BuzzerBeater Forums

Help - English > This game is bad

This game is bad (thread closed)

Set priority
Show messages by
From: GM-Eran
This Post:
22
227544.4 in reply to 227544.1
Date: 9/25/2012 3:50:53 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
341341
You played a walkover game, your argumnet is invalid. you won 25-0, none of your players even played. What you've seen is total **** worth nothing, that basicly didn't happen.

Last edited by Fluff at 9/27/2012 2:40:53 AM

This Post:
00
227544.5 in reply to 227544.3
Date: 9/25/2012 4:02:18 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
22
When it comes to the FG %:

My former PF was 26-37 (70%), with 4-7 3pt. He was inept IS with respectable JS and low JR.
My shooting guard is 14-36 (39%) with 2-12 3pt. He is strong JS and JR, with respectable IS.

Looking at my current players, he is the 2nd worse at FG % and 3rd worse at 3pt %, even though at shooting alone he is straight up the best player I have.

He only played 3 games but I'm not seeing how this will even out that much more. I've been watching games and he's consistently the one who scores less in %.

To add insult to injury, his Game Shape has been top notch, being 8 for 2 games, and 9 for the last game.




The player rating overall I guess it's somewhat consistent, what really isn't is the scoring/defending rating with the PP100.

Looking at this (I'm the right side):

inept (medium) Outside Scoring inept (medium)
inept (medium) Inside Scoring pitiful (high)
pitiful (medium) Perimeter Defense inept (medium)
pitiful (high) Inside Defense inept (low)

My C and PF had the most PP100. Yet my inside scoring is considerably lower than outside scoring, and their inside defense is better than outside defense.

When I saw this, I quickly realized that the statistics this game provides are not to be trusted, and therefore I was disappointed I can't make up tactics based on it because this feature is completly broken and makes no sense.

Last edited by Vicestab at 9/25/2012 4:03:47 PM

From: Vicestab

This Post:
00
227544.7 in reply to 227544.6
Date: 9/25/2012 4:21:42 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
22
When it comes to comparing PF to SG, well, then this is just a proof that either the game benefits too much inside OR that the game has too much randomness? 70% FG with inept inside shooting is way better than my SG? In theory training a SG to this level would take more effort than training that PF I had.

And how does the team rating/PP100 thing I presented makes any sense btw? You say it's too complex, well I just think it's too BS. No way such a big gap in skills can lead to this randomness without something being wrong. I'm not betting in the stars aligning because it only happens once in a billion years.

And yes 3 games is not much but then I'll send you a message in 1 week when the same thing happens again and my SG still has bad FG %. With high game shape too.

Last edited by Vicestab at 9/25/2012 4:24:25 PM

This Post:
00
227544.8 in reply to 227544.5
Date: 9/25/2012 4:24:31 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
99
I fear you see only half of the problem.

This game, as basketball in real life, is all about matchups. Add to that that that big men are always more efficient in real life, since his shots are of higher percentage kind. Thus, your C and PF tends to have the biggest PP100.

The way people train players in the defensive end in this game, tends to make outside defenders better than inside defenders. This adds to the lower efficiency of perimeter players.

You can't try and make conclusions if you don't know the other team. When you learn (and 2 weeks is almost nothing, sorry) a little better to read the adversaries, you will be better at reading the stats.

This Post:
00
227544.9 in reply to 227544.8
Date: 9/25/2012 4:29:01 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
22
Can you defnie how to "read better the adversaries", when all of these opponents go simply base offense man marking with the initial players they had because they only logged on to the game once or twice?

The stats they provide couldn't be more inconsistent like I said based on the ratings of that game. Also the fact that I play these opponents makes the game less complex and more "bland" and therefore easier to analyze.

Only explanation really is that C and PF is OP but still...

Last edited by Vicestab at 9/25/2012 4:29:57 PM

This Post:
00
227544.10 in reply to 227544.5
Date: 9/25/2012 4:31:48 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
573573
When it comes to the FG %:

My former PF was 26-37 (70%), with 4-7 3pt. He was inept IS with respectable JS and low JR.
My shooting guard is 14-36 (39%) with 2-12 3pt. He is strong JS and JR, with respectable IS.

