BuzzerBeater Forums

Does that mean the best player is the one with higher matchup rating(best scorer) or is some other criteria, like salary/rating, etc?

This is an excellent question, one worthy of an informed reply--not speculation.

Having used this tactic in 5 games (outside ISO) and observed another 5-10,it's quite clear that it focuses on the best match-up...

e.g.If your guards face a very strong OD,most of the shots will go to the big men(assuming they have adequate JS/JR and are defended by low OD big men)

Having used this tactic in 5 games (outside ISO) and observed another 5-10,it's quite clear that it focuses on the best match-up...

e.g.If your guards face a very strong OD,most of the shots will go to the big men(assuming they have adequate JS/JR and are defended by low OD big men)

See, for my point of view things are more complicated than that. I assume all tactics are desing to take the ball to where best matchups are being created.

My question intented to give some light under other aspects of tactics as well, for instance and in these two particular tactics, when you talk about inside foucs what are you talking about? The best inside player(read C or PF, perhaps SF) with better scoring chances(better matchup, wich is calculated not only by their inside shots but also their jump shots from all distances) is the one being isolated? or is the best player(of the five in court) with the best inside scoring chances(this is not the matchup but a component of it) who is being isolated? And later, is being isolated for what kind of shots? Inside shots? Outside shots? Any kind of shots and "focus" is only used to choose who the isolted player will be?

Since that seems to be too much information to ask to a BB, also very specific, I made a more broader question in order to have some oficial ground to start speculating not because I don't value your(or others) experience, but because there are a lot of question to start with.

Last edited by Zero, the Magi. at 3/25/2011 12:16:01 PM

This is not the kind of information that the BBs give out. You can figure this out for yourself, if you are interested enough to do so. There are several threads regarding the new tactics and even a federation dedicated to the investigation of how the new tactics work. Good luck!

This is not the kind of information that the BBs give out. You can figure this out for yourself, if you are interested enough to do so. There are several threads regarding the new tactics and even a federation dedicated to the investigation of how the new tactics work. Good luck!

I no longer have much interest in BB, so I won't take you up on your challenge.

Getting answers like this is one the top three reasons I continue to lose interest in BB.

The other two are the poor modeling of stamina in this simulation--players play too many minutes compared to real pro ball.

The third reason also relates to stamina, I suppose. The inability to have real life substitution patterns so you can keep fresh players in the game. I have studied sub patterns for many seasons, and I'm mystified at the lack of realism.

I could explain further, but no one will read and respond, so why bother?

As you pointed out, that is the way of the BBs.

Sorry to hear that you no longer have much interest in BB. It will be too bad to lose an active member of the forum community.

What sort of answer would make you gain interest in BB? The game is the way it is- managers will not be spoon fed the workings of the game. A lot of players, myself included, like it this way. If you do not, there isn't much to be done.

As far as the stamina issues go, I don't have a problem with them. My starters play about 30-34 minutes a game which is pretty much standard for the nba.
(http://www.cbssports.com/nba/stats/leaders/regularseason/...)

On your team, Ostrowski plays 35 minutes, Penteado plays 37, and no one else plays more than 30. Do you wish your players played more minutes, or less?

There are ways to have players play more or fewer minutes. Granted they might not be as realistic as being able to pull a guy whenever the coach feels like it as happens in real life, but this isn't real life. By manipulating the lineups and substitution choices I can get guys consistently between 20 and 48 minutes, depending on what I want or need them to play.

Finally, your final two sentences are very defeatist and negative, which is too bad. There are many people who will read and respond to your posts. I wasn't challenging you in my initial response to your post, I was trying to help you out by giving you options.

Last edited by somdetsfinest at 3/27/2011 1:12:25 PM

I think what the GM meant was that part of the challenge of this game is to figure out how things work for yourself and then use your understanding to do well in the game. That's a reasonable response, isn't it?

