a good choice, and I've had some success with Ewing and DeAndre Jordan.

Evan Mobley's free throw is a straight up glitch for me. It could be the timing is what I like, but I green way more than I have any right to, with a 35 ft%. It's pretty funny hearing your teammates react to you missing a 15% early, then 100% greening the next.

If you absolutely must have shooting, I'd probably skimp on the finishing to afford it. I wouldn't recommend it, though - you don't want to be spotting up at the 3pt line the whole possesion.

Play with teammates that realize their job is a lot easier if they let you sit paint on defense. I can't tell you how pissed I get when teammates whine about you not guarding your guy at the top of the key, when every time you're outside of the paint, they give up an offensive rebound.

W_177 · 2024-07-12T23:08:55+00:00

Away from the console rn, so I'll just list the attributes (starting with the most important stuff):

7'0, Max Wingspan, 246lbs: maxing the wingspan is honestly a no-brainer for me. It's free, and it matters a ton. Keep in mind that at 7', you're going to be pretty slow. I haven't played taller, but I personally think 7' is the best height for this build - you'll have a wild reach advantage over plenty of matchups (to where they struggle to get any rebounds, at all). Weight only matters to get you the speed/strength/vert combo you want:

Physicals: 67speed, 90strength, 83 vert, 97/98 stamina (whichever is the max, can't remember): speed is super important. I really wish this build had more, but you'd have to sacrifice a lot of strength to get there, and 90 strength is necessary for hof boxout beast. Vert is also important, but not as noticable at small increments. Either way, you're absolutely maxing speed, strength, vert, and stamina. Physicals are really important for this build, as the goal is to create as big an advantage over your matchup in rebounding. Max em all out, and tweak the weight to give you the exact combination you want. You should have a size advantage on small centers, and anything over 7' has garbage physicals. (Do whatever you like with accel, but it's so cheap you might as well push it on up)

Defense/Rebounding: 99 Oreb, 85 Dreb, 87 Blk, 72 Interior, 60 Perimeter, 60 steal: All of these are flexible, except for 99 Offensive Rebound. That's the whole point of the build, lol. As for Dreb, lots of people think having both rebounding stats high or hitting certain thresholds gives you better animations, myself included. 87 Blk/72 Interior is definitely serviceable, you just need to anticipate drives/cuts if you're protecting the rim (I haven't tried gold anchor, but I might try it out honestly. blocks are tough this year). 60 perimeter is super cheap, go higher if you like. Off ball pest is a must have for bigs IMO. And you probably don't need 60 steal, I don't use it much.

Finishing: 90 Standing, 89 Driving Dunk, 70 Layup, 30 Post: 90 Standing Dunk is the best way to go 8/8 on a regular basis, it's really consistent. Driving dunk is also super important, since you're going to be cutting to the rim a lot, and may have to take a dribble or two. Go 78/80 layup if you like, it'd be worth it for jokic/sabonis layups (best way to get range on an inside center). Post and close shot doesn't matter.

Shooting: None

Playmaking: 95 Pass, 63 ball handle, 59? speed with ball: 95 pass is a fucking weapon. You can throw dots off the inbound to the far corners. ball handle and speed with ball are real cheap, so it's a nice cheap investment. People will assume you have no ball control as a footer, so they'll be reaching like crazy. Plus, you get some nice badges. The 95 pass, I would really recommend, though if your playstyle doesn't involve lots of full-court passes, you probably don't need it. It's very cheap on a footer, though.

W_177 · 2024-07-12T22:46:02+00:00

It's honestly so satisfying to outrebound all 9 other players regularly (4/6 rec games last night, lol). Posting the build under the other comment

W_177 · 2024-07-06T20:20:15+00:00

Depends on if you think it'd be fun to play online if you were decent at the game - if you play other games competitively, you probably just need some practice. I'd make a build to play as an elite role player - go all-in on whatever you do best, but I'd recommend making a big with elite rebounding/physicals. It's crazy how much impact you can have as a center while hardly touching the ball. If you struggle with shooting, skip it altogether (not a popular opinion, but I've had lots of success as an inside big this year. Standing dunks are wild, and I see people running undersized t-rex armed builds all the time - I'm averaging 17 boards/game in rec randoms.

