BuzzerBeater Forums

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.

If I write, "Superfly is a jerk. Just kidding." And you only reprint, "Superfly is a jerk,"

What? Superfly is a jerk....only if I have to play him in the cup next week and he goes out and buys a team with his 25 million...Until then..He's just Superfly..the punk a** Biatch because he supports Liverpool.....hahahahahahhaa
PS...This is a joke and should not result in a 30day forum ban..He is even on my buddy list..

It's penalty enough that he supports Liverfool...

No, Dont worry I got myself into the game too... just that I think Its too time consuming and if this game is actually a stock market game then I think I am going to quit and focuses my effort on the actual stock market where I am going to make a living ;)

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.

How about we count it in seasons? I bought a 19yr old, trained him for 2/3's of a whole season, and sold him at the end when he no longer fit in with my team. And at the time I bought him, I was also in division V, and he was good enough to be a key player on my team all season long.

I realize you are trying to point out some kind of hypocrisy, I just don't understand why? My very first sentence to you was "I admit I can see your point about the value of TL poaching as a way to build money, but..."

I apologize if I seemed condescending, that wasn't my intention. I'm not a BB, just a regular manager like yourself. I just disagree with your view on the TL. IMO, trading is one of several ways to manage finances, financial management is important but still only one of several aspects of team management, and team management is only one component of winning individual games.

My only point was that there are in fact lots of strategic aspects to this game, so don't let yourself focus too much on the TL, especially if you don't enjoy that aspect of the game.

Please, I'm not trying to massively diss the game. As I have said, and will say again, the game has some great aspects and credit definitely needs to go to the developers. Sure, there are bugs. I've never complained about them, as I understand how (and sometimes why) they happen. I'm simply pointing something out.

That you trained a player for 2/3s of a season and sold him for over a thousand percent profit doesn't really do your argument that much justice. If you disagree with my view on the TL, that's fine. You are likely to move very slowly up the ladder and reach and point where you will flat line, or even go backwards, because other managers are effectively trading. But I don't think this will happen because, despite the debate, I believe you understand the importance of the TL.

My only point was that there are in fact lots of strategic aspects to this game, so don't let yourself focus too much on the TL, especially if you don't enjoy that aspect of the game.

I completely agree with you. It's just that success in the TL overpowers success elsewhere, including basketball analysis. This is irrefutable.

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.

Certain aspects of the front page mislead people, yes. There are certain aspects that do not. This doesn't mean that it is a wholly bad or wholly good thing. I'm pointing out a few things that are misleading, taken both in context and out of context.

I have not, ever, stated that the GE is bad or misleading or is not advanced. That you imply that I have is closer to selective editing than anything I have written to date.

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.

I definitely see your point here and rescind my position against this.