BuzzerBeater Forums

TIE is a stupid face, not critical for game play.

As I have tried to explain multiple times, the existence of TIE/Normal/CT is first and foremost a strategic game play concern. Even this simple fact should be enough to justify it's persistence in the game.

i disagree. There may be strategy involved in TIE/Normal/CT, but it has nothing to do with basketball.

Consider the following situation. i have a cup game against a bot, so I play my B team and rest all of my A team guys. After that, I have a league game, so I play my A team. Now, if I TIE the cup game, I'll have an enthusiasm boost for the league game, whereas if I normal, I don't get a boost, and if I CT, I lose enthusiasm.

As it stands, the attitude I use for the B team in the cup game directly affects the performance level of my A team in the league game. That feels very artificial to me.

of course we have 1 team (but I agree we often think A/B or 1st team and reserves) and as one of the primary ways to create cash is to train players you cant just have 5/6 great players and ignore the rest....

again a thread of mixed opinions and as long as the rules are there for everyone and we get advanced notice of major changes lets just accept and play on...

it seems that when an opinion on part of the game is overwhelming opposed by the boards then alterations have a chance of being made... so lets just see how this plays out..

You can definitely see a difference in the game that you TIE.

not realy. Not in my case anyway. I am surprised more than once about my ratings.

Why? easy, because at first I thought you could see easily if one TIe or CT.

Why can't I predict my own ratings? (well maybe I could predict a littlebit if I realy put much time and effort in it)

Let me explain.
I use an average of 19 diffrent guys every week ( 1 week 20, the other 18, mostly it's 19 or 20 though). Each of these guys has diffrent skills, but more important, their game shape is changing weekly, and I start every line up from scratch, so it is very possible I don't use the same line up for weeks.
So it might be that either by coincidence, or maybe on purpose a lot of good inside defenders and rebounders join 1 line-up, and let's say I play TIE that game. The previous game I played normal, but the fellows that where in the line up are the ones with less rebounding and less indside D. It might very well be that in the first game my insde D and rebound ratings are lower than in the second game! So if you look at the ratings, and say "hey he TIE-ed the first game, and played normal now, since his ratings where low, and now are higher", then you see how wrong you can be!

The fact you can see it only goes for teams using the same line-up every game. This is not always the case.

i think its safe to say you are in the minority.. most people i have scouted have a nucleus of 7-9 top guys they rotate 60-80mins with each week and a few extra players hanging around to fill gaps or to give minutes to in scrimmages. when you do this you notice big differences in your stats... when i TIE at home it does look similar to Normal away.. but when i can get away with TIEing away to a bot in the cup then play a home league game with much higher enthusiasm normally i expect 2 full levels difference in some areas...

as for CT i have only done this twice ever and both away from home so I have no clue what stats I could muster up at home on enthusiasm 10..... good luck to whoever I decide to dish that out to!!

Last edited by Superfly Guy at 2/29/2008 7:58:43 AM

that indeed is a clearly diffrence.
Also when teams use the same players consistently, probably their game shapes will not change that much either.
In my case a player with average game shape today , could have strong or even proficient game shape next week...

Mutual TIE's possibly don't have a neutral effect on game results.

In HT, the effect of PIC's is on the midfield rating, and the effect of the midfield on possession is based on the relative strength of the midfields.

But in BB, the effect of TIE's is primarily on ID and rebounding. A team that bombs from outside, may not see as much performance change with a TIE.

But in BB, the effect of TIE's is primarily on ID and rebounding. A team that bombs from outside, may not see as much performance change with a TIE.

Pretty sure it affects perimeter defense equally.

As it applies to mutual TIEs - I have no real problem with it if TIE is in the rules.

I do think though that TIE should not be a part of the playoffs. The problem isn't that the number one team has a target, the problem is that the number one team could conceivably face CT every round of the playoffs, making it virtually impossible to win unless they are completely dominant.

Finishing first should not be a disadvantage.

TIE makes more sense in the regular season though. Teams that play back-to-backs will try and play their stars less to keep them fresh for the next night. While this is not a precise analogy the proper analogy does not really exist so this is a close as it gets because in this game playing time does not affect performance the next game (yes yes...unless its the week after)

I do prefer the suggestion made earlier though (I forget who made it) of a standard level of 10 (or whatever number is chosen) which is dropped by CTing.

Hoever even with this I still think it should be left out of the playoffs. Any professional athlete worth a dime gives it everything in the playoffs. Perhaps experience could become more of a factor in playoff games or someting.