BuzzerBeater Forums

A clutch player raises its performance.

Just a question for clarification. The original suggestion does not explicitly consider this sort of performance boost. It is only about choosing a preferred player for clutch plays. I understand this is not your interpretation or suggestion. So, is your suggestion to introduce an additional skill or trait for each player, or is it to simply give a boost for any player who is selected as a clutch player? I think both options are something that can be considered, but from the game play/design point of view they have different implications.

Let me explain what I mean and discuss the implications a little further. I will start with the latter, since it is the simple option. You select a player and he gets a (mostly scoring-related) skill boost for whatever plays the game engine considers a clutch play. Assuming this is already handled in some way in GE, the selected player is thus automatically more likely to take a shot (and score). This is potentially not a very difficult change to the GE. From the game play point of view, the choice is not necessarily a very challenging one but it should give some new variation in tactical choice. I have difficulty in seeing what is the real downside of the choice. It all seems strongly tied to your selected offensive tactic, which you can either enhance further or give a small safety net by making the clutch player decision. If you have a hero player who you can only make stronger, is the choice not obvious and thus not really interesting?

The other option is to give each player a new (hidden?) skill or ability to act as an effective clutch player. Thus, the manager sets his preferred clutch player and this player is given more weight in clutch plays. This is closer to how I understand the original suggestion, which has the disadvantage that the GE really needs some major work to make the suggestion in any way useful (based on what we know and can assume about the GE). This option however has one benefit over the original suggestion: the player now has a skill that directly affects the outcome. If it is a hidden skill, it would not even be as important to smartly rebalance the GE decision logic.

As I see it, the manager could override the "optimal" GE choices and force (or make significantly more likely) a certain decision, i.e. the decision to create the clutch player a scoring opportunity. By default, this is a suboptimal choice by the manager (it is important that you can make both a good and a bad decision). It also weakens your chances if you choose an otherwise good/hero player who is a weak clutch player. If the skill is shown, you will not make this decision (which suggests it should be a hidden skill). The obvious upside is that you can improve your chances, if you select a strong clutch player. I see that this would reward users who study their games and know their team. Thus, it is a fairly nice suggestion as such. I however think it needs some work in the GE. I don't mean this as critique of the suggestion, I mean it as a reality check.

There is an easy way to create a third option, which is to combine the other two. This would make it possible to have a "new player type" in the game: a role player who is a very strong clutch player. However, it would diminish the risk of selecting your hero player for clutch plays. It could also make the hero player with a good clutch ability too powerful. The third option would therefore need much more work, probably some balancing based on player skills or something.

Let me explain what I mean and discuss the implications a little further. I will start with the latter, since it is the simple option. You select a player and he gets a (mostly scoring-related) skill boost for whatever plays the game engine considers a clutch play

if you force someone to take a shot, i believe his shooting percentage will decline instead of raise.

The hidden skill could work and maybe get easier, since it might work as a Xp bonus in the calculation and may use there formulas within(or maybe already have them).

if you force someone to take a shot, i believe his shooting percentage will decline instead of raise.

I agree that this option does not seem entirely realistic, but more importantly I feel there is no real game-play benefit in this option.

Xp helps you to keep cool on those situations, which makes you make a shot with 60 percent in this situation instead of 50 percent since you are nervous.

Now you begin with "inventing the wheel"...
Experience player is not the better clutch player in a team.
Experience just make him take shots with better percentage, and not making him better at those moments.

A clutch player raises its performance.

Just a question for clarification. The original suggestion does not explicitly consider this sort of performance boost. It is only about choosing a preferred player for clutch plays. I understand this is not your interpretation or suggestion.

This is a line that only who reads the last line, and does not read the full context, will say/write.
The discussion had been about choosing a clutch player - one who will take a larger percentage of the shots at the clutch time.
Some, ridicolusly pointed that the experience is relevant for choosing who he is.
I pointed out that there is no connection between the two, and gave more than a couple of examples to explain that.
Then, we started a discussion about the implication of having a clutch player.

Summary - Choosing your clutch player (the one who will take more shots at clutch moments) is a good suggestion.
In addition, having a "Clutch" ability, hidden or not (and maybe it is already part of the game and we do not know it...), is a good suggestion, and as written there is no connection with the "Experience" ability.

