BuzzerBeater Forums

I hope this get's locked soon.

We don't lock Suggestions threads unless they spiral into repetitive flaming.

I am trying to give managers and coaches more power concerning tactical choices and make them feel to have more influence on the outcome to the game. I said that tactics are important, and I think tactics should play a more important role than enthusiasm, but still the most important goal should be to create a good team. Therefore I was explaining that a weak team should not be able to win against a very strong team just by choosing the right tactics.

Teams which are skillwise not so far apart should try to anticipate each others moves and win with tactical cleverness, be it choosing the right offense or defense after a certain time, or a certain situation. The if-term suggestion is coming from a game I already played some years ago and I thought it was thrilling to see that in certain situations the tactical switch you had prepared for a certain situation before the game changed the outcome of the game.

I will ignore the post of Kukoc as I see he didn't read all posts and just tries, as usual, scare people who suggest things away. I 've read in different other forum topics that he just is there to make people feel stupid, and that is really strange and immature behaviour I think from a 30 year old man, as he claims to be.

Timeouts would be a great place to effect the tactic changes.


Last edited by Coach Ash at 1/12/2010 2:04:03 PM

I would also want to stress that maybe the Buzzerbeater community can discuss about useful if-situations where a tactic switch is possible. For example we can say it is possible to switch tactics after certain time ranges (all 5 minutes or all ten minutes or even just by quarters) and for certain situations such as points being behind or in front (5, 10, 15, 20 points).

The if-terms should not be personnally created but there must be a certain scheme that Buzzerbeater is ready to offer, based on what they think the game engine can handle without being too overwhelmed.


Last edited by Coach Ash at 1/12/2010 2:12:03 PM

Timeouts would be a great place to effect the tactic changes.

there wont ever be tactic changes during live game as game is calculate before you actually see it live...

but there could be possible to set different line ups and tactics for each quater before the game and choose who suppose to get ball if opponent goes straight to foul you or who suppose to try score from 3pt line (random would take a part too so not every time your team could give the ball for the player you set so others would shoot or get ball too but most of the times the player you have chosen to do that)


And it`s really no point to argue about tactics change opportunity during live game, cause it`s impossible.

:) I'm still not talking about tactic switches in the game, but set before the game.

If you could decide before the game when you want to take the timeouts to switch tactics...that's what I meant. Sorry for the confusion.

To make it clearer: you would set before the game: take timeout in minute 15 and switch offense to run and gun and defense to 3-2 zone.

Last edited by Coach Ash at 1/12/2010 2:15:54 PM

To make it clearer: you would set before the game: take timeout in minute 15 and switch offense to run and gun and defense to 3-2 zone.

and that`s what I hope will be possible to do in the future.

and what do you think of the possibility to change your tactics based on a certain situation, like for example your team is behind by 10 points?

I like your idea of adding situational tactics to the game. I remember a hockey manager game which had these features and I thought it was fun. You could set things like "Pull your goalie for a sixth attacker when down by less than X goals and with less than X minutes to play" or "Play a defensive game when ahead by at least X goals". Yes, it was rather complicated for a newcomer but the fact is that you were not forced to set these advanced tactics, you could just let the AI take all the decisions and still had a fair chance at winning the game.

I read all youre posts.
I also read a lot of forums, prolly more than you. I only write when I see something totally wrong or something I support.

I have read these type of suggestions before. Now you are drifting again to the "old" suggestion of the goto guy. Where you set up a guy who will shoot when it counts the most. Keep in mind that any tactic must have a counter tactic. Anything you can set up can be countered. If you have a star SG in youre team and you set him as the goto guy. Defencive team must also have an option to double team x player in the last minutes. Now the game engine already calculates the best matchup and ability to score from behind the arc in the last minutes. What if the goto guy is crowded with 2 defenders will he take that crappy airball or will he pass to an ok guy behind the arc. Just choosing one guy for taking those forced shots is not tactics.

I will say for the last time, that changing tactics to a lot of different "if" tactics will make the game more complicated and will demolish the point of having defence tactics at all.

How can you still keep calling me immature, when I give out valid points? It seems to me you are just in denial...
Whenever you suggest something changed, you have to see the big picture. What will the change affect? I am all for good suggestions, perhaps something good will come out of this one. You will never know. Just move in a direction that will not hinder/destroy something fundamental this game has (like negate defencive tactics alltogether).

Last edited by Edju at 1/12/2010 4:51:12 PM

I like your idea of adding situational tactics to the game. I remember a hockey manager game which had these features and I thought it was fun. You could set things like "Pull your goalie for a sixth attacker when down by less than X goals and with less than X minutes to play" or "Play a defensive game when ahead by at least X goals". Yes, it was rather complicated for a newcomer but the fact is that you were not forced to set these advanced tactics, you could just let the AI take all the decisions and still had a fair chance at winning the game.

yes, I think also that you should not be obliged to choose tactic modifications. Maybe something to add in advanced tactics. and you would also feel that the orders that you gave before the game changed the outcome (be it positively or negatively) and not just let the game engine do his thing. For me that means in the end more fun and joy watching games and analyzing opponents. You also feel taking part of the game action by having given your orders for certain situations before the game. While right now it is a little bit as if you send out your players with a blessing and hope they make the best of the one tactics you told them to play.

Last edited by Coach Ash at 1/12/2010 4:57:46 PM

I think you overrate the offensive ability to score. A good percentage to score in a season is what? 50-55%. Even the best players of the world don't have better stats that that.

It's an extremely rare feat for an NBA team to have an overall field goal percentage above .500. A good scoring perentage would be anything in the .450-.500 range.