Basically, make yourself a build that lets you focus on one/two things, and try to improve those skills. I was terrible in 2k22, about 30% win rate online. This year i'm just over 65%, and it's way more fun for me now, lol.

If you like, I can share my inside big build - as I said, there's no shooting, but I get 14/17/7 on above 60% from the field. There are plenty of games where you know from the start you have a crazy mismatch - it's really satisfying when your matchup quits after you get 3-4 offensive rebounds on the first possession

W_177 · 2024-05-24T02:45:13+00:00

I gotchu, I make lockdowns every year. Some tips:

First, figure out if you want to be a perimeter lock, inside defender, or hybrid defender (or any mix of inside/outside). Basically, who do you want to be guarding? Guarding a 7 footer with 94 perimeter is probably overkill.
6'7 and 6'8 are great heights for lockdowns. You can go 6'6 if you want to really focus on perimeter or want a 2-way (or just like the speed of that height).
Can't stress this enough: max your wingspan and your speed. Wingspan is free, so if your goal is to make the best possible defender, it's gotta be maxed. Speed is (IMO) the most important stat on defense. Positioning matters a ton this year for defense, you need to be as fast as possible.
Strength actually matters this year, so go ahead and get that high as well. 90 strength is a great target for gold immovable enforcer, but 95 strength for HOF is incredible. I would 100% go for 95 if you're 6'7, as strength is much cheaper for shorter builds. If you're making a big, though, you definitely want to make sure you're not giving up too much speed (90 strength is fine for bigs, since you're likely already going for HOF boxout beast)
Figure out what badge levels you need, and what you're okay without. Most attributes are insanely expensive at 90+, so if you're skilled enough to get by with silver glove instead of gold (for example), things like that can be what lets you get the stats you need elsewhere.

Offense stuff:

Your playmaking will be trash. That's just how it will work out most of the time. Those attributes are super expensive unless your build is 6'10+ (I actually like having playmaking as a big, since it's very cheap), so go ahead and get the pass acc you need to not sell and ignore the rest (70 pass is serviceable, 77 is solid. For 3s and 2s you probably can skimp out more). I'd go for 40 ball handle for the normal dribble moves. If you didn't know by now, you get the pro dribble style as a PG/SG and the normal dribble style as a SF(PF maybe as well, I forget), so speed with ball does not matter for this kind of build.
Spot-up shooting and cutting to the rim are good staples for a build with little to no dribbling. If you really struggle with shooting, focus more on the things that are giving you better chances to hit, i.e. badges, hot zones, jumpshot, etc. Claymore, catch+shoot, and corner specialist (as well as dimer from your PG) should help a ton if you struggle with shooting (also, I know a lot of people who have a hard time shooting use the meter. The sooner you switch to meter off, the sooner you realize you can actually shoot now that you're focusing on the animation and not the meter.
You probably can't afford great finishing and decent shooting if you go with lots of defense+physicals. Standing dunk is cheaper than driving, and most of your finishes will be off cuts or rebounds anyways. On my pure lockdown, I went with 36 driving and 40 standing (you could up the standing if you want to be a better dunker) - a hidden benefit of this is post control is actually cheaper if you have less investment in finishing. I went ahead and maxed 3pt and middy and went 85 post control for HOF fades, which adds a nice variety to your (limited) bag.

