BuzzerBeater Forums

If the BBs were to create another game that, sure there was training involved and some kind of trade system, but was more focused on Basketball Strategy, I would probably pay for supporter straight away. I would do this because I can see that there has to be some smarts to create this game as it is, and this has given me a lot of confidence in the BBs.

Last edited by Axis123 at 1/23/2011 10:46:26 PM

I admit I can see your point about the value of TL poaching as a way to build money, but I actually agree with GM-somedetsfinest:

I think that is pretty much what the game is. I spend very little time on the TL (because I am not very good at it and don't really like stock markets) and mostly train not to sell but to improve my team. I spend a lot of time analyzing my opponents. So, as the BB's have said, there are many possible strategies to employ. I use a completely different one than you do. And while it would be wonderful to be able to have a match-up zone and the old Notre Dame Irish offense, remember that it is a simulation and those types of tactics require decisions that this GE isn't currently capable of simulating.

There are other basketball management games out there that allow you a wider spectrum of game time tactical choices. They suck compared to this game, though. At least for me.

To me the game is still at its heart a strategic 1-basketball, 2-management game. It's about understanding how your team works and how your opponent's team works (the strategic basketball parts), and then trying to figure out how you can beat your opponent (through both short-term basketball strategy and, more long-term, management strategy).

The TL and the training system are tools to help achieve that goal, but they're more than just tools to generate money. Ultimately it's still a game where you try to determine what your opponent wants to do, what your own team can do, and then how you can create a situation where you are able to do what you want and he is not.

Having more resources never hurts, but if it's beginning to seem like more money is the only way to create those favorable situations for your team, I think you ought to take a step back and consciously try to broaden your view of what options are available.

Here's a list of things that are often not given much credit on the forums:

-2-3
-Princeton
-FCP
-Shot Blocking
-JR (higher than like 13+)
-Big men with guard skills/guards with inside skills (most people realize these are nice to have, but most people also don't go through the trouble to train them seriously)

... and opinions are already forming for and against the new isolation and box/1 tactics.

So of course if everyone is trying to play exactly the same way, buying and training the same types of players, running the same tactics, etc it begins to seem like the only factor that separates managers is how much money they can bring in, but I think if you go back to your roots and look at all the strategies and options again with a fresh set of eyes, you'll find that the BB have created a pretty large strategic space for us to compete in, with a wide variety of options at our disposal.

Tactics etc are only 'broken' until someone figures out how they actually work and begins to use them to their advantage. Then the rest of the community catches on and it just becomes common game knowledge. Maybe the game could be even more fulfilling for you if you made something like that your focus?

I apologise if I seem confrontational, but that was quite a condescending response, especially from a BB (if you are a BB).

You, yourself, have made clever decisions on the TL and I highly doubt that you really believe that it isn't the TL that has allowed the successful players to get where they are, more so than the strategic basketball decisions they have made.

Here is one example of some smart TL play: (10596465) - bought for $51k on 12/24/2009 and sold for $600k on 3/1/2010. How many weeks is that? Or should we count it in days? That is almost $550k profit in trades for one player in a bit over 2 months.

I can see that you have also made seemingly bad decisions as well. That is irrelevant. The point is, if you're good on the TL, you can have a much stronger team than someone who isn't, and this negates anyone's Basketball Tactics.

If, over a couple of seasons, someone makes even just two million more on the TL compared to someone who doesn't, that expert TL player has either two million more on her/his arena or two million worth of extra skill points in players (this is putting aside other advantages of having more money like Drs, Trainers etc). And, because they're expert TLers, they're going to get good deals, so their two million will be worth even more than someone who isn't an expert TLer.

Now, after considering the above, consider these again:

-2-3
-Princeton
-FCP
-Shot Blocking
-JR (higher than like 13+)
-Big men with guard skills/guards with inside skills (most people realize these are nice to have, but most people also don't go through the trouble to train them seriously)

...the new isolation and box/1 tactics.

After three seasons, the expert TLer now has, and let's look at most likely minimums, probably an average of an extra 4 to up to 6 rating points on average extra than the person who doesn't. As a result, the person who learns and begins to understand the TL system will, in fact, most likely be in a different division to the person who was focussing only on tactics (even if their studied tactics were inclusive of the above) after three seasons.

The "list of things that aren't given much credit on the forums" become completely irrelevant in this case when the two supposed competitors are leagues apart. If you put the teams head to head, the expert TLer could choose almost any tactic and it would be a complete walkover.

All the above support the fact that this is a basketball 1. Trading 2. Management 3. Tactics game. 2 and 3 are very close and possibly inverse but 1 is definitely stuck at 1.

lol

Firstly, I like the compassion in your response, thank you.

No, it isn't the "general manager" aspect of the game I do not like. It is the "trading" aspect of the general manger aspect of the game that I don't necessarily dislike, I just don't think it is any kind of simulation of Basketball Strategy or Basketball team Management.

Those type of players only pop up on the TL once every couple of weeks and they're usually listed for an obscene amount of money.

To begin with, how does a player make an obscene amount of money? Is the best way through the TL or from Arena revenue, honestly? Even if a good deal of money can be made through Arena revenue, if two players are pitted together and have the same Arena and similar league standings etc, if either one trades and the other doesn't thennn...... You get where I'm going with that. That's the first point.

The second point is that, as you say, because they only pop up on the TL once every couple of weeks, it is the manager who is constantly on the lookout on the TL who will be the one to reap the rewards. Again, TL expert (or TL hangerouterer) wins out.

