BuzzerBeater Forums

This IS right, but what you said is not always what is happening.
Just my opinion, no need to answer (off-topic, use of capital letter... we deserve to be banned, ;-)))

This is the first time i've been able to get a chance to read this thread... i'd say by the large degree of attention its getting and the examples that have been posted that in some cases it is a little too easy for the GE to string together a sequence of rapid events. I wouldn't call it a bug in that I think I understand what is happening and why... but in general I think i need to figure out a way to make it take a little longer to get shot attempts up after full court inbound plays... 2 seconds is only really reasonable for a desperation three.

Now i'd contend that there isn't anything wrong with the 4/4 performance of 3's that was listed as the first component. I would suspect that if you look at the 3 point percentage at the end of games across all games that there isn't a statistically significant effect... and if anything there is a decrease.

However the 2 seconds per event I think is probably happening more often than it should and i should look to redesign things to address this.

i guess I would ask the community whether other than the speed at which shots are taken, whether the logic the teams seem to be following in the new game engine are better and preferred as to what was happening before.

Regarding the two seconds full court play:
this is only possible if the play involves a long pass, and a quick shot.
In real life, the majority of these long passes are intercepted or gets out of bounds.
A shot like Derrick Sharp's against Zhalghiris is pretty rare,
http://youtube.com/watch?v=R2-McbenSbc
but it seems that in BB it can happen few times during the same match...

But in BB, it doesn't happen very often that the best team in the world plays against a high school team. The game I was referring to was between two teams in the same conference.

Great. This is exactly the type of answer I was looking for, and I thank you for responding so quickly.

I absolutely agree with you that the main problem with what happened (and in general what is happening) is the time it takes for the team that is rallying to either shoot the 3 or commit a foul. Right now it almost gives the impression that the GE is programmed to do one or the other exactly every two seconds.
The 4/4 from three point range can be considered somewhat of an aberration that is bound to happen with so many games played. In fact, I've seen other games that have had this type of final sequence, and the percentage of 3 pointers made was always around 50% (give or take a 3). What remained constant was the time factor. Exactly 2 seconds to commit the foul and no more than 3 (but in the vast majority of the times 2) to take the 3 point shot.

IMO the logic is fine (except for maybe sometimes when the losing team commits an intentional foul down by 7 or 8 points and the clock at 00:00, but that really has no effect on the final score). Stop the clock and shoot the 3 is exactly what I would want my team to do. The only thing I would change is the fact that the team in the lead should sub in all its best FT shooters, regardless of position. That does not seem to be happening right now.

Furthermore,

On a game between a world-class team and an High school team they wouldn't need this desperate full court passes.

I must kinda agree

The game is about 48mins and shouldnt be entirely changed within the last 30 seconds.. which has also happend to me a lot.

When I stopped watching basket in TV, I had the following thinking: In this sport, you don´t need to see the whole match because most often you just need to see the last 5 min! So I guess, the GE is working fine by simulating this.

In general, I think the end of the games it is NOW better than before the changes (maybe BB-Forrest wants some feedback about this).