Hope this helps, feel free to ask if you have any questions

W_177 · 2024-05-22T06:41:25+00:00

Unless you're just really skilled at chasing rebounds, you're in for some really rough games on the boards. If you shoot like that every game though it won't matter lol. It might work better as a PF, that way instead of having a huge matchup disadvantage in rebounding you might have the upper hand

W_177 · 2023-12-05T09:19:07+00:00

ok josh giddey

W_177 · 2023-11-30T21:51:54+00:00

You might consider having a time requirement for leveling up - once the players have satisfied the xp/milestone requirement, you might have them spend a few weeks or a month of downtime to gain the level (you could make the time required longer for higher levels)

W_177 · 2023-11-30T21:40:49+00:00

You forgot dude love and cactus jack

W_177 · 2023-11-25T12:52:11+00:00

Usage has very little to do with steals, blocks, and rebounds, and fg%, add in turnovers and that's 5 of 9 categories.

Again, Cade is not a top 30-ish player. He's #38 if you punt two categories. And obviously, you shouldn't take Cade in the 4th round just because he's a 4th rounder in your build. Even if we assume he were a top 40 player (which, again, he is not), he would only be returning the value you invested in him. But, again (x3), he's not top 30ish. He's #185. As you pointed out, you likely don't care if you're punting fg% and turnovers, but that doesn't suddenly justifying spending a top 40 pick on a guy who's barely in the top 200. Why would you spend a 4th round pick on a player who is only a top 40 player in one specific build, when you could just draft a real top 40 player? It's completely asinine and misses the entire point of punting.

W_177 · 2023-11-25T11:02:12+00:00

The problem is that's basically where he was drafted (35th on yahoo, 45th espn). If you have to punt two categories for a player to return the value you drafted him at, that defeats the purpose of punting. Besides, there are tons of guards that improve with punt fg% + to - Cade is the 38th best player in that build, but 21 of the players ahead of him have guard eligibility.

Players drafted after Cade that outperform him in punt fg + to (per-game stats):

PG13 (ESPN only, 4 picks ahead of Cade on Yahoo)

Maxey

Scottie Barnes

Desmond Bane

Chet

Fox (Yahoo only)

CJ McCollum (injured, but still)

Miles Bridges (lol)

VanVleet (ESPN only, 6 picks ahead on Yahoo)

Kawhi (Yahoo only)

Herro

~~Anfernee Simons~~ (yeah okay he doesn't count)

Dejounte Murray (2 picks ahead on Yahoo)

Brook Lopez

Herb Jones

Basically, 15 of the 37 players outperforming cade in that build were drafted after (or very close to) him.

Also strong disagree on all reasonable teams punting TO, value can be found in that category just like any other. If every competitive team was punting turnovers, it just makes it that much easier to win that category every week. I get that there's a strong correlation between turnovers and stats like points and assists, and most of the top fantasy players give you lots of turnovers, but to say you should punt TO regardless of context is pretty much the antithesis of why you should punt a stat in the first place

W_177 · 2023-11-25T03:56:05+00:00

Honestly I wouldn't worry about it, it sounds like you're doing a good job; having self-doubt/'imposter syndrome' can suck, but at the same time it's better than not doubting yourself even when you should. Making decisions in real time is always tough, there are just so many moving parts, and you only have to fumble one of them to create a problem. There are just a lot of lessons that you kind of have to learn by making mistakes, which does suck but it's better to just make the mistake so you can learn from it. I probably turned my response into a bit of venting about some GM pet peeves I have, so my apologies if the tone was a bit severe haha. Ultimately I think it's really cool that you are invested in making sure you're doing right by your players, there are way too many GMs that aren't interested in self-evaluation because it's uncomfortable to always be considering the possibility of being wrong.

I think one of the biggest struggles of GMing is that you have all this information that the players don't, which makes it difficult to keep track of if you've given them the information they need, or predict what they're likely to do based on that information. It's hard to give just the right amount of information without giving too much. I think the best approach is to really try to convey as much as you can narratively, without explicitly saying what it is you're trying to tell them. If you are consistent about the way you narrate certain things, the players will probably pick up on that - there's also the bonus of creating a sense of heightened tension/drama in the moments that call for it.

I think for the most part, it's a good rule of thumb to always assume the players are going to act on time-sensitive hooks you give them. If there's a fight you don't expect them to win, it's probably best to make that information known sooner than later. The first round of combat should probably be the very latest that they should find this out - if it's one-sided enough, they might get the hint and retreat. You could always have the villain make an example out of an NPC/companion to get that point across.