I do agree with you though, that in this case, I would also like to know what exactly the new tactical options do. Do they pick out players with or without regard for opposition, in other words, if its matchup driven or not. That is arguably a matter of specifying the rules of the game with clarity and shouldn't be left to guessing games. But if you just take a look at a few games with inside/outside iso offence its apparent that the player with the best matchup is isolated most of the time, though probably not all of the time. After that its a matter of that player's decision making to start the offensive play.

I agree with you that the substitution patterns aren't what they could be, apart from other realism issues, but perfection is hard to come by. So why not just take it with a pinch of salt?

On your team, Ostrowski plays 35 minutes, Penteado plays 37, and no one else plays more than 30. Do you wish your players played more minutes, or less?

You are not looking at the games themselves, merely the average minutes. What you are overlooking is that the average minutes you computed are based on games the player started and the minutes he came on as a sub. My 40+ minute example is for starters ONLY.

I do rotate my players to try to keep minutes played to the point where everyone is sharp. However, the starters put in too many minutes when they start, and not enough when they come off the bench. That the average is NBA-like is not the point.

Further, the real issue is that players do NOT come in and out of the game realistically. Nor is there a setting that allows the split to be 28-20 or as close to 24-24 as possible. Thus a coach cannot maximize his team's advantage in stamina by using Full Court Press in a realistic manner. I have tried that repeatedly, and it has not worked, ever. FCP is a gimmick setting in this simulation, not at all well implemented.

Every player on my team has STRONG or better stamina (except for two young ones who haven't fleshed-out yet) and Everyone is AT LEAST STRONG in OD and ID with most better in at least one. On a real court, I would shuttle my players in and out so that my team always had fresher legs on the court than my opponents. That is impossible in BB.

Finally, your final two sentences are very defeatist and negative, which is too bad. There are many people who will read and respond to your posts. I wasn't challenging you in my initial response to your post, I was trying to help you out by giving you options.

I understand your try to give me options. I was answering quickly becasue I don't want to spend too much time on BB any more.

My real response should have been that anything other than Man or the 2-3 and 3-2 zones are gimmick defenses IRL and that I don't have any interest in using/learning about them becasue my team has terrific defenders who don't need tricks to win.

What would make me think more highly of BB would be meaningful upgrades to the game engine or additions to the game. Instead of this we got the unbelievably useless ROLE addition tot he player card and the two junk defenses we've been discussing. Very disappointing for me.

I agree with you.

We have seen Charles trying to defend that SB works, but we haven't read anything yet about the new tactics apart from 1-2 lines that say nothing.

It would be nice some post from a BB talking '' a bit'' about the new tactics, from what i've seen so far, they aren't really competitives

You are right that I was looking at the average minutes. Good point.

Here is a question. How would you suggest the GE be changed to make substitutions more realistic? When a guy misses five shots in a row he get pulled? When the other team's best scorer hits five in a row you change to a better defensive player to guard him? What if there are some managers who want their best guys in no matter how poorly they are playing? My point here is that it is impossible to satisfy every player's desire for substitution patterns and that subbing in real life is so situational as to be impossible to replicate in a computer simulation. If you have a suggestion, lay it out here or preferably in the Suggestions forum. Maybe something along the lines of a coaching choice similar to let them play/ sit them where the coach subs a guy who is "fresher but not better" "fresher and better" or "fresher and similar?"

I remember one of the BBs saying something a long time ago about the game not being real life and that having a bit of imagination is important to enjoy the game. The fact is that in order to effectively manage minutes, game shape, and training a manager is going to have to make some sacrifices. If that means leaving starters out of a game or playing starters as reserves once a week, that's what has to be done. I will suggest that having all of your players with STRONG stamina is not a very good managerial move.

I like the new tactics. I disagree that full court press or 1-3-1 zone are gimmick defenses in real life and I also disgaree that roles are unbelievably useless. That's what makes horse races, though.