BuzzerBeater Forums

if you scout an opponent you do it to beat the team.

Lets take a look at a habbit of many PG, when they drive to the basket and the help defence comes a lot of tend to jump and then pass the ball. Normally a risky and bad pass, so you can say they are weak in passing, but to utilize this information you had to know where he looks for his teammates to receive a pass and how the help defender can rotate over the guard without giving his matchup a easy basket. Which passing station shouldn't be open, and which one maybe even give the defence time to rebuild ...
Next example, you have a good shooter in the opposing team. If the scout comes with this information alone, he is most likely fired because it is more important for the succes of the game to know, how they use his strength if he plays pick and pop or are they running plays to make him open as a spot up shooter and how they could defend it(can they rotate on the pick? How the C/PF reacts after the pick etc.)

What i am saying, yes they look for strength and weaknesses but those strength are considered in the enviroment they play and how they and you utilize it and this is something where you had to consider there systems and the other 4 players on the court. They don't come up, with an one and one streetball profile.

Edit: You have the same questions also on offense, how is the help defence, where we could get an open men etc. Such thing might start with a personal weakness, but also consider the abilities and tactic of the opposing team. And you don't search such weaknesses in studying one player, you do it in studying their games and analysing situations.

Last edited by CrazyEye at 10/18/2011 6:32:29 PM

1) I understand this is a game, and the idea is to make it interesting and not just "simple".
On the other hand, you want to have it balance with the ability to get information and take desicions.

The argument against giving this information could be taken also for other aspect in the game.
Why give your own players exact profile?
Why not hiding also the arena breakout of revenue per seat type?
etc.

So, the only Q is - does my suggestion makes the game too easy, or is it in the bounding of reason.
I think it is reasonable, but it is for the BB GMs to decide, and it appears they set their mind against it.

2) I agree, in "real" life the scout gives a more presice information (and I've already wrote it before).
But, he definately gives the narrow information of the differnet players' skils (like rebounding).

3) I think it will improve the game as it will give the user one more option to think about.
Does he wants to pay a scout for getting information of the opponent or not.
Again, the amount of money and the amount of information is for the BB GMs to decide.

I think it is reasonable, but it is for the BB GMs to decide, and it appears they set their mind against it.

if the post haven't a moderating aspect, our post are like every other user but definately we don't decide what get implemented next.

Your whole argument of "this is how it goes in the real world" is just not true. Scouts go watch a particular player in his games, look at his boxscores, how many minutes he plays, etc. All that you can do here! Just grab some popcorn and watch your opponent's last 10 games on the viewer. Knowing the exact skills would be more or less like sending scouts to your opponent's training, where you could really see a player shoot volumes, or how well he jumps and rebounds, how accurate his passing is, etc... As far as I know, Celtics scouts aren't allowed in Lakers practices.

And don't take this the wrong way, but for someone who has only been playing for 2 seasons, you shouldn't spend so much time making new suggestions. A little idea now and then is all for the best, but it really looks like you expect this to work like the mental conception you have of an imaginary game you would like to play

Your whole argument of "this is how it goes in the real world" is just not true. Scouts go watch a particular player in his games, look at his boxscores, how many minutes he plays, etc. All that you can do here! Just grab some popcorn and watch your opponent's last 10 games on the viewer. Knowing the exact skills would be more or less like sending scouts to your opponent's training, where you could really see a player shoot volumes, or how well he jumps and rebounds, how accurate his passing is, etc... As far as I know, Celtics scouts aren't allowed in Lakers practices.

In case that was the status then scouts would be expandable and pointless, or at least there would be no reason to send a scout to an actual game.
He could just grab the statistics (like you said), a popcorn, and analyze from it...
I think this suggestion could add another interesting abilitiy aspect to the game, and one that does not compromise its assence. But it is not under "must have", it is under nice to have. It is additional feature, and not a required fix.

And don't take this the wrong way, but for someone who has only been playing for 2 seasons, you shouldn't spend so much time making new suggestions. A little idea now and then is all for the best, but it really looks like you expect this to work like the mental conception you have of an imaginary game you would like to play

Well, here I just totaly disagree with your POV.
Veteran user just keep doing the same things and will rarely think about changing something that he is well aware of.
A new user, will be a refreshing way of thought.
Maybe he will be wrong about some or most of the things, but he will definately comes with a clean and new perspective.
And this is true to all things and not just to the narrow world of BB.

Last edited by Pini פיני at 10/23/2011 3:03:16 AM

In case that was the status then scouts would be expandable and pointless, or at least there would be no reason to send a scout to an actual game.
He could just grab the statistics (like you said), a popcorn, and analyze from it...
I think this suggestion could add another interesting abilitiy aspect to the game, and one that does not compromise its assence. But it is not under "must have", it is under nice to have. It is additional feature, and not a required fix.

