BuzzerBeater Forums

The first proposal was unfair towards who make right training choises,and give recriminations entrance about all the sytem of salaries and potentiali for all the skills and all the roles

why it was so unfair for them, still the others wasted a lot of time - but now they don't get punished to have an total ineffective training?

The second proposal doesn't have very much sense because if we have a skill called Inside Defence,why there could be another skill about the same thing?

Becuase these sskills also work in reality together, shot blocking is a part of Inside defence, maybe just a small one but none totally unimportant. It isn't really optimal, but it is the way many players interpret the blocking skil also in the past.

If we use maybe 1/3 of the blocking skill as a bonus for ID, it is still more expensiv and harder to train then a single ID skill but you nearly get what you pay for - and thats should be the target. Oldschool centers will still have their place, and aren't overwheelmed from new school guys who actually can block - and they will be also in the future the better choiche.
The step would be very drastic, which maybe isn't that good, but when i look at the transferlist the people who care on blocking don't make genious deals because the skill isn't just overpaid in the salary it is also paid good on the TL because it i maybe good looking. So maybe we just make the game the way, the user expect it.

Shot Blocking skill couldn't boost the defence of a player directly,but indirectly,influenced the chioses of the attacking team. A player who have fear to suffer a block from the adversary,will try to shoot a little far away from the basket.

The problem is to find a line betwen that and ID, because i think the shoot contribution will run everytime the same, and the players don't take to difficult shots for them which could also be the case because they are afraid of being blocked from a defender who maybe stand not 100% optimus. So you had to pass the ball out in the same sitution, like against a player with higher ID.

and the indirect effect of SB gave him a great defensive ability.this solution don't penalize who in right way train ID,because the effect on salary and potential will be the same,gave the right importance to SB,which cannot be a primary skill as IS,ID and ReB,but could be a skill usful to train until a certain leve if a player has a good starting SB skill,without being obligatory to train for a player

in my eyes the merging relation will guarantee this more, because it don't give an extra part into the game - where the old centers are freaking bad(and this part should eb importance, to give a reason for the high salarys for the blocking skill). And they are still trained more effectly and have a little smaller salary then the one with blocking.

.Certain a level 14 in SB was useless,is useless,and will be useless also with the new changes,as the example of Chris Andersen in the real game(Denver Nuggets in NBA says)

I jsut google for him, i can not believe that he is such a weak player like you always say ;) He have an very small offensiv output, and he pays for a championship contender in the NBA as starting Center. Maybe i underestimate the one oan one play in the NBA, which doesn't look for missmatched, but for me basketball is a team sport and when you have a zero defence and zero offence center you aren't a championship contender and become a lottery team.

Last edited by CrazyEye at 7/31/2009 8:12:41 AM

If you still talk about salary and potential changes ONLY for SB or about a direct bonus on ID,we can close in this moment the discussion.
You say:"Why we should punish who make wrong choces?"
But I can answer you:"Why we should reward who make wrong choices?"
So these proposal are far way from reality
My proposal about SB is related with ball circulation,because ball circulation is the way to avoid an adversary with great ID and SB or to give better shot against a great shot blocker,or to pass out the ball for some players in perimeter.SB related with ID could influenced the attacking choices of the attacking team,as yet only ID make in the current GE
About people who care Sb at the same level of other skills of big man,it's the same previous question:"Why we should reward who make wrong choices?"
And about Andersen(poor Andersen,maybe I'm too bad with you :D),he's not the starter in Denver Nuggets,the starter is Nenè,and that team went so goodl last year because it had players like Chauncey Billups,Carmelo Anthony,Kenyon Martin,JR Smith,not certainly for their reserve center :D

You say:"Why we should punish who make wrong choces?"

i say the game is very unbalanced on this point, and this need to be changed.

But I can answer you:"Why we should reward who make wrong choices?"

maybe to have a better game afterwards? And it isn't a reward, maybe it a regulation like the thing with the arena or the rebounding(ok more extrem then the rebounding).

About people who care Sb at the same level of other skills of big man,it's the same previous question:"Why we should reward who make wrong choices?"

why you argue the total other way in the arena thread ;)

Your answers aren't in the worth of the matter,i purpose a balancing of the game that i think fair and realistic in the game,you substain a renewal of the game that is unfair for the main part of the users and unrealistic,also if this is not your wish,that's the point
In every different question one person have to chose what re think is the right position,arena question doesn't have anything to do with SB question


Last edited by Steve Karenn at 7/31/2009 2:56:57 PM

If you still talk about salary and potential changes ONLY for SB or about a direct bonus on ID,we can close in this moment the discussion.
You say:"Why we should punish who make wrong choces?"
But I can answer you:"Why we should reward who make wrong choices?"

I think that adjusting the impact of SB on salary would not really reward anyone that trained it (call wrong choice or misled). It would just not punish them that hard, they still wasted training and they still pay a higher salary. The problem is (the way i see it) that a PF or C pay more for his SB than for example a SF pay for his OD or ID.

at least i can see how killing the salary and potential effect for blocking on a fair will give the players advantage like he always said ;) Hey they still trained much for nothing, but at least training doesn't make the players weaker.

At least we have this new post: (93604.480) - the question is it is new or not? When the effect was from the old engine Forrest mislead us, but i way you could understand because it was very small the effect, else maybe we could close the thread for a while till we figur out if the change are good enough.

That sounds good, it seems hard however to evaluate? When a shot was missed was that caused by good defence or a block altering the shot?

in real games a block sometimes changes momentum, so why not add some kind of psychological bonus to blocked shots like poorer shot selection or slower offensive pace, more offensive fouls due to frustration, by the team that shot was rejected...

There are already 4 distinct effects from shot blocking that were mentioned in this thread. In addition, there is player momentum, so missing a shot makes it more likely that you'll miss your next one. How much more do we need? Shotblocking is not the only skill in the game, you know.