BuzzerBeater Forums

I really think the current system is working well and there is no need for making more negatives to using TIE than there already is.

If you have a good team TIE is absolutely about strategy especially in the top leagues.

I am winning games playing TIE consistently. Only when I face extreme opposition (for example the final of the Tournament) will I put Normal or CT. I lose very infrequently and do not need to play normal to beat the majority of other teams.

From what I can gather the effect of Enthusiasm on games will decrease which means that playing TIE in the long term will be less effective and you will just lose the games. Enthusiasm will also drop faster which makes it worse because not only will it be less important it will become impossible to win playing TIE and it will only last a short time.

The thing that bugs me about the entusiasm system as it is now, is that it reduces the play-offs into something resembling a game of rock-paper-scissor.

When planning a play-off run, team strength and tactical decisions take a back seat to enthusiasm management. You basically know that TIE will lose to normal, normal will lose to CT, and CT will lose you your next game. Thus it becomes guessing what the other team will throw out and trying to beat it.

That is strategy then isn't it?

You are guessing what strategy your opponent is using.

And I will just clarify one thing TIE can and does beat Normal if you have high enough Enthusiasm. And it can beat CT if the opposition doesn't have high enthusiasm.

There are a lot of factors in this game. Enthusiasm is just one of them. If I play TIE and expect to win I have to use tactical guesses.

Half the trick of winning is to fool your opposition into using the wrong defense and guess what they are planning to use for offense.

I never said it wasn't strategy, just that it mattered too much and rendered other aspects of the game moot.

And yes, the relationships do not always hold, but I was speaking of a relatively competetive conference where teams are roughly equal.

Half the trick of winning is to fool your opposition into using the wrong defense and guess what they are planning to use for offense.

Not if the other team CT's and you normal (assuming both teams are near similar to each other) unless you already had a lot of enthusiasm built up you will lose 99% of the time regardless of offensive or defensive tactics.

TIE and CT is a ****** System. for example:
i just won in the tournament sami-finals... against a Very strong team than in order to win i played CT, and now in the finals im playing againt a weaker team than me' but they will probably win because even if i use CT my enthusiasm is only 2... so basicly no matter what option i would have chosen(go normal in the sami-finals and loss or go CT and lose the finals...) i GOT ******.

EDIT: Watch your language

Edited by GM-JuicePats (12/12/2007 8:41:49 PM CET)

Last edited by Shay at 12/12/2007 8:41:49 PM

Umm, i wouldn't say that losing to a better team means you got screwed. I would think you would be happy because it seems you went one round further than you should have thanks to the enthusiasm system.

it seems you went one round further than you should have thanks to the enthusiasm system.

what about his oppenent in his semis. In my opininion he is screwed. he would have probably lost anyways. Now he lost the semis. If he would have played CT, then he would have probably won the semis, but loose the finals...

Here I would definitely agree with you and is basically the reason why I'm hoping the effect of enthusiasm is reduced by a lot. If we just look at these three teams it seems not right that the strongest team gets knocked out first because he ran into a lesser team that was willing to punt his enthusiasm leaving no chance at the final, just to get one more round.

Look the point of a system like this is to make it difficult.

If someone crunch times your team you will not lose every time. It is very important to watch every opponent you face to see whether they will crunch time you or not. If you think they have built up their enthusiasm (look at their ratings) and for them you look like a challenging team then you need to either play normal or crunch time them as well. If you have been playing with strategy and have your enthusiasm very high (i.e. 11) then you can go normal and have a very decent chance of winning and still not lose much enthusiasm.

Making the game easier is not the job of the BBs. It isn't that hard to figure out how to play this game. Enthusiasm or no Enthusiasm will just make the community complain about how unfair something else is, when really you are playing a game they reflects as well as a game can how basketball is in real life.

Id like to remind you that its your opinion that this system works, if someone else has a different opinion thats their right. Essentially calling them crybabies isn't constructive. If you disagree with their posts stick to that rather than take shots about how the community will complain regardless of how an issue is resolved.

I don't THINK the majority of the players in the community build up to and sit on a 10-11 enthusiasm rating. Your assuming that thats just the way to play might be a little off, Im hoping the changes soon to be brought in help make the system more managable.

A weak team should not be able to wreck a better team off their effort alone, thats supposedly fixed and I think that will help out.

Just my two cents, but put me down as not liking the TIE/CT system one bit; not because I lost or won, but because I see no basis in reality for this system. As others have pointed out, professional players don't need to be told a game is important.

As to the 'it makes for a better strategy game, well it doesn't for me. If there are to be strategic choices, let's come up with better ones.

In reality, telling a group of athletes that it's crunch time, so dig down and give me all you've got does not always work. Many players choke under pressure and if you tell them 'this is the most important game of your life' they will collapse into quaking heaps of nerves on the dressing room floor. An exaggeration, obviously, but this does happen often enough to make the certainty of the CT effect unrealistic.

My suggestion is to make the effect of CT not foreordained to work. That is, there would be a two-thirds chance (percentages to be determined, perhaps your trainers rating would apply here, too) you'd get the benefit and one-third possibility your morale would drop instead because your team panicked and choked.

That would add a realistic risk to the choice, and even though I'm not enthusiastic about it, I think this suggestion would at least place an element of risk in the choice to play CT. And make for a better game of strategy.