BuzzerBeater Forums

Good afternoon. I am a newbie in the game but a veteran in others of the same type and I was a grassroots basketball coach. The game, which I love, already includes training for the development of the players on the squad at a technical level rather than a physical level.
I wonder if the game includes or has already considered and ruled out the possibility of introducing tactical training.

I will try to summarize the idea as much as possible and if interested I will undertake to develop it to facilitate its implementation if it is considered interesting.

It would be a matter of implementing in parallel with the current training one that was tactical in nature and could choose between defense or attack and various models for each case, adjusting to current tactics.

If a team has been training "circulate the ball" for some time, it should do it better and better and if in a match it uses another tactic "searching inside" that it has never used or trained, it should not be 100% effective.

The level of maximum effectiveness should be achieved with a maximum of two or three different tactics at the same time because as time has passed without using it and/or training it, the effectiveness should decrease. The same would happen if many elements of the template change, which would penalize the constant change of cards.

This, in my opinion, would bring the game closer to reality and would give an extra level to the training, filling a gap that exists now.

It sounds similar to this thread (323509.13).

I still don't know whether I want to support this idea, but the first thing that came to my mind is Game-Day Preparation.
Having fewer tactic options makes it easier for opponents to guess your offensive strategy.

If the number of offensive and defensive tactics that can maintain 100% effectiveness is increased to, for example, 10, then it should not significantly affect most people.

Naturally, not having a tactic trained should not make it completely ineffective.
To put numbers to the idea: If a tactic is now 100% effective without training, the effects would be noticeable, but its effectiveness would drop to, say, 85%, after three weeks of training it would rise to 100% and after 2 more weeks to 110%. On the other hand, its effectiveness would decrease by 5% for every two weeks that you have not trained or used it, without ever dropping below 85% and without dropping anything if you use it in matches.

In this way you could have two to 4 trained and functional tactics like now or 2 highly trained ones that would work better than the current ones.

If you train for three weeks, a tactic, even if you have not used it, will be ready to use in a match with the same effectiveness as now. Let's be honest, depending on your squad there are really only two or three tactics that can be effective, if you don't have good passers the slow ones don't work and if you don't have rebounders the 2-3 doesn't work to catch more rebounds. With training they could work better and even surprise rivals more if they have never used it even if you have secretly trained it.

Advantages that I see:
I would not limit the tactics to use.
It would improve the effectiveness of tactics that do not work now.
Encourages long-term match preparation.
And above all, the game would get a little closer to the reality of sport.

To add, in BB, the use of tactics is actually very diverse, especially offensive tactics.
Below is the usage of tactics this season by the current top eight teams in B3, viewed through Buzzer Manager.
(https://imgur.com/a/zRtmW6m)
We can see that if we exclude those used only once, each team has utilized at least six different offensive tactics.
Therefore, in terms of numbers, the new system is likely to limit the use of tactics.

In this way you could have two to 4 trained and functional tactics like now or 2 highly trained ones that would work better than the current ones.

110% is very attractive.
I guess most teams will choose 2 highly trained ones, and most of them will select one inside and one outside offensive strategies with different pace to avoid being predicted.

I would like to read more opinions, whether for or against. And if they are argued even better.

It is possible to get promoted to a higher league even without planning to do so.
In such cases, the players' salaries are usually lower than the minimum total salary required for the higher league.
If you choose to recruit new players, the suitable tactics might be completely different from those used before.
In this situation, the team is already relatively weak and is further punished by changing tactics, which feels like a double damage.

It is possible to get promoted to a higher league even without planning to do so.
In such cases, the players' salaries are usually lower than the minimum total salary required for the higher league.
If you choose to recruit new players, the suitable tactics might be completely different from those used before.
In this situation, the team is already relatively weak and is further punished by changing tactics, which feels like a double damage.

True, I hadn't thought about this. Thanks for discovering it.

It could be solved at least in part by doubling the effectiveness of preseason training or otherwise lowering the training level of all teams during the "Interseason Break."

Thus, the teams that have to change tactics due to the new squads will be only slightly at a disadvantage in the first days, but after two or three weeks they will have to achieve the maximum possible performance again.

Many people use regular league games and BBM to test tactics.
But opportunities for testing will significantly decrease in order to maintain the effectiveness of tactics.
Although increasing the quota for pickup games might help, many managers in our community prefer a slower pace.
They might not like having to arrange additional matches and set the lineup for extra games.

Additionally, differences in the effectiveness of tactics make it difficult to evaluate tactics, which in turn slows down everyone's understanding of these tactics.
This may not be beneficial for new managers.



Last edited by little Guest at 06/05/2024 04:14:09