BuzzerBeater Forums

My point is that a large number of NBBA teams (and I have to assume in B3) have as deep (if not deeper) a roster as Heathens. The difference-maker is the OD (and, I'll grant you, the very good rebounding).

Plus, OD, along with ID and REB is even more effective then it was intended to be due to teams having much higher enthusiasm then anticipated.

Say that 10 enthusiasm gives me a 10% boost in outside defense over having 5 enthusiasm. If i have a team OD of 10 @ 5 enthusiasm, that gets boosted to 11 @ 10 enthusiasm.

Now i decide to train outside defense to the point that I get 20% increase in team OD. So now i start with a team OD rating of 12 @ 5 enthusiasm, that gets boosted to 13.2 @ 10 enthusiasm.

After that additional training i get a 20% increase in gain from having higher enthusiasm (+1.2 instead of +1 gain in team OD). This makes it much smarter to train your players in outside defense (or reb and ID) then it does another skill that doesnt get that enthusiasm boost, particularly JS which is typically one of the highest trained player skills.

Last edited by brian at 5/12/2010 10:38:16 AM

In fact, in a quick glance at some of their closer games I didn't see any in which the last couple of levels of their OD didn't seem to be overkill and would have been more valuable if spent elsewhere.

Results aren't agreeing with this. Most of your points seem overly simple for the supposed complexity of the GE, leaving out the importance of passing, and the effect of enthusiasm boosting the skills that Mike has focused on, and the cost it would require to build a team that's finely tuned (and also unbalanced) to take advantage of their weaknesses.

Maybe for the high cost of inside defense and rebounding its better to have that overkill in OD, especially if it stifles your opponents ability not just to hit anything outside the paint, but also to move the ball. We've yet to see a team expose that inside defense. Ice Storm is probably the best built inside team in the NBBA -> (20386373). So Ice's PF/C shot around 50%. Big deal, they still chucked up 19 threes and hit only 1. If you could have your coach tell your team to "never take an outside shot against this team or your running laps for an hour after the game!", maybe it's less effective but until then a shot outside the paint against this OD is essentially a turnover.

edit - im agreeing that a better distribution of skills, or a re-distribution of skills, would be much more effective at countering the model that Heathens has built which he will inevitably have to react to. It will take some time and cost to build a balanced team that can do this though, as the ideal "balanced" team has now changed due to this new Heathens model. Overall this is great and will lead teams having to evolve their training and tactical plans.

Last edited by brian at 5/12/2010 12:18:54 PM

Sorry, but Charles and Forrest are probably the only people that know this for certain, so I'm definitely listening when they speak over anyone else

Sure, and I also pay atention when BB's write about the game engine, and most of the times i agree with them(even if i dont write it), but lately i dont really agree with them, SB issue or economy.

For example this season its becoming evident on the B3 that its really hard to play zones with success(2-3/1-3-1 is frustrating how it works) and of course on national teams that we are 2 steps over the teams. Im really waiting for knowing how the zones next season will work(the new ones that were announced)


@Damena

I will be keeping my thoughts, but i will never encourage a manager to train SB. I know SB effect its not only the SB produceds, and from my experience on nt's for example i saw how a 13 SB was outplayed more times than expected(even with good game shape), anyway as i said i will keep it for me.

Obviously does a effect(really little) acording to the salary increase

For what it's worth, I've trained SB for 4 weeks in a row now.

For what it's worth, I've trained SB for 4 weeks in a row now.

Having just re-read your answer to the 2nd question I posed to you earlier I hope for your sake this is 3rd time lucky!!

On the salary calculator you can build the following type of player;

ID/RB 18
SB 17
PA 12
HD 7
OD 7
IS - under 5
rest of the skills rubbish - all this for about $150k by my reckoning.

Now would the fact he cant shoot mean he would definitely pass in the game engine.. and which tactic could you envisage a player like him being a success, or is this my 2nd far fetched post of the day :D

don't know if you could say that, yes the bonus is a bit bigger when you have a high starting value but the question is if the additional gain "linear" and i would answer that with no.

He already compete very well with low enthusiam, and the additional gain through enthusiam, wouldN#t give that big effekt because he already dominated his opposition without the boost where the gain of the other team will have a bigger impact because it is "closer" competion. So overall i think the extra % will favour the team with a bit lower or comparable OD most, even when the total bonus is smaller.

But concentrating on OD is a good way in the engine, because i believe this skill is used in a lot comparisions, and it is very difficult to raise all this skills to a comparative level then the oppositions Od.