BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Motion VS Run & Gun

Motion VS Run & Gun

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
97502.1
Date: 6/17/2009 10:27:37 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
11
I am curios to hear what other people think the differences between these two offenses is. I know what the rules says but i find my team shoots just as many 3's as they do in run & gun. I don't believe my team shoots enough mid range jumpers as they are supposed to.

In real life Motion is set up for good passing teams and first option is usually looking for a player cutting to the basket , secondly rolling of a screen for a jump shot that may or may not be a 3 pointer. I have played run & gun once this year and i shot 38.3% of my shots were 3's against 3-2 zone. I twice played motion and shot 45.5% of my shots were 3's against a man defense and in the other game i shot 32.5% of my shots were 3's against 3-2 zone. In one of the games while playing motion i took 7 straight 3's. I dont believe my team either understands how to play motion or something is off in the GE.

I would like to know what other people think so i have a better understanding of these offenses.

Thank you for your time.

You got to know when to hold em, know when to fold em, Know when to walk away and know when to run. You never count your money when youre sittin at the table. Therell be time enough for countin when the dealins done.
This Post:
00
97502.2 in reply to 97502.1
Date: 6/17/2009 10:37:07 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
5555
In the current game engine, the main difference between Motion and Run and Gun seems to be pace. If you play Run and Gun, you will shoot earlier in the shot clock (on average).

The type of shots taken, as far as I can tell, is basically the same. For both of these offenses, you can expect lots of jump shots and lots of 3s. There might be some small differences other than pace, but in practice, I haven't noticed any.

This Post:
00
97502.3 in reply to 97502.2
Date: 6/17/2009 10:47:19 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
In general, motion tactics produces more 3 point shots than 2 point shots, or atleast it tries to. These shots are usually of better quality than the ones taken with a R&G tactics. Also it allows more opportunities for offensive rebounds than the R&G tactics.

Last edited by Legen...Riceball...Dary! at 6/17/2009 10:51:02 AM

This Post:
00
97502.4 in reply to 97502.3
Date: 6/17/2009 10:59:22 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
Also it allows more opportunities for offensive rebounds than the R&G tactics.

I assume this is based on personal observation, though I fail to see anything in the way those two tactics work that might explain such behavior.

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
This Post:
00
97502.5 in reply to 97502.4
Date: 6/17/2009 11:06:32 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
Imagine the team shooting the first possible shot vs the team that passes the ball around first looking for a better quality shot. You should be able to say that the second team should have their players at their assigned position. IE, centers and PF near the basket to get the rebounds. This can also be explained with the shot clock/quickshots. R&G usually takes faster shots making it harder for players to be at their position. Sometimes they even take shots within 10 seconds.... not nearly enough to position those rebounders well. Motion on the other hand usually take less rushed shots than R&G do, which allows better quality shots and probably higher chance of offensive rebounds.

This Post:
00
97502.6 in reply to 97502.3
Date: 6/17/2009 11:09:38 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
11
Thanks for the input but from my games i don't see any difference between the two different offensive sets. I just don't see any difference in the BB world and i know from experience that there is a huge difference in real life.

You got to know when to hold em, know when to fold em, Know when to walk away and know when to run. You never count your money when youre sittin at the table. Therell be time enough for countin when the dealins done.
This Post:
00
97502.7 in reply to 97502.5
Date: 6/17/2009 11:12:07 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
Imagine the team shooting the first possible shot vs the team that passes the ball around first looking for a better quality shot. You should be able to say that the second team should have their players at their assigned position. IE, centers and PF near the basket to get the rebounds. This can also be explained with the shot clock/quickshots. R&G usually takes faster shots making it harder for players to be at their position. Sometimes they even take shots within 10 seconds.... not nearly enough to position those rebounders well. Motion on the other hand usually take less rushed shots than R&G do, which allows better quality shots and probably higher chance of offensive rebounds.

I mean in terms of BB game mechanics, not in terms of how the two tactics might operate on a real basketball court.

I am not sure either of the considerations you mentioned are built into the game engine, but of course we'd never know for sure.

Last edited by GM-kozlodoev at 6/17/2009 11:12:34 AM

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
This Post:
00
97502.8 in reply to 97502.6
Date: 6/17/2009 11:14:14 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
There is definately a huge difference in real life, but i'm not sure if it is comparable to the BB's take on these two tactics, unfortunately. :/

But that's what i keep in mind when choosing between motion and R&G. And i frequently BB-mail with some top team managers who agree to some extend :). It's just an assumption of mine and should be considered as one :)

This Post:
00
97502.9 in reply to 97502.8
Date: 6/17/2009 12:04:26 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
409409
I would say that I'm not really sure if we can now have a good conversation about tactics in general.

We know that there will be changes in the GE related to passing, rebounds and shotblocks. Also, changes in zone defenses, but as far as i Know this is not a GE but a games dispayers change, because, help defenders have always been there.

Recently, BB-Charles had said that those changes are part of a mayor pack of changes, wich may include or may not include fundamental aspects of tactics.

For example, if passing is going to be more effective, then the pace of a tactic will be more importante and, maybe, just maybe, this new effectiveness in passing would allow us to see with more detailed the subtles differences -if any- between tacticas like motion against a Run and Gun. Because, I assume, high quality shots will happen more frequently in different areas with different positions for different tactics, even if both of them are outside oriented.

From: GM-ksachs

To: Coco
This Post:
00
97502.11 in reply to 97502.10
Date: 6/17/2009 2:25:13 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
11
If that is the case then the rules need to be changed. What if you have great shooters but poor range then what offense do you choose. If you have great 1 on 1 players then what do you choose. I understood by the rules and from what i know about RL basketball that you would see more 18 footers than 3's. Plus motion is usually spread out fairly well which helps out with a player who knows how to drive.

You got to know when to hold em, know when to fold em, Know when to walk away and know when to run. You never count your money when youre sittin at the table. Therell be time enough for countin when the dealins done.