BuzzerBeater Forums

When I see a suggestion as far out of the box as yours, I tend to try to figure out why you suggest it. That's when I check the profile. It's not about me playing in div2 and you playing in the lower leagues. It's about the quality of the team. I'm just saying that with 5 seasons of experience your team is still on par with new registered users. That makes me conclude that you either do not fully understand the game (thus the clumsy, not thought through suggestion), or you keep your team crappy on purpose (why I do not know, fun???).
I'm 30 years old, so hardly a boy. Theres nothing wrong with suggesting things, but there have been clear argument here why it should not be done. Still yank on about it's better, more tactics, when it's clearly not the case, is a bit weird.
So in case you missed those posts, different tactics per quarter will ruin the defence tactics completely, thus making the game about luck. Everybody is basically forced to play man2man (or whatever tactic that evens out their od and id).
Playing 1q,3q with LI and 2q,4q, R&G -> you actually play push the ball but with better results. That just makes scouting your opponent impossible and nailing tactics really random.

In the game manual is written:
Whether an outside shot goes in is a combination of the individual and team outside scoring rating, as well as the opposing individual and team outside defense. If a great player is the only option on a bad team, he will draw more coverage, and therefore his shooting percentage will go down; similarly a bad player on the same team will only tend to shoot outside shots when he is wide open.

So when the defense is adjusted, the offense play will change, too. Right? It's also unclear to me when you say "the defense is adjusted, but not fully". To what extend is the defense adjusted then? either it is adjusted to the opponents offensive play or it is not. Or is it just half of the team which tries to adjust? I didn't get that. I would like to have more transparency on how things are adjusted.

the offense adjust, too. And if you choose the right tactic from beginning is it also better at the end of the game - so the adjustement don't equalize the setting, they made it less worse.

the offense adjust, too. And if you choose the right tactic from beginning is it also better at the end of the game - so the adjustement don't equalize the setting, they made it less worse.

I don't think so. Where your best shots are might change, but that would be mostly because of changing defense rather than adjusting offenses.

thank you for the explanation.

i just think it would be more exciting to give managers more control of in-game action before the game. A good team which plays against a worse team will be forced to actually change to man to man and eventually base offense to not risk too much, while the worse team will try to predict the tactics the good team chooses and risks totally to be run over or to heighten their chances to win.

I just have a hard time seeing a club play the same tactic throughout the whole season and still be unstoppable because his/her team is specialized on the one tactic.

which is an adjustment, because someone who would normally take a shot can not take it, as the defense has been adjusted, so someone else will have to take the shot. For me that is an adjustment, a reaction to the defense which is played.

why not let the managers make those adjustments and decide for example, who should be their second choice for shooting? Would also be an addition and a way to take part in the game action.

And I had another idea for another "what, if" situation, which is very common in Basketball: "If team scores, full court press/trap".

Again, my point is: When I watch the gameviewer, I don't really see any decisions I took being used. I feel having no influence on the game. I owuld like some features to make it possible so I can say during the match: yes, that was what I wanted them to do. When I lose in the end, I would then say, it was my bad decision (plus not having good players) to let them play so and so. When I win, I would feel: cool my tactics worked out.

Having the game engine do everything for me takes away the attractivity of watching the game.

I'm 30 years old, so hardly a boy. Theres nothing wrong with suggesting things, but there have been clear argument here why it should not be done. Still yank on about it's better, more tactics, when it's clearly not the case, is a bit weird.

You're for me a too egocentric person to discuss anything. You see things just your way. And you think you know something about me and my motivations by just checking my BB profile? To have it clear for you: I enjoy playing league 4 and 5, especially because I can let the rookies play, and see them advance and become good players. Sometimes I sell them to better clubs ten and follow where they land in the end. You seem just be a very prejudging person and you never seem to have learned how to discuss. FOr you a discussion must quickly end, while I learned discussions are the most productive when they go on and on. When new ideas and arguments are found. I'm taking time (today I have plenty) to help BB become more complete as a game from my point of view. If you have a different opinion, that's ok, but you can not look down to people and send them disrespectful comments such as "you seem not to have understood the game". For a 30 year old that's quite immature.

