BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > BB tactics from best to worst

BB tactics from best to worst

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
298868.40 in reply to 298868.39
Date: 6/10/2019 4:34:58 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
14901490
The only way to defend LI is try to minimize shots the C, PF and SF take. It could be done by having absurdry high OD stats on guards. But that could be countered by having high driving skills for centers.
Well it's not only DR on big men is also guards with 18 and even 20 IS...which, remember, used to be FREE and it's still relatively cheap salary-wise.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 6/10/2019 4:35:46 PM

This Post:
00
298868.41 in reply to 298868.38
Date: 6/10/2019 4:48:44 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
14901490
SBing at a higher level than ID results in better usage of SB.
I agree this could be the case, but unfortunately I concluded it's almost impossible to try this at top level because one of the points I made above: training.

Training a big man punting ID is very hard if not impossible, while training a big man punting SB/IS/RB is doable and much easier to do. Since nobody gives up RB (rightfully so) and you need IS in inside offenses, then the choice is between medium ID and elite SB or elite ID and no SB. The second option costs tens of thousands of $$$ less and is effective in limiting inside shots.

I tried as much as I could to figure out a way to have a big man with minimal ID and elite IS, SB and RB and I could not find any based on training simulators and CP. More precisely: you can do it at D2 level or below, but not at top level, while you routinely see players with 54 IS+ID+RB and 7 or less SB on the transfer list. There are some on the market right now.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 6/10/2019 4:49:46 PM

This Post:
00
298868.42 in reply to 298868.41
Date: 6/10/2019 10:27:14 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
SBing at a higher level than ID results in better usage of SB.
I agree this could be the case, but unfortunately I concluded it's almost impossible to try this at top level because one of the points I made above: training.

Training a big man punting ID is very hard if not impossible, while training a big man punting SB/IS/RB is doable and much easier to do. Since nobody gives up RB (rightfully so) and you need IS in inside offenses, then the choice is between medium ID and elite SB or elite ID and no SB. The second option costs tens of thousands of $$$ less and is effective in limiting inside shots.

I tried as much as I could to figure out a way to have a big man with minimal ID and elite IS, SB and RB and I could not find any based on training simulators and CP. More precisely: you can do it at D2 level or below, but not at top level, while you routinely see players with 54 IS+ID+RB and 7 or less SB on the transfer list. There are some on the market right now.


I suppose you could find guys with 7 IS/RB/SB and 1 ID as draftees and train them, but that's something you pretty much have to go all in on yourself since you're not going to stumble across D1 ready guys with skills trained that way. Punting IS is a lot easier, of course, but that naturally has its own complications.

This Post:
00
298868.43 in reply to 298868.42
Date: 6/11/2019 3:58:51 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
14901490
The problem is that IS and SB train ID as secondary skill and the effect from SB on ID in particular is stronger than other secondary training, so with that massive gap and the elastic effect on ID, it will grow quite fast and therefore it will reach levels that have an impact on salary.

At some point I can run again a simulation to achieve something like 18 IS, 18 SB, 16 RB and minimum ID with perfect initial skills (7 JS for IS elastics, 7/7/1/7 inside skills etc) and trying to push IS via 1v1 as much as possible.

The other problem I can see with limiting ID and having high SB is that you have to be lucky getting a trainee that doesn't foul, because I agree that such a player will guard more shots due to lower ID.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 6/11/2019 3:59:26 AM

This Post:
00
298868.45 in reply to 298868.44
Date: 6/11/2019 8:59:37 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
14901490
You did quite a long time ago now when you had lots of players with SB and played zones. If you want me to say you were experimenting? No problem, but I think it's fairly accurate to say this is what it was: team building relying heavily on shotblockers (due to Nachmahr and other trainers) on the assumption that you can stop and beat inside tactics this way.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 6/11/2019 9:02:20 AM

This Post:
00
298868.46 in reply to 298868.45
Date: 6/11/2019 8:02:03 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
You did quite a long time ago now when you had lots of players with SB and played zones. If you want me to say you were experimenting? No problem, but I think it's fairly accurate to say this is what it was: team building relying heavily on shotblockers (due to Nachmahr and other trainers) on the assumption that you can stop and beat inside tactics this way.


To be honest, slowing down/stopping inside tactics isn't necessarily that much of a problem if that's the goal. Hell, I think I've given up 100 points once in the league the past few seasons despite almost always playing a predictable fast outside offense. Pairing that with enough offense to actually take advantage of that without burning through money is the challenge that seems to be out of my reach. ;)

This Post:
22
298868.48 in reply to 298868.47
Date: 6/12/2019 3:08:35 AM
Vilkiukai
II.3
Overall Posts Rated:
429429
Second Team:
Vilkiukai II
Salary wise LI is most cost-efficient. But it can be optimized. Now two problems you get with LI salary wise is:

1: you would like to have better offensive flow and more high percentage shots. But for LI guards passing jacks up the salary.
IS on guards is free salary wise.
2: You want to have 20 IS atleast for your big men with decent rebounding and defence. But this jacks up the salary for centers.
PA on centers is free salary wise.

Do you see solution? It is natural. Best PF playing as SF; PG and SG with 20 IS playing offensively as PF and C and defending as PG/SG. 20 Passing big mens with oly rebounding and decent inside defence and maybe some little 10 js, driving playing as PG and SG and defending PF and C. You get perfect offensive flow, low salaries but loose offensive rebounding. But offensive rebounding can be compensated with higher defensive rebounding/better inside defence on centers because of low salaries.

In seasons 20-23 i had tried this kinda. In lower lever worked. had 16 and 14 Passing big mens defensive minded; and guards with 16 and 17 IS. Made to div 2, got to college, had no time, quited. Had games with 60-80% assited shots for SF, PF, C. centers offensively are terrible like bellow 40 percent, but as they have high passing they tend not to shot that much.

Going to retry this. Training my own draftee to like 18-19 IS guard. toobad so low potentia. But i can train IS over cap because he will be playing center So 20 IS here we go.

Last edited by Vilkai [LTU NT] at 6/12/2019 3:14:04 AM

Advertisement