BuzzerBeater Forums

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.

You want to win -> you fail to win -> you want a change.
This is just my opinion.

Well I can just repeat that for me this game is not only about winning. I think for someone like you that would be the case, but that shows again (thanks god) how different we are. So out of your "opinion" I take the following conclusion:
You win right now -> you don't want a change -> game should not be improved, because things might get harder then for you

That's my opinion. From now on I will be ignoring you, so better don't waste time to write anything.

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.

We agreed upon adjustments that are made throughout the gameplay by the game engine already, right? So why should the game engine be screwed up, if some adjustments are cancelled or are modified to take place differently than originally implemented by the game engine?

the big change you like is the tactic, and for that we already had the discussion ;)

Last edited by CrazyEye at 1/11/2010 1:09:22 PM

And a first step to that big change ;) would be just an additional setup category where you can choose that whether or not you want to play intentional foul to stop the time in the last 2 minutes IF your team is behind. it's a very small step but a start. and later the "if, then" factors could be introduced.

I also wanted to make clear: I am not suggesting unlimited "if' then..." tactic modifications. I think there should be a limit like 4 "if, then" modifications maximal possible. Some ifs will not happen, therefore not all modifications will actually take place.

for example: one of your "if' then" modification wish would be: "if team -down by 10 points- after -20- minutes of game switch to -full court defense- in defense and -look inside- in offense" and you're not down by ten points but by 5, that modification will not be done.

i am not a fan of tactics switch during a game.

well I am but I think by now you know. I think it belongs to basketball. you don't play with one tactic the whole game, you must be flexible and react. otherwise you wouldn't need coaches on the bench. you could train a bunch of guys in the practice and then tell them: go out and play run and gun! and they would do it.

Coaches are there to modify and react on game situations. If you can't do that, then a significant part of the fun being coach/manager is missing. I still love this game more than any other bball simulation online. what I suggest would just be an improvement of an already very good game.

but this makes it to easy, to find the right offense which kill the defense porpose ;)

Normally you play defense depending on your opponent, if he switch offense you switch defense. This is probadly realistic but boring, because then i could make a standard lineup, and play always the right tactic, if yjust one team change tactics is bad for the game balanced because you destroy "reads" of the opponents with it.

Last edited by CrazyEye at 1/11/2010 4:43:47 PM

yes you destroy reads on opponents who play a diverse game and use different tactics and settings. You still will be able to read those who play aways the same way. And there will still be championships to be won with teams that play always the same way, because they just have a very strong team.

But in case teams are equal tactical cleverness will triumph. And that's like real basketball I think. And you feel in the game, you feel having influenced the match rather than just have given one instruction for the game.

yes you destroy reads on opponents who play a diverse game and use different tactics and settings. You still will be able to read those who play aways the same way. And there will still be championships to be won with teams that play always the same way, because they just have a very strong team.

But in case teams are equal tactical cleverness will triumph. And that's like real basketball I think. And you feel in the game, you feel having influenced the match rather than just have given one instruction for the game.

did you think the most clever is the one who fall back first, and then make the adjustment to catch the opponent, short before the finish so that he didn't get an wrong tactic indikator which gives him a sign to react. Or did you think it is smart, damn i am in front, now i had to change my d and offense, because maybe my opponent change it.

For superior teams a good indicator, because they could react when something goes wrong, tactical surprised get reduces through it in my eyes because for the week team probadly the change will come to late or to random if you choose a small margin.

Last edited by CrazyEye at 1/11/2010 5:46:26 PM

did you think the most clever is the one who fall back first, and then make the adjustment to catch the opponent, short before the finish so that he didn't get an wrong tactic indikator which gives him a sign to react. Or did you think it is smart, damn i am in front, now i had to change my d and offense, because maybe my opponent change it.

you see how much fun and variation such an option brings. you totally got it right: First of all you will have to scout opponents to see how they usually play. Then you anticipate their moves, which means: you can not be sure they will exactly play in the same way against you, because they might fear that you scouted them and have made adjustments to beat them. So you anticipate each others moves.

A team which is behind, still has to make up the difference. For example if the difference is 15 to 20 points, it will still be difficult to catch up, you might need an entire quarter or more for that even with a favourable tactic, if teams have equal strengths. And then again eventually, you have foreseen in a tactic such as "if -after 35 minutes-, team -up by 15 points-, switch to -3/2 zone- in defense and -patient- in offense". Which would eat up time. You will have to play around with that then, but it is a lot of fun to see if you were able to anticipate correctly, or if you'd been totally predictable.

In the end it will in 90 % of the cases be still the stronger team, who wins. Only if you got totally owned by all your tactical decisions your weaker opponent would have a slight chance of winning. You should again be aware, I am not talking about letting league 4 teams win against league 2 or 1 teams. tactical cleverness is interesting when equal teams meet each other. A weaker team has always a certain disadvantage because of the missing skills to win against a better team, even in a perfectly favourable tactical set up. The weaker team will still make less shots/ defend worse than a good or great team. A weak team would not be able to wipe out a much better team with just the right tactics.