BuzzerBeater Forums

I played extremley wel in one game, loaded previous match tactics 2 games later to play the same way with the same result, in terms of performance not score.
Questions:
1) does "Loading Match Tactics" from a game you did well in make your team play better, because it is playing the same way as before. less TO more Ast's etc?
2) If yes to Q1 then how long can you keep calling back that game before it disappears from the list. The whole season, forever as long as you keep loading it?

I know this sounds like one of those weird before game time things that has know bearing on the game itself, but thought this would be the quickest way to figure it out.
Thanks.

No. Using the same tactics and lineup just means you play with the same tactics and lineup. There are no bonuses or anything.

What a shame ...

I wish that some bonus would be given if I keep using the same tactics for many games (say 10 games or more), because players perform better as teamwork would be improved in reality.

Thats real, and I totally agree,
Vince Lombardi ran the power sweep religiously during every game, and I know they practiced it til they were bleeding from the nose.
Their should be an exicution bonus......that would go a long way for GMs to choose another offense other than LI.

Thats real, and I totally agree,
Vince Lombardi ran the power sweep religiously during every game, and I know they practiced it til they were bleeding from the nose.
Their should be an exicution bonus......that would go a long way for GMs to choose another offense other than LI.

The one so does not imply the other. Unless the bonus is somehow explicitly set up to be inversely proportional to the "effectiveness" of the tactic or simply not given for LI, there is no reason at all to think that a bonus for consistency in tactics will do anything but reinforce the LI mindset. If a user believes that LI is the best tactic, a flat bonus to all tactics does nothing to ameliorate that situation - LI is still going to be considered better by the same amount - and if the bonus is a percentage then it's going to be considered even more favorably.

If anything, to get the desired effect of deterring people to set and forget LI/M2M, the bonuses instead should be given when different tactics are chosen - or a negative given to repetitive tactics to simulate boredom or a lack of creativity given to the players. I'm not saying that this is, on its own, a good idea - just one that would be more likely to stimulate more changes in tactics and possibly in team building and the overall game environment.

Of course, the real problem is that to cause a shift in tactics, there has to be a reason to do so - and putting aside the perceived and observed relative merits of each of the tactics, in a game environment where an outsized percentage of the teams and players are built for LI, it'll be hard to just flip the switch to run an outside offense. And that's the type of change that has the real potential of driving off people if not done extremely well.

I am more than willing to offer you a mutual Princeton - box and 1 for our rematch in the later part of the season, though, if you want to experiment! ;)

Last edited by GM-hrudey at 10/11/2012 4:55:13 PM

We already are experiencing the stagnation and slow collapse of this game.
We need to shake things up and soon.
As reguards to the playing bonus, a flat bonus would not work, I was thinking along the lines of an incremental bonus like enthusiasm that will eventually cap. When new players are aquired, the team tactic playing bonus drops of in the lineup, and in increments grows back again showing familiarity in whatever offense is run.
Might take you up on your offer hrudy.

We already are experiencing the stagnation and slow collapse of this game.
We need to shake things up and soon.
As reguards to the playing bonus, a flat bonus would not work, I was thinking along the lines of an incremental bonus like enthusiasm that will eventually cap. When new players are aquired, the team tactic playing bonus drops of in the lineup, and in increments grows back again showing familiarity in whatever offense is run.
Might take you up on your offer hrudy.

Whether the bonus is incremental or not doesn't really change that it's not a solution that encourages people to try new tactics - it's more of a solution to the problem with rented players for the playoffs (and may well be a good reason for that). But if the problem is that people are continually using the same tactics and then you offer them a bonus for consistency in their tactics, I can't find any logical reason to think that would do anything but entrench the tactics.

I think a more significant paradigm shift would be occurred with a simple redefinition of the shotblocking skill to address a very real balance issue (I think wolph is the one who has pointed out this problem most, but if not he I know it's been mentioned and I do not claim credit for it). A significant balance issue exists because there's a fundamental difference in the offense/defense mechanic for inside versus outside shots. For outside offenses, you need JS and JR to be able to shoot effectively, while both are shut down by OD (a single skill that also effects handling, passing, and so on). For an inside offense, there's a single skill for inside shooting, while there's ID and SB to defend it.

As an alternative, what if shotblocking were made the skill that affected the probability of a shot being made, and the OD and ID skills were more about preventing passes to the outside and inside and being able to get good enough position to give an opportunity to block the shot? Training would have to be changed to reflect that, and there'd still likely be a ton of value in high OD still, but allowing ID to prevent passes inside and making perimeter defenders invest in shotblocking in addition to OD would at least be a step in a new direction.

I agree with you on all points, especially with LI offenses being further entrenched in the fabric of this game.
A reguards to the defensive recommendations, I see aspects of the shot blocking premise already in effect, it really shows itself when I play a 3-2. Adam and Kiser are both very good shot blockers and I see the effects on the opponants offense, especially when an opponant drives in. So the elements for the foundation is already there.