BuzzerBeater Forums

I don't know if this has been discussed before, i don't read much the forums, i find them quite uncomfortable, a "normal" board would be a lot easier to read.

Anyway, that's not the question, I don't like how the last minutes works when a team is losing by few points:
I know how basketball works, forcing three pointers + intentional fouls is very common, but in real basketball teams have decent 3 point %.
Here those % are simply ridicolous.

Ok, it's because the game is "young" and players aren't strong enough now, I understand and accept this.
I usually play inside game, so my guards are just decent,and when they have to force they ALWAYS miss.

And as you can understand, CONSTANT miss + 2 free throws for my opponent = CONSTANT loss.

I would have A LOT more chances of winning by forcing a two pointer and hoping for opponent free throw misses.




So, here it's my idea:

Let the user choose how to play the last minutes: insert a menu (in the match tactics) similar to the one based on how the Head Coach should follow your rotation indications... these could be the options available:

1) Force 3 pointer + Foul
2) Force 2 pointer + Foul
3) All court man-to-man pressing, Look for 3 pointers
4) All court man-to-man pressing, Look for 2 pointers
5) Play normally
6) Let the HC decide for you

Obviously if you choose 3 pointers HC should send into the court the best 3p shooters, exactly as it's now.

I think this is the best way to handle this "problem", because it would allow every user to manage the last minutes (the most important ones) in the way he prefers ;)

Last edited by Diablix at 8/2/2008 2:15:03 PM

well, actually I was thinking about this problem not a week ago, but I wouldn't give the choice to the manager, I'd make the game engine smarter.

Why? simpel, because you must know the situation, and the gamehistory to be able to make the right decision, only the coach can do that, since you can't make choices once you reach 15 minutes before the game.

There are a few options:
the loosing team is prety good at 3 pointers, and the winning team has not shown a very good outside D during the game.
Same but loosing team is not good at 3 pointers anyway.
same as first, but winning team has also good outside D.
And the remaining option.
hen thee is also the FT % the winning team has shown during the game, and the coach is supposed to know a little about the FT% of the opposing players during the season as well.

Now let's give an example: say the loosing team sucks at 3 pointers, but the winning team also sucks at FT. Then it would be wise to foul and go for 2. But so far the game engine fouls and goes for 3, so the score doesn't change much at all, while if you go for 2, you actually gain on your opponent missing 1 or 2 FTs.

An other thing bothering me is that the time needed is just too small.
If 40 seconds are remaing, and a good 3-point team is behind on a not so good FT team by 10 points, I put my money on the 3-ponit team, and not on the team being 10 points in front.
Ofcourse the system is made so the team who is behind can still win, but mostly this should not happen.
It is quite frustrating to see a 3 point against in second 39, then miss 1 FT and at second 38 being fouled to just get an other 3 points against in second 37.
It is not always like that, but I've seen games in which 10 seconds provided 4 shotchances for the lossing team...40 seconds could mean 16 shotchances this way, and I just think it is a little to fast going that way. The defending team should try to stall, and try to prevent getting fouled, and should also try to prevent the opponent from taking a 3 point shot within a second of time, especially against a good 3-point team, even if this means they foul on the action, because a foul only means 2 possible points.

So in fact the coach should evaluate: own 3 point chances, own 2 point chances, oppenent's FT chances, and then based on that info, make a decision on how to coach his team.

Both of you raise very good points...

I gotta say it must be a programmers nightmare (or dream!) to get this part of the engine spot on..... i already find the level of game engine intelligence incredible and I guess over time with fine tuning using ideas like this it is just going to get better.

IRL would a team who is far superior inside ignore going for 3's and stick to what they do best which is 2's to try and pull back a deficit?