Why don't you just get off your ass and scout the games yourself rather than try invent a whole new concept of scouts to do work for you?

As others already said it just doesn't make sense for you to know exactly what your opponents skills are. This is a management game. The smart managers will be able to predict what the skills are from analysing box scores and team/player ratings. If you want to just log in and press a button and have it all done for you then perhaps this is not the game for you. There is no fun when everyone knows exactly what the skills are of their opponents as tactics become less relevant.

Veteran user just keep doing the same things and will rarely think about changing something that he is well aware of.
A new user, will be a refreshing way of thought.
Maybe he will be wrong about some or most of the things, but he will definately comes with a clean and new perspective.
And this is true to all things and not just to the narrow world of BB.

Ever heard of the saying that if it ain't broke don't fix it? Theres nothing wrong with the current system so there is no real enhancements gained here. What you propose here is a whole new concept change alltogether and will take our BBs time to change and implement.

There is nothing wrong with this and as "refreshing" as your thoughts are, it is not adding any additional value to this game. In fact, it will take away many of the fundamental values of this game if everyone knows what everyone players skills are and makes tactics less relevant.

In case that was the status then scouts would be expandable and pointless, or at least there would be no reason to send a scout to an actual game.
He could just grab the statistics (like you said), a popcorn, and analyze from it...
I think this suggestion could add another interesting abilitiy aspect to the game, and one that does not compromise its assence. But it is not under "must have", it is under nice to have. It is additional feature, and not a required fix.

It's not only the stats, they actually watch the game.
And you can do it too by yourself (game viewers do work pretty well).

You want life easier, less challenging, less entertaining...

So, why don't you suggest the other way around?

You could suggest that giving the users an option to choose and buy players (for example) is too much, and they should be drafted without seeing any stats.

You could argue that the user should not be able to make his own lineup, and the coach will decide upon his reasoning, because, hey, why making life easier? no???

This suggestion that I brang here stands by its own.
You are getting one thing but giving another.
Like you can scout in the draft and pay for that (again, why allow the draft scouting? Isn't it not challenging?), the same is suggested here.
Paying an amount of money for a very little bit of information.

So, why don't you suggest the other way around?

You could suggest that giving the users an option to choose and buy players (for example) is too much, and they should be drafted without seeing any stats.

Why that? In real life, teams do buy and sell players. Teams do scout draftees.
What you don't have in real life, is a scout that comes to you before a game and tells you "I've discovered that Omri Casspi is a very good shooter and a good rebounder". Wow!
Scouts don't tell you how a player in your league is good at what.
Both in real life and in this game, I perfectly know who my opponent's good shooter, legendary passer, atrocious rebounders are.

You could argue that the user should not be able to make his own lineup, and the coach will decide upon his reasoning, because, hey, why making life easier? no???

It's the other way round: having to choose the line-up ADDS complexity to the game.

This suggestion that I brang here stands by its own.
You are getting one thing but giving another.
Like you can scout in the draft and pay for that (again, why allow the draft scouting? Isn't it not challenging?), the same is suggested here.
Paying an amount of money for a very little bit of information.

Because in real life teams pay scouts to tell them what draftees are good at and how.
And because in BB, instead, there is no other way you can get an insight on draftees (simply because BB-NCAA games or similar stuff don't exist).



Last edited by Stavrogin at 10/26/2011 5:32:37 PM

Scouts don't tell you how a player in your league is good at what.

Not only that they tell how good each player is, they also point to the exact moves that he good at, and where his weaknesses are.

It's the other way round: having to choose the line-up ADDS complexity to the game.

Just the same with this "enhanced scouting abilities", the user should decide how much money he will invest in a small partion of information regarding his opponent.
It is exactly like the draft scouters! The user chooses amount of money to invest for getting better information about players he can draft.

Because in real life teams pay scouts to tell them what draftees are good at and how.

I got it... scouts can tell all about a draftee, but about a player the same information (kind of) they just can tell, beacuse it is just a totaly different thing. [You understand that it sounds a little bit absurd].

And because in BB, instead, there is no other way you can get an insight on draftees (simply because BB-NCAA games or similar stuff don't exist).

There are three levels of scouting. Why after you get the statistics you don't ask to prevent the last level?
The statistics of a game they give is as representive as a whole season. Otherwise, it would just not give anything.

Summarizing;
Like a scout can scout information about draftees, the scouts of the opponent can do the same.
Exactly like a scouter for the draft candidate is being paid for a small bit of information, so can the scouter for the opponent.
This gives the same complexity as scouting for the draft.