BuzzerBeater Forums

I think we are facing two problems:
1) preventing such effective savings - I found an inspiration in another online game. The countries with lower than 100 active users don't have own league, but plays international league together with all the teams from the small countries. I think it could work here as well (maybe the limit could be different). Even if there are still lot of issues to solve (how about countries which are in the international league and go over the limit, how about countries which have own league but fall down under the limit, how about B3 participant, just cup winner for each country and the winner of international league or best team of each countries in international league, draft etc.).
2) force the team that already have saved enough money to spent them as quick as possible. I can't take them the chance for B3 run for next season (or few seasons), but I would like to shorten as much as possible period of savings B3 winners.

Last edited by rwystyrk at 5/19/2011 1:01:49 PM

The countries with lower than 100 active users don't have own league, but plays international league together with all the teams from the small countries.

Sound like something Superfly Guy has been advocating for pretty much ever.

force the team that already have saved enough money to spent them as quick as possible. I can't take them the chance for B3 run for next season (or few seasons), but I would like to shorten as much as possible period of savings B3 winners.

That's a good way to get users to quit. I disagree with "moving-the-goalpost" changes to the game which is why its frustrating when these issues could have been addressed before they were to the point of ruining entire aspects of the game.

There are always some users that don't like the situation and are quiting the game. That's only about finding the way how to minimize that numbers and about design the game so that it could be healthy in long term without useless competition.

Last edited by rwystyrk at 5/20/2011 2:39:23 PM

I challenge you to play 2-3 against inside teams and proof that even if you have the best team it's broken.


I'll call it the 2-3 challenge, if you manage to proof that this 2-3 can work on serious games, i'll pay you a supporter for 3 month

Kaksi Tornia vs. Venomous Scorpions 67 - 105 ((32866411))

Low Post against 2-3 Zone

FG:26 - 89 --> 29%
3FG:1 - 19 -->5%

Nice match, it shows how 2-3 works;

K. Harjula C 4-10-- 40% (3 dunks&1 driving layup)
H. Hallamäki PF 5-12---41,6% (4 dunks)
J. Merikangas C 2 - 7---- 28,5% but only 7 FG

Total a 11-29---- 37%

Thats ok, but...

If Kaksi Torniahad had outside players that apart from defending-passing were able to drive under the basket or shoot from the middle-long distance in good conditions then the situation would be different.

Even if Kaksi Tornia outside players are weak on their outside skills, they managed to score, but you defended nice because you have an insane team and so high defenses.


This match is showing that 2-3 makes you lose lot of OD(or it's so hard to counter a driving from an outside player...), if you face an opponent that apart from having nice IS's have nice outside players, then you will see how his PG or SG will end with more than 20 points.

The problem of the 2-3 is that instead of watching how the C ends with a 7-27, the PG or the SG is the one that ends with 10-20 FG's, the 2-3 doesn't help you defend better, it just changes the distribution of the shoots, in m2m you can't stop the PF-C but in normal conditions with 2-3 you can't stop the PG-SG and that's something we already said...

You stopped their outside players because you have high OD and because of the weakness of his outside players.


PS: About SB we see how useless is.


Last edited by Marot at 6/1/2011 12:06:23 PM

In 3-2 you lose a lot of ID

That's not true.

Last edited by Marot at 6/1/2011 2:28:13 PM

1 team playing R&G 2-3 and the other LI, 3-2.

There are more chances that the team playing LI his SG ends with 20-25 points or 25-30 than the team playing R&G his center scoring 20-25 points from the inside just because of the zone.

If you don't see this(the imbalances between the zones) you will see it with the time.

Last edited by Marot at 6/1/2011 2:56:58 PM

This match is showing that 2-3 makes you lose lot of OD(or it's so hard to counter a driving from an outside player...), if you face an opponent that apart from having nice IS's have nice outside players, then you will see how his PG or SG will end with more than 20 points.

The problem of the 2-3 is that instead of watching how the C ends with a 7-27, the PG or the SG is the one that ends with 10-20 FG's, the 2-3 doesn't help you defend better, it just changes the distribution of the shoots, in m2m you can't stop the PF-C but in normal conditions with 2-3 you can't stop the PG-SG and that's something we already said...

ratings are not every thing that you need till win a game ! my OD rating was weak but my team work at Perimeter Defense was so good (1-19)

yes , his PG and SG were weak but my team wholly overcome to his inside players ! anyway i dont think that if he has better guards , he could do anything more :))

Last edited by Misagh at 6/1/2011 4:04:58 PM