Hey, this is a fair game to play. It's exciting and interesting and even intelligence (actual over potential) building to some degree. But, as I've said, and it simply cannot be refuted, it is not basketball simulation.

Interesting side note in response to the concept you brought forward: Teams that get to that level where money means less and strategy means more... They get there through making lots of money and purchasing players to be able to compete. This is made a lot easier by being an expert TLer.

Anyway, real basketball simulation would have teams doing trades with other teams, sometimes multiple trades with multiple teams. Some teams would lose out, others would win big. Sometimes both teams would win and sometimes both teams would lose out. The ones doing the best deals, the best coaching, the best marketing, the best training, all in all making the best Basketball Management and coaching decisions would move up to better leagues.

I could imagine the forum activity and levels of communication between players.... It would be huge.

This would be basketball simulation.

If I write, "Superfly is a jerk. Just kidding." And you only reprint, "Superfly is a jerk," people would be misled. Just like when you only reprint the first two lines of a paragraph and not the whole thing. That's what I mean by selective editing.

The point is that it is not simply a basketball simulation game, with or without capital letters. It is a basketball management game, and thus takes other factors besides just the playing hoops part of the game into consideration. In fact, just under the Welcome To BuzzerBeater it says,"The world's largest basketball manager game." So while you think the wording is inappropriate, I think it gives an excellent concise overview of what new people to the website can expect.

As for your questioning whether or not the simulation is advanced or not, I think that's a bit of an insult to the developers. It is clearly an incredibly advanced computer program that has performed at any amazing level of accuracy when used to predict the outcome of NBA games.

And, in the end, it really is a matter of taste. If you don't like how the game works, you can think about moving on. It would be a drag to lose a passionate manager, but if you are just banging your head against a wall and not enjoying the game the way it is and the way the vast majority of people seem to accept and enjoy it, there are other ways to spend your free time.

I remember having a bit of a meltdown at how it wasn't "real basketball" at some point in my first season or two and firing off a rude post in the forums. I received a reply from BB-Edju that made me rethink my position and realize that the game is the way it is and if I wanted to enjoy it I'd have to work within the framework of the game.

I think "selective referencing" would be a better way to describe it. I have edited nothing. Nonetheless, your point is not valid, purely because I can copy and paste the whole page in here and it would still be the same. If someone creates a list of things about something, and someone else takes parts of the list and doesn't agree with them, it doesn't necessarily mean they are selective editing or selective referencing (whichever you choose to call it). It means they don't agree with those parts of the list (those parts by themselves or with the rest of the text).

This is still superfluous and I was almost not going to respond to this post. However, I saw this:

As for your questioning whether or not the simulation is advanced or not, I think that's a bit of an insult to the developers.

The actual game engine is very cool. I have commended the BBs on several occasions. I am also giving constructive criticism. Both of these concepts influence people to create amazing things, providing they follow the, "observe, reflect and transform" cycle.

I have given much positive feedback on the game as a whole (which includes the work of the developers). You have selectively referenced from my posts to assume that I am simply insulting them. Insult? No. Constructive criticism? Yes.

As for my other points, they still stand and haven't really been refuted.

I will not have a meltdown and nor will I get rude in my posts. This helps no one, especially me. I am all for positive change in situations I am involved in. This is why I write what I write.

I think what axis is try to say is that This game has turn into more a stock trading rather than smart management/coaching of a team... that it reward time spend on TL rather than tactical smartness. You could make a couple of freakishly lucky transfer and advance your team by a lot rather than the people who spend time building a solid team without doing anything out of the ordinary.

In all, It turns some people off that this game reward geeks and no-lifers rather than long term strategical planning... I dont mean you naker :p

You can see that games like hattrick is dropping in popularity maybe it due to the same fact we are discussing... laters

Edit: oh yea, I wish BB would actually spend time fixing their existing bugs rather than adding more features (more bugs) into the game... the game engine is in a mess that the Shot clock bug has not been fixed and now double double bug as well as wrong SC placement were introduced...

Last edited by SplitJ at 1/24/2011 7:13:29 AM

What you said was that the front page misleads people. I don't think it does, and pointed out the other facets of the game that the front page highlights. Points that you choose not to acknowledge.
Since I don't know if you have the qualifications to decide how advanced a basketball simulation program is or isn't, I will leave you to your belief that BuzzerBeater's AI and GE are not so. Not sure how saying it isn't advanced is constructive. Sounds more like criticism. I disagree with you and have 10000 lines of code and an impressive history of predicting the outcome of NBA games (on which the simulator is based) to back me up.


As an aside, I also highly disagree with your point that none of the tactics are run for a full game in real basketball. I have coached and played and refereed many games where the teams involved ran the same thing for the entire game. One example of the full court press tactic being used for an entire game is the UNLV Runnin' Rebels under Tarkanian. They played full court man-to-man press for 40 minutes every game. They also played run and gun for entire games as did Loyola Marymount. (Anybody else remember that team with Gathers and Kimble?) And, in lower leagues like high school and grade school teams run motion offenses like flex for whole seasons. Princeton famously destroyed UCLA in the NCAA tournament playing 40 minutes of Princeton offense.And many teams play man to man only. In fact, until just a few seasons ago, man to man was the only defense you could play in the NBA.

There is a game that allows you to change your tactics every quarter out there, if that's what you are looking for. It also has a TL, though, and its GE is not nearly as advanced as this one.