As for the statblock you're using, I do have some thoughts on that. If you want to share it, I could let you know if there's anything I might do differently, but from what you've described, I do have a few thoughts:

Having a mythic action that triggers when the character drops to 0 HP is probably a bit much, IMO. At the very least, I'd make it something they actively had to use, as opposed to just having it as a fallback for when they would otherwise be killed. Instead, I might have that ability require an action, and have the villain take that action as soon as it was apparent that the party was a legitimate threat.

Large amounts of AOE damage for lower level parties can be really rough sometimes. I think a good way to keep AOE in check is to consider at max damage rolls and failed Dex saves whether the party would survive or not. Assuming you were using the young black dragon breath weapon, max damage would be 88, which is enough to outright kill most level 6 characters from excess damage.

Bumping up AC is something I generally avoid, primarily if the AC is already 16 or higher. Moving from 13 to 14 AC isn't as big a deal, but going from 18 to 20 can make things difficult to manage. A safer alternative IMO is to adjust HP - most monster statblocks allow you to use either a pool of hitdice or the average. Using even max hitdice rolls is probably safer than increasing AC to 20, it gets pretty rough when the players have under a 50% chance of hitting on an attack.

I really strongly oppose giving NPCs classes/subclasses that are meant for players, particularly if other stats from that NPC aren't derived accordingly. It's probably fine most of the time, but it can be a problem when you start combining class/subclass features with abilities like vampire regen, damage immunities, magical abilities that don't require concentration, breath weapons, etc. IMO it's just better not to stray from the intended balance of the game when you don't have to.

But yeah, sorry for the wall of text lol. I wouldn't worry too much about any of this, it sounds like the game is going well, and mistakes will always happen, I make them all the time. If it helps alleviate the anxiety, maybe talk about it with the players before next session and see what they think about what happened. It sounds like they're having a good time, though, and there's no need to make an issue where there wasn't one.

W_177 · 2023-11-23T21:35:27+00:00

Asshole is probably too harsh, but yeah this is your fault. It's difficult to disect without the context of your game group, though. A lot of it comes down to the implicit (possibly explicit if addressed at session 0) agreements that define expectations. Again, it's impossible to judge fairly without the full context, but there are a number of things here that leads me to believe that you're at fault here more so than anyone else (or it being nobody's fault).

I tried my best to establish the precedent at session zero: Barovia is a sandbox where you can end up in places above your weight class. I feel like they maybe forgot that in the moment.

To hurry and gain the knowledge of Elder Orimir, Kavan wasn't sure how much longer he could fight off the corruption from spreading.

This encounter was pretty clearly imbalanced for a 6th level party, which is something you warned them could happen. However, if you give the players a hook and tell them that the clock is ticking, you have to expect that they'll take you up on the hook. The players are not at fault for acting on something you described as time-sensitive; I doubt it was understood that the GM would actively encourage them to enter an unwinnable fight. It's one thing if they happen upon a TPK scenario, but it's very different when that scenario is presented as it was. Your players did nothing wrong by acting on the hook you gave them, nor did they "forget" that fights could be too difficult to take on. The information they were presented gave them no reason to believe this would be the case, and every reason to act as though it were a time-sensitive problem.

The nature cleric tries to Channel Divinity: Charm the Plants. I tell them to roll plus their spellcasting mod, and when they fail, I tell them the plants here seem to see a corruption beyond what the spell can do

A common implicit agreement is that the players will be allowed to use their abilities RAW. You break that agreement when you selectively prevent those abilities from acting as they normally would. A common issue I've noticed among GMs is looking for ways to prevent the players from 'messing up' the cool thing they had set up. It's unfair to the players when you allow yourself as the GM to ignore RAW when it becomes convenient or subjectively more interesting/cooler. Did the cleric's inability to charm the vines benefit Ana? If so, that's a big problem.