Last edited by Pini פיני at 3/8/2012 4:52:31 PM

A clutch player raises its performance.

So, is your suggestion to introduce an additional skill or trait for each player, or is it to simply give a boost for any player who is selected as a clutch player? I think both options are something that can be considered, but from the game play/design point of view they have different implications.

1) A user should get the option to choose his clutch player who will take more shots during clutch moments (as been suggested here).
2) There should be a "Clutch" ability that will make the specific player better (by small degree) during clutch moments.
Remark - Experience means taking better shots, and not making the harder ones better.

Let me explain what I mean and discuss the implications a little further. I will start with the latter, since it is the simple option. You select a player and he gets a (mostly scoring-related) skill boost for whatever plays the game engine considers a clutch play.

Now that I read this, I'm not sure that just offensive skill is relevant.
Maybe per skill one should have also skill during clutch time?...

For example: Inside deffence - 12 (13). 12 is the ID ability during most of the game. 13 is that player ability during clutch-time (last shot on a quarter, the last couple of minutes of the game.

Assuming this is already handled in some way in GE, the selected player is thus automatically more likely to take a shot (and score).

Again - a clutch player with low experience is expected to take bad shots, but to shoot them better.
There are times that it will be better that he wouldn't take that awfull shot, and just pass the ball, but due to his lack of experience he will take the shot although there is enough time to pass the ball and find a better one.

This is potentially not a very difficult change to the GE. From the game play point of view, the choice is not necessarily a very challenging one but it should give some new variation in tactical choice. I have difficulty in seeing what is the real downside of the choice.

It all seems strongly tied to your selected offensive tactic, which you can either enhance further or give a small safety net by making the clutch player decision. If you have a hero player who you can only make stronger, is the choice not obvious and thus not really interesting?

I don't really see a connection between this two sentences, but who says that one will choose to clutch his best player?
Again, if we will take the real-BB game, maybe that is "the catch".
You will choose your second-best player to take clutch shot at a specific game, and the tactic of BAO will go strong on your best player, which will leave that player a little bit more free to take and make that shot.

Last edited by Pini פיני at 3/8/2012 5:12:34 PM

A clutch player raises its performance.

The other option is to give each player a new (hidden?) skill or ability to act as an effective clutch player. Thus, the manager sets his preferred clutch player and this player is given more weight in clutch plays. This is closer to how I understand the original suggestion, which has the disadvantage that the GE really needs some major work to make the suggestion in any way useful (based on what we know and can assume about the GE). This option however has one benefit over the original suggestion: the player now has a skill that directly affects the outcome. If it is a hidden skill, it would not even be as important to smartly rebalance the GE decision logic.

Not hard at all.
1) Selecting a player who will take most of the shots can be easily done by updating the passing pattern.
Currently there is some formula that choses which player will get the ball from current player who posses it. Add the clutch player selection to this formula and that's it.
2) Player's clutch ability could easilly be taken, during clutch time, instead of the "regular" ones.

As I see it, the manager could override the "optimal" GE choices and force (or make significantly more likely) a certain decision, i.e. the decision to create the clutch player a scoring opportunity. By default, this is a suboptimal choice by the manager (it is important that you can make both a good and a bad decision). It also weakens your chances if you choose an otherwise good/hero player who is a weak clutch player. If the skill is shown, you will not make this decision (which suggests it should be a hidden skill). The obvious upside is that you can improve your chances, if you select a strong clutch player. I see that this would reward users who study their games and know their team. Thus, it is a fairly nice suggestion as such. I however think it needs some work in the GE. I don't mean this as critique of the suggestion, I mean it as a reality check.

I support hidden due to the same reason - it will give bonus to those who actually watch players' games before buying them, etc.
Selecting your best player wo be your clutch player for a specific game as its drawbacks as well.
This desicion is something a coach takes on those game - should we use Jordan as a clutch player, or as a bait and pass the ball to Paxon (the best example that I could thought of)...

