BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > screwed

screwed

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
268.15 in reply to 268.13
Date: 7/9/2007 9:55:37 PM
1986 Celtics
IV.21
Overall Posts Rated:
88
also i took a look at the other 3 games that have been brought up....but i want to do some simulations tonight before i pass judgement on what happened. again.. many thanks for the feedback.. I at least hope that we are giving the impression of making a better game... the inside focus always wins game engine was definitely less "interesting" than this ;)

This Post:
00
268.18 in reply to 268.16
Date: 7/9/2007 10:05:54 PM
1986 Celtics
IV.21
Overall Posts Rated:
88
sorry yes.. that was looking at 547079, brianjames's game.

From: brian
This Post:
00
268.19 in reply to 268.18
Date: 7/9/2007 10:15:51 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
ok, but i think you read this backward:

Even though you were a better rebounding team.. they got more rebounds (i don't think that's a bug, just bad luck, but i will check), the also got more foul shots (perhaps you are a more physical team .. or maybe you were just down at the end). You did end up shooting better than they did..

I had more rebounds, more foul shots, fewer turnovers. He shot 52% to my 46%. So, I could see this make sense if I had made some poor tactical choices or my off v def / def v off ratings were just weaker. Such as, using a 3-2 zone against an inside team (like my opponent, Hoosiers, did). Instead of being rewarded with a higher coaching rating and better shooting % for choosing a 2-3 defense against an inside team, the opposite happened, and the 3-2 against an inside opponent received a higher shooting % AND a higher coaching rating. On top of this, all off vs def ratings were favorable to my team.

.. but the combination of fouls, turnovers and off. rebounds made up for the difference and the eaked out a win. I bet you play this game 10 times you win most of them (i will try it later tonight in our test universe and see).

Cool, be interesting to see the results. If it's just an unlucky result that happens, but if its something thats messed up with the coding then hopefully this helps.

Edited 7/9/2007 10:23:29 PM by brianjames

"Well, no ones gonna top that." - http://tinyurl.com/noigttt
This Post:
00
268.20 in reply to 268.19
Date: 7/9/2007 10:41:15 PM
1986 Celtics
IV.21
Overall Posts Rated:
88
yeah sorry i was reading that sort of backwards.. err... it seems to me the real problem was that you took 16 3 pointers when you were shooting a good percentage inside... and since you were focused inside.. i don't see why you would have taken all those bad 3s...

This Post:
00
268.21 in reply to 268.20
Date: 7/9/2007 10:46:12 PM
1986 Celtics
IV.21
Overall Posts Rated:
88
ahh.. i know... and this is something that needs to be adjusted with our simulation.. not a bug cause its doing what we told it to do, and what we wanted it to do... just it needs to be doing something different.

I'm not sure how much of the reason i should discuss but this has definitely given me an insight that I will discuss with charles, and implement soon.

Edited 7/9/2007 10:50:56 PM by BB-Forrest

From: brian
This Post:
00
268.22 in reply to 268.21
Date: 7/9/2007 10:52:42 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
It did seem odd that I would shoot so many outside shots. On top of that, it seems even more odd that I would shoot 0% compared to Hoosiers shooting ~35% (4/11), when our perimeter off/def where nearly identical. If just one of those 16 3's had connected, I'd have won and would have never brought this all up!

Anyway, feel free to share as much as you can about this Am I wrong in guessing it has something to do with team attitude?


Edited 7/9/2007 11:06:04 PM by brianjames

"Well, no ones gonna top that." - http://tinyurl.com/noigttt
This Post:
00
268.23 in reply to 268.22
Date: 7/9/2007 11:12:09 PM
1986 Celtics
IV.21
Overall Posts Rated:
88
exactly which is what lead me to my epiphany.. there is a good reason why you are taking bad 3 pointers... its cause those bad 3 pointers are still well above average 3 pointers... just you really really suck so well above average is still sucky.

well team attitude should be reflected in the zonal ratings... those ratings are not a function of just how your players base ratings.. but actually what their effective ratings were when you put them out on the floor. IE if someone is very tired they aren't very good anymore and that will bring down your zonal ratings.. yet another reason why the coaching rating as we have it isn't a goodone... as preventing players from getting tired by setting a proper depth chart.. is part of coaching but now is getting normalized out.

Edited 7/9/2007 11:17:41 PM by BB-Forrest

From: brian
This Post:
00
268.24 in reply to 268.23
Date: 7/9/2007 11:19:48 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
exactly which is what lead me to my epiphany.. there is a good reason why you are taking bad 3 pointers... its cause those bad 3 pointers are still well above average 3 pointers... just you really really suck so well above average is still sucky

Sure, my perimeter scoring is crap, but Hoosiers was just as bad (just slightly worse actually), yet he knocked down 4/11 to my 0/16. And, if there is a good reason my team was taking that many 3s when inside scoring was successful, then I'm not sure I understand at all what that is.

"Well, no ones gonna top that." - http://tinyurl.com/noigttt
Advertisement