BuzzerBeater Forums

I don't want to take anyone's side, but I have a hunch that the fellow managers from Japan and Italy are correct.

Let's examine some facts.

B3 winners and NT World Title winners' choice of tactics
S5 B3: LI (6045735)
S6 B3: LI (8111249)
S7 B3: R&G (10336343)
S8 B3: LI (12721499)
S9 B3: PTB (15137569)
S10 B3: PTB (17565508)
S11 B3: Motion (20025810)
S12 B3: LI (22600514)

S4 Worlds: Motion (1457)
S6 Worlds: LI (3101)
S8 Worlds: LI (5988)
S10 Worlds: LI (8339)
S12 Worlds: LI (10849)

So out of 13 times the winning team used LI 8 times, outside tactics 3 times and PTB (with the PTB C topping the scoring in the game) twice. I assume it's more balanced than it's been after the change as 62% is less than 90%+, but it looks really hard to make the case that outside tactics and R&G in particular were dominant.





Last edited by Lemonshine at 9/18/2016 8:07:34 PM

Some NBBA ratings from the more recent games you linked (to prove people used outside tactics) are not exactly telling though. You wouldn't have made the finals in other nations with those ratings.

Besides if you read again Brambauti's point, he claimed that LI and inside tactics were never broken, they were more expensive to build back then. However at the very top level where these constraints are looser, you can see that outside tactics did not dominate the scene and you could perhaps make the opposite case. You can argue that the LI dominance has also been caused by the way salary is determined, with IS free on guards, but that is only part of theproblem. If outside tactics were good enough to win, although with a higher price tag, someone would have succeeded that way at least for a stretch.

Where do we go from here? IS on guards is going to cost something, but that only means that LI becomes a little more expensive, not less effective. I don't know what the imbalance was at the beginning of the game, but the current imbalance is caused by inconsistencies in the GE and unusable or indistinguishable tactics. At this point I'm unsure whether just lowering the impact of OD would result in more balance.

I think the only way to do this without redoing the GE altogether is to both lower the impact of OD to some extent (which presumably also will naturally increase the number of mid-range jumpers and 3 pointers for all tactics) and revise some key parameters for the least used tactics (e.g. bump the bonus to outside team rating for higher JR in outside tactics). Unfortunately, since I started playing this game, Marin has never been very keen to touch anything to do with the GE, so I don't think he will, but I hope I'm wrong.

No, The original poster said that LI has only been dominant for 10 seasons which is a lie. And outside O was dominant for 10 seasons which is way too long. I know this because I was one of the only outside teams in Japan(back when we had 50 users).
(32355142)
This was my last game ever running an outside O in a big game. I blew up my team and started a LI team. CUP FINAL heartbreak and the fact that I got tired of Sharman talking crap on the forums.

If my memory serves me correctly, Sharman said that the season 10 final between him and BC Hostivař was a PTB agreement. I don't know if that is 100% true, but that is what he said in the game chat.

Hey, I am not trying to be a dick but your numbers from your original post are WRONG!!
here they are again.

RNG had about a 10-season dominant era
LI had about a 10-season dominant era
we are only in season 36...would you like changes to happen after season 100? is that enough time?

It was more like a mix of motion/PTB/R&G/LI was used for the first 12 seasons. Then it has been that all big must win games have been LI battles(unless one team wants to lose) for the past 24 seasons. Those are the facts!! Like them are not!!

Yeah in the first 12 seasons a lot of finals were played using different tactics, it was almost never LI vs LI and I haven't seen a single R&G vs R&G. The European championships were more varied than the World championships, but inside tactics were still represented.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 9/19/2016 6:49:50 AM

That game should be looked into: looks like +22 bbstats for the losing team, +1 average rating among the players and -20 efficiency!!?? For some reason also 21 three pointers while playing LI. 8}

The home team played LI, his Cs had a combined 139.4 PP100 but they shot a measly 13 times (lowest shots by position including fouls). The same goes with the PF position, 129.4 PP100 but a lot fewer shots than the SG and the SF position???

On the other side: PF 106.4 PP100, shot 75% TS%; SG 104.7 PP100 shot 70% TS%; SF 113.4 PP100 shot 66% TS. Not even Curry, Redick and KD put up that kind of shooting efficiency.



Last edited by Lemonshine at 9/19/2016 7:25:33 AM

Somebody should really start a petition to get LI removed from the game. Maybe for one season only or so, to see what happens.