BuzzerBeater Forums

Help - English > OK you convinced me....ODIS experiment

OK you convinced me....ODIS experiment

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
288297.27 in reply to 288297.25
Date: 7/6/2017 12:53:28 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
Points in the paint is probably not at all doable since I don't know how you'd identify that, but it would still be nice to have for funsies.
Not possible there is no indication anywhere in the play-by-play source about where the shots is taken from or the distance. You only have the type of shot: 3 pointer, fade away, driving layup, jump shot, dunk, alley hoop etc.

I think second chance shots is doable because after a missed shot, if possession doesn't change, the next shot is a second chance shot.
it requires a lot of fiddling because:
1) you need an offensive rebound
2) the same player who got the rebound needs to shoot the ball in the next few seconds
It's not as simple as: "possession doesn't change", because the game has those genius rebounds out of bounds and also contested balls which don't change who has possession of the ball. Also you need to rule out all the situations when a player passes the ball after the offensive rebound, which is the tricky part (because the same guy can take the shot after several passes have been made and 20 seconds have gone by).


On these, I wasn't suggesting user-created tools, more of a wish list of things I wish were available in the actual box score/live viewer. I don't even know if points in the paint would be possible with the current engine, because I'm not sure how accurate the position of shots being taken actually is (if the position is calculated and displayed correctly in the viewer, it would be possible but I expect that's not very precise).

Second chance points is a team stat. Basically, if the team misses a shot (and isn't fouled), but retains possession, any points they then score before losing possession are second-chance points. It'd be something that can be useful at a glance to see how much rebounding is helping or hurting a team in a given match - if you hold a team to 25% shooting but they rebound half of their misses then they'll have roughly 50% effective shooting per possession (at least, on possessions they don't have a turnover).

This Post:
00
288297.28 in reply to 288297.27
Date: 7/6/2017 1:15:51 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
14901490
I thought you were talking about putbacks specifically.

Re: rebounding. I know first hand that it's a huge problem: (97117247). I had the best rebounder among all players in that game and in the second quarter I lost the game because my opponent grabbed 50% of their offensive rebound opportunities. Guard trainees with low rebounding kills your rates especially on the road (I also had my second highest paid player injured).

This Post:
00
288297.29 in reply to 288297.21
Date: 7/6/2017 5:41:47 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
120120
Do we really want any random manager coming into this game to emediatly be able to catch up to any team in the game that actually has spent rl years of time to achieve that position?
That's better than never being able to catch up because the economy is broken and there are no means to make enough money and catch up.

So if your question is in relation to the current state of the game the answer should be unequivocally YES and I would like the BBs and you, the staff, to understand this.

The same point could be made in general, as strategy and management games should reward ability or commitment not length of subscription. Older managers have more experience, have a built up arena, have player capital, have a lot going for them...that you guys want it to be hard or impossible for newer users to catch up is beyond illogical. The game is already hard as it is for new users, I think a lot of them quit not because they don't win games, but because they understand how long it will actually take them to be able to progress in the game and since they haven't invested much time yet, they have very little reason to stick around if they think the time is too long.


There's so much common sense and logic and truth in what you said...

Would anyone play madden if it forced them to take the Jaguars to a Super Bowl win before they could play as any other team or change a setting or game mode?

Or if the NBA games made you turn around the 76ers and win a championship before you could do anything else?

That's the analogy I came up with to agree with your point.

Coming in as new managers, takes ridiculous time investments, trial and error learning, and asking questions, to enter to a point of winning or trainees coming how you want, or "fun"

Even seasoned BB managers who leave and come back, still need multiple seasons, to get to any semblance of point and they come in with a ton more knowledge and head start than brand new managers.

When did BB become a monarchy, where meritocracy exists in the slimmest of fashion overcoming the harshest of elements? And instead everything else is based off how old ones bloodline/team is, and their "noble birth"

This Post:
00
288297.30 in reply to 288297.29
Date: 7/6/2017 5:49:40 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
[quote=RandyMoss]Would anyone play madden if it forced them to take the Jaguars to a Super Bowl win before they could play as any other team or change a setting or game mode?

I'm going to let that slide because Randy Moss was a freaking joy to watch, but as bad as the Jaguars have been they've been the worst team in the league exactly as many times as Minnesota has won Super Bowls, and their playoff drought is only about half that of Buffalo. ;)

On the actual topic, the problem with persistent, long-term and slow developing games is exactly that - how to get new players competitive in a timeframe that doesn't completely delegitimize the time investment a similarly-skilled manager who joined a year or two earlier has made. I don't have any pull there and I'm not sure I have any good ideas if I were someone who did have sway, but I agree that it's problematic - it's just the nature of this type of game.

This Post:
00
288297.31 in reply to 288297.30
Date: 7/6/2017 5:54:59 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
120120
I used jaguars as Brady is old there in AFC E

Where Jaguars have young mariotta, luck, and a good hou team lacking QB to contend with for years.

Browns similar to bills as Flacco and Rothelisberger are up there in years.

Bears could have been an option... but they just took a QB who might pan out.
So Jaguars seemed Defacto to me personally.

Last edited by RandyMoss at 7/6/2017 5:55:44 PM

This Post:
00
288297.32 in reply to 288297.30
Date: 7/6/2017 5:55:31 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
26152615
This was a good suggestion I saw about new managers rosters to get them involved and more competitive more quickly:

Another thought to expand on this. Have the new manager be given like an expansion draft.

Option 1: give the new manager a player pool of say 20 players and the manager picks the 12 or so players they want to start with.

Option 2: same as above with a player pool, except assign a dollar amount for each player. The new manager could be given more than the 300K we start with and use that money to buy players from the pool that they want. The money they dont spend they keep.

- An example of this is just like daily fantasy sports. Your given 100 dollars and you try and build the best lineup you can based on player values.

Murray/Harris/MPJ/Grant/Jokic - 2020 NBA Champs
This Post:
00
288297.33 in reply to 288297.32
Date: 7/6/2017 6:48:04 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
14901490
I saw that too. I'm proud the suggestion came from a new English user although others also contributed and I agree.

This Post:
00
288297.34 in reply to 288297.32
Date: 7/6/2017 7:42:55 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
This was a good suggestion I saw about new managers rosters to get them involved and more competitive more quickly:

Another thought to expand on this. Have the new manager be given like an expansion draft.

Option 1: give the new manager a player pool of say 20 players and the manager picks the 12 or so players they want to start with.

Option 2: same as above with a player pool, except assign a dollar amount for each player. The new manager could be given more than the 300K we start with and use that money to buy players from the pool that they want. The money they dont spend they keep.

- An example of this is just like daily fantasy sports. Your given 100 dollars and you try and build the best lineup you can based on player values.


I kind of like that. I don't think it's a full solution by any means but it's definitely an improvement, which is sadly where the I have no pull factor comes into play.

Message deleted
From: WardoYT
This Post:
00
288297.37 in reply to 288297.34
Date: 7/7/2017 2:36:13 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
9595
Me and my students of the game who I teach on here has a very distinctive strategy to get ahead of new players and seasoned Div Iv players. I have had a lot of success with my strategy and my 1st student is starting to produce positive results as well. If you give players the option of loaning more than 300k and 500k overextension tax then my teachings are invalid and I will have to start over on them.

Advertisement