Looking at my current players, he is the 2nd worse at FG % and 3rd worse at 3pt %, even though at shooting alone he is straight up the best player I have.


Backcourt players always have worse FG% than front court players. Long jumpers and 3 point shots are more difficult to make, and don't convert at nearly the same rates. Check the FG% leaders in the NBA. They are inside players. So in that case, BB is modeling the world pretty well.

As far as Juterborg, he's taken 13 3FG attempts, and gotten perhaps a bit unlucky that only 2 went in. But 13 observations is not a useful statistical sample. And it's not just his JS and JR that affect his FG%, but also his driving, inside shot, and passing. His passing looks good, judging from his assist totals. But the others will affect his exact percentage. Really, on a guy who's 8 JS, 39% FG% is pretty decent.

The player rating overall I guess it's somewhat consistent, what really isn't is the scoring/defending rating with the PP100.

Looking at this (I'm the right side):

inept (medium) Outside Scoring inept (medium)
inept (medium) Inside Scoring pitiful (high)
pitiful (medium) Perimeter Defense inept (medium)
pitiful (high) Inside Defense inept (low)

My C and PF had the most PP100. Yet my inside scoring is considerably lower than outside scoring, and their inside defense is better than outside defense.

When I saw this, I quickly realized that the statistics this game provides are not to be trusted, and therefore I was disappointed I can't make up tactics based on it because this feature is completly broken and makes no sense.


Well, part of this is reflected in the difference in FG% inherent between inside and outside shots. So that's affecting your C and PF and center's PP100 values. Inside guys almost always will have a higher PP100 than their backcourt teammates. And their inside defense isn't higher than their perimeter defense (a step from pitiful(med) to pitiful(high) is very small).

Finally, there's a way that his lower perimeter defense can boost your inside guys' PP100, and that's because of uncontested shots. A uncontested shot is one that if it is converted, becomes an assist for whoever made the pass. And when your backcourt players have the ball and are trying to pass, they are competing against the defender's OD. So, a low perimeter defense for your opponent makes it easier for your guards to pass to your inside players, and lets them make easy dunks and layups.

Note that this effect of uncontested shots doesn't appear in the team inside scoring rating. That value is controlled just by the skills of your bigs.

It's also useful to note that the team ratings are a reflection of the skills of your players at various positions, but they don't tell the entire story. They don't reflect the importance of secondary skills on players (such as passing on big men, or inside shot on guards). And they don't really reflect the player by player matchups, or the effects of subsitution patterns. So they are useful, but there's no completely deterministic relationship between team ratings and PP100.

This Post:
00
227544.11 in reply to 227544.10
Date: 9/25/2012 4:39:07 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
22
Ok so I'll have to guess that the fact that he is 2nd worse FG % is kinda unlucky and that I'm dumb to be training jump shot instead of inside shots,and that I shouldn't waste 30k on a proper SG because SG is complete garbage, because at the end of the day C or PF are OP. Guess that's really all of an answer I have to hear.

Last edited by Vicestab at 9/25/2012 4:41:19 PM

This Post:
11
227544.12 in reply to 227544.11
Date: 9/25/2012 5:08:05 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
573573
Well, if that's what you want to take away from what I said, then it seems you've already made up your mind that the game isn't any good.

There are SGs who have good FG%, so it can be done in this game. Just don't assume that your 8 JS guy is necessarily going to be one of them.


This Post:
00
227544.13 in reply to 227544.12
Date: 9/25/2012 5:49:26 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
22
Against bad teams I sure do assume that...

This Post:
55
227544.14 in reply to 227544.13
Date: 9/25/2012 7:31:03 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
573573
As I said, you've already made up your mind. So you're not worth the discussion.

Should you decide to open you mind and ask questions about how to get better, and how the simulation works, I'll be happy to help.

Advertisement