BuzzerBeater Forums

I don't think the problem is in the engine itself, but in the boxscore page. Everything works as it should I think. But the Matchup ratings are just displaying it wrong. The points per 100 shots are right I think, but there is just something wrong with written ratings (strong(medium) etc).

I dunno if those parts are seperated (the engine and the displayed ratings), but I got the feeling the game works well, and the tactics work as it should, but it's just not shown as it should.

the 3-2 zone bug with outside defense seems to persist. Any new insights on this one?

This is extremely annoying, since the bug seems to not be presentational, and because all explanations of why the team rating might be lower fall short.

Most current example is contained in (1545) and (1547).

The bottomline is, Bulgaria plays virtually the same defenders in virtually the same or better form in the 8 relevant positions. Moreover, the 4 best defenders are packed in the 4 guards slots for the 3-2 game.

Even if we assume (and this is contrary to what the rules read) that some defense rating might be lost because the SF weighs more into the OD rating than the SG, this still doesn't explain how there is a full level drop in the OD rating when 3-2 is selected.

I can understand if there was no visible difference, then I'd assume that the small downgrade is compensated by the 3-2 zone. But this is drop in the OD rating is absolutely unwarranted, and judging by the matchup ratings of the Turkish team, the bug is probably not presentational.

I'd love to hear more feedback from a BB- and I'll be happy to provide more information about the situation in a non-public forum.

Cheers.

Last edited by GM-kozlodoev at 6/9/2008 2:47:43 PM

the 3-2 zone bug with outside defense seems to persist.

I agree with you about this bug in the perimeter defense rating with the 3-2 zone
(although I think it's only a presentational bug).

Here are my 2 examples:
(4310219) and (4310226).

Similar skills and same game shape, but home court advantage and higher enthusiasm in the second game with the 3-2 defense.... and still same ratings!

In particular, same players as PG (both level 7 OD), better SG in the second game (2 level 7 against 2 level 6), worse SF in the second game (average 5.6 vs 6.6).



Last edited by Newton07 at 6/10/2008 5:56:19 AM

As crazy as it sounds, it looks like 3-2 lowers the OD rating instead of increasing it, at least visually.

Is there any further development on this? I play 3-2 a lot and am certain that the rating final team rating is off as well - playing far inferior OD guards should not net a better OD rating in man-to-man versus superior OD guards in a 3-2 and none of the proffered causes above (e.g., fouls, game shape, etc.) appear to sufficiently explain the differences - I played man to man tonight and received an OD rating that made no sense to me. Since I have not played a lot of man-to-man (and watched such games), I can not judge if the intended boost effect to OD is happening but just not reflected.

Since the rules state: Your team also receives several ratings per match. These team ratings are used in the calculation of what happens each possession. Here is a synopsis:

Outside Scoring, Defense: Both guards weighted heavily, small forward medium, power forward slightly.

Is it using the bugged ratings to configure each possession or the "correct" rating, but somehow presenting it different on the final page?

Last edited by jbmcrock at 6/15/2008 1:00:12 PM

This week I had a good opportunity to provide additional observations on the problems with OD, since the Bulgarian NT had two consecutive games where I wanted to use the same tactic.

The games are as follows: (1547) and (1767). The players are _exactly_ the same, and there have been only minor fluctuations in form. Game 1 uses 3-2, game 2 uses Man to Man.

The result? Outside Defense dropped by 1 sublevel, and Inside Defense rose by 1 full level.

As far as game shape is concerned, our starting PG and starting PF lost a level, and the starting C gained a level. Even with 1 week's worth of defense training going on (and not all of the players trained defense either), it looks like the fluctuations are way too minor to adequately represent the tactical effects.

So is this going to be BB's "Attack on Wings" bug?

For those who don't play Hattrick, after literally years of user complaints about the Attack on Wings tactic likely being broken, and years of official denials that there was anything wrong, it was announced yesterday that there was indeed a bug.

Anyway, it looks to me like the BB's are taking this seriously and not just being dismissive, which is good. And my own guess is that this is presentational only... for example, my perimeter defense rating last game with a 3-2 (6034208) was definitely lower than it should have been, but the opponent's PG and SG matchup ratings were more consistent with a stronger defense.

Serious bug or not, it would be nice if this didn't follow the HT model, and was resolved before 2013.

I don't think they have 8 months of summer holidays here, like it seems like the HTs have.

Either way, it would at least be good to know whether the issue is presentational or not. Up to now, the only thing being said is that the code and the games in question look alright, though there is pretty clear evidence that a problem exists somewhere along the chain of events.