Last edited by Coach Ash at 1/11/2010 11:24:40 AM

Wrong. I see things in a lot of ways. Can draw conclusions -> What happens if I change this etc. You just want the change without really seeing the outcome. You can call me immature or anything you want. I do not get offended by forum comments:) Why do you get offended about my comment is bizarre.
The fact remains, if you are still on par with newly registered teams after 5 seasons, you lack knowledge on game fundamentals. There is nothing wrong about playing in the 4-th 5-th league if you like it so much. I just dislike it, when you suggest something that just makes tactics a big mess and random luck thing.
NB! Your addition that crap teams should have chance against good teams. The managers have worked hard to build up their team. If they would still be on par with a person who just logs in once a week. Does not upgrade arena, nor buys players and watches his 26 yo-ds getting team training. And still is able to win against him with just tactics. What point would this game have then?
You want to win -> you fail to win -> you want a change.
This is just my opinion.

Last edited by Kukoc at 1/11/2010 11:39:36 AM

the offense adjust, too. And if you choose the right tactic from beginning is it also better at the end of the game - so the adjustement don't equalize the setting, they made it less worse.

I don't think so. Where your best shots are might change, but that would be mostly because of changing defense rather than adjusting offenses.

the defense is in favour of the change but if i had the bb right in my mind also the offense change, i believe you could see it also in games against 1-3-1 where the shots inside get higher after a while.

But if you choose the right defense, if the offense adjust to it with babysteps the defense will follow close so that the adjustment are really small and sometimes even back to the game plan. With defense adjustment, you often make them in the right direction, with the offense haven't the space to make their tactics more extrem because it already start at an "end".

why not let the managers make those adjustments and decide for example, who should be their second choice for shooting? Would also be an addition and a way to take part in the game action.

because you don't have the first option, nrormally the teams look for their best oppurtunity not that layer X scores ;) Like they do it here right now.

Again, my point is: When I watch the gameviewer, I don't really see any decisions I took being used. I feel having no influence on the game.

i could easily tell, what tactics plays in the offense, and if i know the teams a bit also i could make a pretty good guess about the defense ;)

Having the game engine do everything for me takes away the attractivity of watching the game.

you can interact also with your system, because you had to make it before. You have powerful tactics currently, so use 'em.

And I had another idea for another "what, if" situation, which is very common in Basketball: "If team scores, full court press/trap".

Scuh change i could imagine, even if i don't find it necessary ;) A thing i would like, is more varitions of pressing. Like press to take time from the clock, or go for steal and after pressing fall back into 2-3 Zone for example.

Last edited by CrazyEye at 1/11/2010 12:09:29 PM

A thing i would like, is more varitions of pressing. Like press to take time from the clock, or go for steal and after pressing fall back into 2-3 Zone for example

Very good idea. What do you think of being able to put that in kind of a "if -situation-, then -modification of tactic-". For example, "If team -losing- after -46 minutes-, then change tactics to -press and stop time-".

I am in favor of giving more power to the managers to decide how their teams should play and adjust to things. There are often adjustments done by the game engine I imagine many managers are not always satisfied with or would like to have done differently.

Last edited by Coach Ash at 1/11/2010 12:21:05 PM

i think you could make a seperate end game setup, but i am not sure if the additional complexity about something which is rarely used might scare newbies and make take to much time to set up for some veterans. Maybe the firs step to it would be a over worked endgame logic, like clockmanagment which is purely engine driven would be enough(or fine)

To the "if's" i can imagine only few scenarios where these could work without screwing the engine, so maybe change starter and reserve is possibly but tactical adjustment i really think will screw the game up - the baby step in bringing in other player could be possible.