BuzzerBeater Forums

I have built an all around passing team, and i say that i prefer motion over RnG 99/100 times. I am using that route for the last 2 seasons. Result? 2 cups and 1 'ship, and the 2nd one is just a matter of time to come.

The truth is that BB doesnt have a ''holly grave''. Everything its relative and depends on your personnel.

Now on the subject. If you have stronger handling team than passing team, then fast pace tactics is the way to go. If passing is stronger, then slower tactics. If you have both, my personal preference is the slower, but yet i dont like patient or the neutral tactics when i face similar teams to mine.

Just my 2 cents.

facts that the risk of a turnover per second is lower with slow paced tacitc.

what facts? can you show them?

if we could search news item, yes. actually not ;) It was a point mentioned during the engine change, or maybe during a ask a BB day that slower pace means less risk to turn the ball over during the passes, so that the to prohability is comparable to faster pace tactics.

i prefer is generally too, and mostly play motion ;)

But the question is, did you regulary did meet teams who play a competive fcp teams and what would you play against them.

There is no contradiction. A quick shot in a slow paced attack will be easier against FCP. I only wrote that because I was not sure what you were saying. Explain yourself, why do you see a contradiction and why do you think it's different from what you are saying ?.

About slow pace, more passes for the FCP to force a TO but better looks for the attack, it's a trade off. You seem to assume it's always better to go for the worst looks. So say it clearly and explain why you think so, that's what mathcorejay is asking for.

i can't see why? slow pace - better looks, fast pace - quick shots. difference in defense and offense levels between you and your opponent makes slow pace sometimes better and sometimes worse.

Why do you think it's different against the FCP than against another defence ?

Comparatively low OF, you wouldn't play slow against FCP but low OF, you are in trouble if you play slow against any defence anyway because you won't produce the high quality looks required for a shot attempt. Comparatively high OF, you wouldn't play slow against FCP, you'd play fast because your players good at handling and passing would beat the defence easily. And that's what OF shows, the team capacity to create quality shots and that's against any defence.
From what you are saying, I don't understand when you'd play slow since the points you make are worth against any defence. I am sure you don't always play fast so please elaborate your toughts.

We have started discussing because of the game against BC Lavonai. FCP worked because of his low OF, pace was irrelevant. I have just reread your posts, I don't know why we are arguing since we have identical views :/


Last edited by Manouche at 11/25/2010 6:51:38 PM

Well i gave my answer there too, i think...Its all about your team's strength/weakness and everything its relative...

Well i gave my answer there too, i think...Its all about your team's strength/weakness and everything its relative...

i think what would be your first choiche, is your team is equality fitted for fast and slow strategies, against a normal defence?

Well I'm not sure how true is your statement, but I kinda disagree about this. Slower tactics don't necessarily have to be for strong passers. Back in my first few seasons, my PGs have the best handling in the country, but their passing sucks (I had to train their shooting at the expense of passing after I found out that no matter how good your offensive flow is, if you got lousy shooters, you still lose). Yet I've never had any problem facing FCP teams with slow tactics. Any explanation here?

What i am saying, is that TO can be produced by 2 factors. Bad handling or bad passing or both. So fast tactics using less passing, and its more on the respective player to create his scoring opportunities than the others create them for him (as the slower paced tactics). Having both of course, is giving you the chance to decide what to play. I am saying exactly what manual says, plus giving the importance of passing for the slower tactics.

Now about the passing/slower tactics. From my experience playing both RnG/motion i saw the % of my players going up considerably. In sum up i will take less shooting/more passing, and i still believe that i will have the same result (or better) with lower salary. On my PG +1 on JS means 12k salary more, +2 on PA no salary affect...

Now about the explanation that you are asking, i dont have either any problems with that. Why? 1st i consider FCP the worse D tactic on the game, 2nd since the players getting tired faster, so you need good bench to keep it up, 3rd if you are much better team, you will win anyway.

well, but if you are not a much better team, but rather about as strong or slightly weaker as your opponent, you won't win anyway and that's the reason I was asking the question originally.

I'll probably decide later on how to approach all of this. There's still 24h left, after all.

i think smedlock has pointed out perfectly what is FCP. its easy to decide if you read his post.