There is an easy way to create a third option, which is to combine the other two. This would make it possible to have a "new player type" in the game: a role player who is a very strong clutch player. However, it would diminish the risk of selecting your hero player for clutch plays. It could also make the hero player with a good clutch ability too powerful. The third option would therefore need much more work, probably some balancing based on player skills or something.

I like it less.
I prefer an option where the user has more affect on the game, and where he is rewarded for performing better BB-managing skills.

Hence, I prefer that a user could choose his clutch-player for a game.
I like the idea that a user could learn who is a better clutch player.
etc.

Let me explain what I mean and discuss the implications a little further. I will start with the latter, since it is the simple option. You select a player and he gets a (mostly scoring-related) skill boost for whatever plays the game engine considers a clutch play

if you force someone to take a shot, i believe his shooting percentage will decline instead of raise.

The hidden skill could work and maybe get easier, since it might work as a Xp bonus in the calculation and may use there formulas within(or maybe already have them).

If you force Bryant to take a shot his percentage may decline (w/o taking in consideration that during clutch minutes he plays better - the second part of this suggestion), but he still will shoot better than Fisher.
So overall, this selection is what usually will happen at the Lakers.

As written in previous message, it could work also the other way around.
A team could go stronger against the best offensive player during clutch time of generally (BAO), and by choosing the second best as the clutch player, he will get more shots that may be better (deffended "lighter") than that top-player.

From the game play point of view, the choice is not necessarily a very challenging one but it should give some new variation in tactical choice. I have difficulty in seeing what is the real downside of the choice.

It all seems strongly tied to your selected offensive tactic, which you can either enhance further or give a small safety net by making the clutch player decision. If you have a hero player who you can only make stronger, is the choice not obvious and thus not really interesting?

I don't really see a connection between this two sentences, but who says that one will choose to clutch his best player?

What I mean is that a simple skill boost has no drawback. It should be fairly easy to find a setting that just works and then practically never change it. The hidden-skill method, on the other hand, introduces a potential tradeoff and is therefore a more interesting game-play element.

Again, if we will take the real-BB game, maybe that is "the catch".

The problem is that the BB GE is basically more objective and consistent than any real-life player or coach. I am not arguing it is better, but it is more consistent and blind to showmanship, super stars, and fan favourites. It finds the objectively best solution, not what a sports fan or a coach feels is the best way to go. The users will exploit this behaviour.

From the game play point of view, the choice is not necessarily a very challenging one but it should give some new variation in tactical choice. I have difficulty in seeing what is the real downside of the choice.

It all seems strongly tied to your selected offensive tactic, which you can either enhance further or give a small safety net by making the clutch player decision. If you have a hero player who you can only make stronger, is the choice not obvious and thus not really interesting?

I don't really see a connection between this two sentences, but who says that one will choose to clutch his best player?

What I mean is that a simple skill boost has no drawback. It should be fairly easy to find a setting that just works and then practically never change it. The hidden-skill method, on the other hand, introduces a potential tradeoff and is therefore a more interesting game-play element.

I will give a better suggestion to something I already suggested.
If one can choose his clutch player, it will be interesting to give also a clutch minutes defence.
That will allow the defender to choose whether to play the same or play BAO on a specific player, one that is chosen on the game tactics.
This will make it like the real-BB game, where one can decide to go stronger on the "Bryant"-player at those clutch moments, and get it from the "Fisher"-player, as the opponent tricked and decided that on that game the clutch player is not "Bryant" but "Fisher".

Both hidden and not hidden clutch skills (which is parallel to the previous paragraph I wrote), are thing that as pros and cons.
The hidden option will make the user who learn his own team roster (or a player to buy on the market) an advantage, as should be.
I prefer that.

Again, if we will take the real-BB game, maybe that is "the catch".

The problem is that the BB GE is basically more objective and consistent than any real-life player or coach. I am not arguing it is better, but it is more consistent and blind to showmanship, super stars, and fan favourites. It finds the objectively best solution, not what a sports fan or a coach feels is the best way to go. The users will exploit this behavior.I argue it is just not true. It has randomness to choose whether to pass, shoot, dribble or drive to the basket.
It passes upon another randomness decision.
Both randomness methods are not fully random, and are affected by the experience of that player, upon tactics and upon time left to the possession.