BuzzerBeater Forums

Fair enough. As I said for Misagh when there was much complaining about him tanking in order to win the B3, I think it's very legitimate to tank for whatever reason, as long as people are coherent.

Last message offtopic from me as well.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 2/17/2015 2:59:15 PM

What's with so many GMs tanking?

We all know the answer to that. Training is so screwed up that it is almost impossible to play to win and train at the same time.
Evidence:

If you want to know why im tanking ill tell you though. Im totally rebuilding my team with brand new trainees that im building from scratch. And there is no place for a team that does just that in the top league.

There couldn’t be a clearer demonstration than that of how screwed up training is.


By the way:

Some people who have told us that they enjoy the challenge in the game and are here explaining to younger managers what they should do, but do they apply those suggestions to themselves?

No, they are in high divisions and think only of high divisions, just like the guy who said this: “A lower potential player is almost never a better choice, under any circumstance, except if you don't have money upfront” is thinking only of high divisions. In his zeal to bad-mouth the GM's someone sounds like the pot calling the kettle black.

I promised not to post off topic again but you're tempting. I gave reasons, as to why given a set of skills, I believe it is often the superior choice to have a higher potential player even if you're in D5. It has to do with the economy and the profit you can make when you don't need the player anymore or when he becomes too expensive for your league level. This game is mostly an economy balancing exercise. This clearly is regulated by how the market prices potential, at some point potential may cost too much, but in a shrinking market pool potential is a scarce resource which is becoming rarer as old players are retiring.

Training, that horrible thing you despise so much, increases the value of your assets. The smart choice is to invest in what guarantees you the biggest return and/or flexibility. We can make a study of the players under 25 currently being sold and see if there is a correlation in net profit (sale price-salaries-trainer cost-purchase price) per penny invested and potential. Since the cost of training is relatively fixed having an asset going from 1 million to 2 million value is generally more valuable than having one going from 200k to 400k. Keep in mind that there were only 2 other investment opportunities in the game, building the arena and daytrading, the former is not available to everyone and the latter was effectively killed by the recent changes.

Coming back to the topic, do you have any views on tactics? It can't be that Mr. Glass is the only one staying on topic here.

Shall we mention and discuss that Marin in one of his posts has acknowledged that inside tactics are still too good and that OD is probably overpowered?

Last edited by Lemonshine at 2/17/2015 6:24:42 PM

I have already don't that before.. sb and 3-2 one and in a championship.

In order not to expound off topic, I'll just say that I disagree with most of your post, mostly because your post comes from a point of a daytrader and I come from a point of a basketball manager.

Basketball manager and basketball coach are not the same thing. Going by your definitions, GM=daytrader and coach=basketball manager. In real life it does not work like that. I have played basketball in a national league in Europe, I have also taught kids for a couple of years before I busted my knee. Economy, roster composition, salary decisions are all things only a GM would manage, not a coach. Training, tactics, depth chart are things basketball managers do not decide, the coach does. They are different jobs. However in this game, as a GM, you also take over some of the coach responsibilities and that's where the confusion arises.

If you see this game as a "pure GM game" don't you agree that we shouldn't even be talking about tactics or training, which is the topic of the thread? The truth is you can't just classify this game with a clear cut real life terms, since it is just a game drawing elements from various aspects of basketball: the game, the coaching and the management, without being exactly any of them.

Now back to tactics please. The OP asked if we believe there are other viable tactics among the "balanced" range. Marin Said LI/LP are still overpowered and OD is overpowered (in stopping 3 pointers), so there might be some changes in the future which improve outside/balanced tactics. Since you alternate BO to LI/LP you surely have something to contribute to the discussion. At least if you think your team performs better in BO rather than PTB or II, which is something many would probably not agree with.

Why are you so eager to put words in my mouth that I didn't say? Please forget the personalities and stick to a discussion of BB. Thank you.

Base offense is dead in my opinion.

The idea behind tactics is to give your team an advantage such that if u had a slightly worse team on paper, tactically you could give your team an advantage.

With everyone playing M2M defense the only way you would win with BO is if ur team is better on paper. Ie your best players will beat his best players. (Generalising a bit here).
Which is fine but tactically totally useless.

I totally agree with you. BO is an inferior tactic even when only considering balanced tactics. If you have favourable matchups PTB, II and Patient would give you an even bigger edge.

That's why I invited someone who routinely alternate inside with it to explain why he chooses BO over other balanced tactics since this was the focus of the thread from the opening post. Maybe there's something we're missing.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 2/18/2015 7:59:05 PM

i think its a default position that people take, because they don't want to use an outside based offence, and have not experimented with II or OO and obviously don't want to use Princeton.

thus this leaves them with BO, Patient, or PTB

PTB tends to highlight some stamina issues, so people play safe and go BO.

That's what I used to do anyways. had a fair bit of success with OI recently. Probably be giving II a go during my Private League games, see what benefits I get out of that.