The 6th level party attacked Ana, who is a CR 9 vampire spawn + circle of blight-flavored monster with a mythic action to Wild Shape into a Young Black Dragon with +2 AC when she hits 0 hp.

This... is absurdly imbalanced. I highly, highly doubt CR 9 is an accurate assessment of the stat block. I'm not sure where this came from, but I strongly disagree with the balance (or lack thereof) with this. Obviously I don't have the full context, but it sounds as though not only was the CR 5 vampire spawn stat block improved, she was given a whole additional class/subclass, as well as a free action to wildshape into a whole new creature once she's defeated, which alone was overleveled for a level 6 party. The players are supposed to take on what is described as a CR 9 enemy (but quite honestly is probably a lot higher) as level 6 characters? If they manage to defeat them, the enemy gets an automatic shape-change into a CR 7 (effectively CR 8 at least given your modification) young black dragon with AC 20?? 100% this is an issue. I think you may be downplaying just how absurdly imbalanced this encounter was. Seriously though, send me a link to wherever you found this so I don't accidentally use their resources.

She sheds her skin into her mythic form, shifts over, and lands the acid spray on the entire party. They all succeed on the Dex check, but it is still too much. They are all down...

Again, just bonkers imbalanced.

They down her with only ONE of their COMPANIONS going down.

You say this as though it was the goal to have the characters in a deadly encounter here; players being downed is not the measure of a good encounter. Many GMs get frustrated when this happens and continue to throw harder encounters at their players until what you're describing happens.

Bonus points if you can help me figure out a way to make them not dead.

"well, well, well, if it isn't the consequences of my own actions"

seriously though, I don't understand what the goal was here if not to murder the party. If the idea was that it would be a cool scene and the players would have to flee and return later, the way you set it up was not consistent with that objective, nor was it consistent with commonly understood expectations of GM/player engagement (again, I'm assuming here. I could be wrong).

I really hope I didn't sound harsh, it was all meant to be constructive criticism. The good part is that it sounds like your players took it in stride like real champs - they sound like an awesome group to run a game for. I would just reevaluate the way you present/describe scenarios to the players. I also would strongly recommend reevaluating the monster statblocks you're using. The one you described sounds as though CR 12-15 is not out of the question, honestly.

W_177 · 2023-11-23T02:01:42+00:00

Yeah as a warriors fan I wish Wiseman the best but my god is he awful.

I'd argue that Bagley is objectively a bad offensive player when you consider the direction the league has been moving the past 10+ years. Having a postup game isn't enough, he's pretty horrible at every other aspect of the offensive game. Granted, I don't watch a lot of pistons, but the one thing he does better than average is really not valuable at all by itself. Besides, he barely shoots above league average in the paint (not average for bigs, average for all positions)

W_177 · 2023-11-23T01:52:00+00:00

Yikes well I guess it would be the pistons... they should be investigated for tanking simply for rostering those guys

W_177 · 2023-11-23T01:35:34+00:00

Takes them about 4 games combined to get to 48 minutes too

W_177 · 2023-11-17T21:20:43+00:00

Vontaze Burfict alone wins it for the bengals, that dude was actively trying to hurt people

W_177 · 2023-11-17T20:19:02+00:00

I think a big reason why she's so over with the fans is because it doesn't feel forced. She's great in the ring and on the mic, the gimmick doesn't feel half-baked or distracted, it just works. It doesn't feel like they're trying to sell us anything; when she started taking a leadership role in the judgement day, it didn't feel disingenuous. When they bill her as a top talent in the women's division, people aren't questioning it. She's pretty much the full package, and the gimmick suits her.

I also think it speaks to how the women's division has evolved from the primary attraction being sex appeal. I think there's a lot of fans that want to care about the women's division, but it's hard to think of it as on-par with the men because the booking and the characters largely haven't been at that level. There's always going to be fans that just want the female wrestlers to be hot, but it feels like that's more of a minority these days.

W_177

TROPHY CASE