BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Look Inside tactic STILL far too dominant!

Look Inside tactic STILL far too dominant!

Set priority
Show messages by
From: GM-hrudey

This Post:
00
245985.109 in reply to 245985.108
Date: 8/27/2013 9:24:18 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
I really think it is as simple as swapping IS and RB in the guard salary formula.

IF they do that those LI guards get very expensive. Not impossible to have, not killing LI outright, but a HUGE game changer at all levels of the game. With more cost on guard salary, people will think more about everything...hopefully.


That'll slow down the offensive part of it, but if you want to make an outside offense a more attractive alternative, you also need to have OD be expensive for PGs like it is for SGs. Swap OD and HN for example on the PG formula (and maybe for SGs as well) and suddenly it may not be so blatantly optimal to load up with OD and PA, since they could cause the same sort of harmonic salary explosion JR and OD do for SGs currently.


From: Steve Karenn

To: SM
This Post:
00
245985.110 in reply to 245985.98
Date: 8/27/2013 10:25:09 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
404404
Last season, I had a 4 player rotation at PG/SG/SF. The guards were each combo guards under 150k, the SF was 60k. Their JS/JR was 18/12, 18/13, 17/15, and 15/7. All four shot over 30% from 3, and three of the four had a FG% of 46%. The guard with 15 JR shot 38% from the field.

Unless the NBBA had an OD deficit I'm unaware of, it's very possible to build a competent outside team in a top division without spending an exorbitant amount on salary.

Then again, I don't know many teams that could match my OD that season (55952654), so perhaps the solution is to fight fire with fire. If the complaints about 2-3 are any indication, OD is just as important against inside offenses as it is against outside oriented teams.

So,are you saying us that a motion oriented team can work if they have three super good OD defenders(something like 20-20-19 and a perimetral defense much better than the ones that NTs have in BB)?
Yeah,that surely indicate to the avergae manager in BB that LI is not a too dominant tactic...

From: SM

This Post:
33
245985.111 in reply to 245985.110
Date: 8/27/2013 12:30:37 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
9494
So,are you saying us that a motion oriented team can work if they have three super good OD defenders(something like 20-20-19 and a perimetral defense much better than the ones that NTs have in BB)?
Yeah,that surely indicate to the avergae manager in BB that LI is not a too dominant tactic...


Those three high OD defenders all had salaries under 150K, if anything this is a case for motion's dominance. They were able to account for the majority of my team's offense and defense on their own, a feat comparable bigs wouldn't be able to accomplish. These weren't particularly difficult players to develop either, I never trained their secondaries. A high IS guard is much more challenging to create.

The fact that such a team, with a 35k PF and an 80k C (with proficient ID) could even compete with teams that have 15+ IS on their guards and monster bigs should say something about LI's dominance.


From: Vari3

To: SM
This Post:
44
245985.112 in reply to 245985.111
Date: 8/27/2013 2:07:56 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
2525
Ten seasons ago everyone would complain about how dominant outside offenses were.Then people started training uber-OD players,and offences shifted inside.It's chicken-egg case but people are really fast to scream OP!!

This Post:
00
245985.113 in reply to 245985.111
Date: 8/27/2013 3:48:54 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
455455
So,are you saying us that a motion oriented team can work if they have three super good OD defenders(something like 20-20-19 and a perimetral defense much better than the ones that NTs have in BB)?
Yeah,that surely indicate to the avergae manager in BB that LI is not a too dominant tactic...


Those three high OD defenders all had salaries under 150K, if anything this is a case for motion's dominance. They were able to account for the majority of my team's offense and defense on their own, a feat comparable bigs wouldn't be able to accomplish. These weren't particularly difficult players to develop either, I never trained their secondaries. A high IS guard is much more challenging to create.

The fact that such a team, with a 35k PF and an 80k C (with proficient ID) could even compete with teams that have 15+ IS on their guards and monster bigs should say something about LI's dominance.



Interesting. You do make a good point that you can likely create more talented guards than big men if given the same amount of salary to work with.

But I do think that the reverse probably works too. But/Create 2 front courts players with dominant inside skills but built like solid all-around PF's for about $350-400K in salary. Play them with 2 guards and a SF totaling $165-215K in salary. Make the SF with better inside than outside skills. With all the perimeter players, you don't need to spend salary on JR and you can go with low JS too. Pump up DR because it's cheap, spend the most $$$ on OD and make sure PS and HD are at decent levels so that you can feed the inside players the ball.

That starting 5 costs the same as your team and I feel that they would win.

From: Steve Karenn

To: SM
This Post:
22
245985.114 in reply to 245985.111
Date: 8/27/2013 6:44:16 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
404404
So,are you saying us that a motion oriented team can work if they have three super good OD defenders(something like 20-20-19 and a perimetral defense much better than the ones that NTs have in BB)?
Yeah,that surely indicate to the avergae manager in BB that LI is not a too dominant tactic...


Those three high OD defenders all had salaries under 150K, if anything this is a case for motion's dominance. They were able to account for the majority of my team's offense and defense on their own, a feat comparable bigs wouldn't be able to accomplish. These weren't particularly difficult players to develop either, I never trained their secondaries. A high IS guard is much more challenging to create.

The fact that such a team, with a 35k PF and an 80k C (with proficient ID) could even compete with teams that have 15+ IS on their guards and monster bigs should say something about LI's dominance.


I like how you missed the point here. It 's not like motion is dominating here, it's sky-high OD that is dominating here. You didn't show at all that motion is a legit alternative to LI at every level, you showed that if you have an OD better than every NT in the world, a team oriented on perimeter players can compete against inside oriented teams.
That's quite different

This Post:
11
245985.115 in reply to 245985.114
Date: 8/27/2013 7:46:35 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
I like how you missed the point here. It 's not like motion is dominating here, it's sky-high OD that is dominating here. You didn't show at all that motion is a legit alternative to LI at every level, you showed that if you have an OD better than every NT in the world, a team oriented on perimeter players can compete against inside oriented teams.
That's quite different


*yawn*

Clearly, it's impossible to compete with a high salary LI team with an outside offense unless you have NT-level defense. I mean, look at:
(59082488)

This is an unfair example of LI dominance, since the road team started three bigs at SF, PF and C with more combined salary than the entire home team's roster. Look at how those 100k+ big men tear apart the sub-25k salary players they're going against... wait, what? The outside team won?

Less extreme examples:
(59082452)
(62072101)

Now that we've seen more reasonable examples at a level average users can understand, you might want to look at the game SM linked to and realize that it was a 1-3-1 so the OD rating was inflated. Besides, even that doesn't tell the story - the OD on the PF and C are really not reflected at all in that rating but they're definitely important.


From: SM

This Post:
00
245985.118 in reply to 245985.114
Date: 8/27/2013 9:06:12 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
9494
I'm very aware of the point you're trying to make. All I'll say is it's much easier to build a high OD combo guard than a high OD LI guard. There's a reason I've been able to consistently beat LI with guards that have 19-20 OD (when 18 is very common), and bigs with less than 10 ID.

Advertisement