as I mention below, we're going to improve the situation before the next game day.
1) The key point here, I think, is that what you see at the moment is really half of a set of changes designed to improve the game engine. We wanted to make the changes gradual so that it would be easier to adapt, but the problem is that halfway leaves things out of balance temporarily
2) If your C or PF is listed as the defender against a smaller player, this is almost certainly because they are trying to block the shot as a help defender, not because they got caught up in a switch. If you are playing a zone defense, then your center will end up defending against a lot of inside shots no matter who takes them, but that's what you expected, right?
3) One of the issues that has always existed in this engine is that the pace is too high; the typical NBA game has about 95 possessions, while in BuzzerBeater that number is often closer to 120. In the past, there have been too many possessions compared to an NBA game but also too much defense. We were trying to fix these things one step at a time in order to reduce the number of changes that come in all at the same time, and it's evident that the end result is that people are looking at the scores and saying their defense doesn't work anymore. I disagree; defense that concedes 101 points in 126 possessions, as I saw in the case of somebody who was complaining about the game engine, is actually quite good defense. It's just the 126 possessions that are fooling you.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyway, I think it's become clear that while trying to do this halfway represents a smaller leap, it leaves everybody confused. I suppose it's been too long since I've read von Clausewitz [surely somebody gets the reference, right?]. So, this leaves us with the choice of either doing things in very small jumps and recalibrating the whole engine every time (which, while time-consuming, might work, but which will also mess up some of the team rating to expected result calculations) or making these changes all at the same time (which will result in a more massive shift, but one in which the games on both ends will make a lot of sense).
We're discussing this shortly and we're going to do something before the next game day to make sure that the game engine is easier to understand.
So schedule is what really matters then? Boo. Yeah make engine different every game day to make it impossible to analyze thanks.
1)Are you serious? I can't believe you actually said that.
2)You should mentioned this somewhere before the changes took place. No just the way you did.
3) Number of posseison is not a problem. Missing team rebounds are problems. considering there are teams not training inside skills such a switch in importance unbalance game ... the hard way.
Overall you should consider gthose changes in connection with training. I t should be possible to cover your weakness by training at least partially no matter how focus the team is.
-----------------------------------
You are just telling you don't want managers to retire cause that's what matters, don't you?
Things that are changing constantly are easier to uinderstand, of course... *roll eyes* Sometimes I think the only one who don't do long term planning are you, BBs.
Edit: Some of those issues works for me, some against me, just claryfing before someone accuse me of being biased. I just don't want to play with different engine each game. And yes the first game was horrible experience (not because the loss which was kibnd of expected).
Last edited by docend24 at 6/7/2009 9:42:05 AM