BuzzerBeater Forums

It's not about the shoot selection being so bad i cant stand it,but it can be improved,look at the diffrence in tactics,you can chose run and gun that is a 3 point shooting tactic and still about 2\3 of your shoots will be for 2 points,same for base attack and for motion tactic,so what's the diffrnce beside the players getting more shoots becouse they play faster?

The shot selection here is not that bad but it still lack greatly,i want to go to my roster and for exmple give my PG and SG orders to play as motion tactic,for my SF to play noraml and my PF and C to play inside,is this so bad??

If i have a great C or PF and i want to play motion they will get less shoot and in the attack will be almost unnoticed if they don't got a good jump shoot,why a 300K center takes 6 shoots in a mption tactic? a total waste...but if he could play inside while the others jump shoot they the roster will get the best out of himself.

Do you have any self-versions of my idea? maybe you can offer a less or more other system that would be better i would like to hear people about it.

This is what you think but it's still the thinking about tactics,in real life each player does what he need to,randolf takes rebounds and go inside,you don't see any centers throw for 3 point and guards with bad shooting dont throw much but try to penatrate to the basket(like rondo)do in real life everyone does waht they need to in individoal way but here you got to select a tactic that restricts all your 5 players on court-not realistic at all.

It's realistic for defence i'll give you that but the attack part is just SO FAR from real life orders it lacks severly in my opinion.

You mistake perfect coaching for an engine thing. The reason, why people do, what they are doing is that they have to do it n their tactical schemes. You need to learn how to utilize the existing schemes and you need to work your players and their character / skillset in a perfect way, what you´re asking for is already there, you just haven´t found it yet.

Last edited by LA-seelenjaeger at 5/17/2011 11:18:08 AM

I disagree with you,yes you can perfect it to a certin limit BUT that limit us not nearly the best use of your players possible,it's only the best possible for the tactic you choose.

I don't want it becouse it will help me i can do good enpugh without this BUT i want it in the game to improve the fun and realisim of the game and make it better.

And again: you call it realism, but actually you misinterprete what´s going on in the NBA and in most basketball leagues. What you see is coaches utilizing players by making them running set plays and different and distinct offense schemes. Not vice versa. Only all star games work the way you ask for.

I agree but not intirely,yes in the all star game everybody do whatever thet want and of course everybody do mostly what they are best to,but in EVERY game the players improvise when a certin attack drill fail and it happen A LOT and then again-anything goes just do it before the 24 cloack ends.

I don't see how giving an order to my center to try shoot most of his shoots in the paint is turning the game upside down in a wrong way.

I don't see almost ANY center in the world shooting 3 points(except for end games and desparte positions)on a regular base,surely you'll agree most of them takes their shoot closer to the ring then from the key area,so why telling my center to do this quite obvious very realistic thing is not good to this game???

I can understand people happy with the current system(i'm with them BTW)but i can't understand people not wanting to change it for the best,i say again-this game is aims to be realistic as it can and this thing is quite basic...

What you are describing is already built into the GE. The players try find the best shot available on each offensive set. Each tactic already builds in what type of shot the players will try to achieve.

I don't see how giving an order to my center to try shoot most of his shoots in the paint is turning the game upside down in a wrong way.

Its already built in. if the player has a good shot he believes he can make then he will take it. That means if your C can get off a wide open, unmarked shot then he will take it if it is the best play available. Which is better than trying to get the shot out to a guard for a contested jumper.

I don't see almost ANY center in the world shooting 3 points(except for end games and desparte positions)on a regular base

Mehmet Okur? Troy Murphy? Andrea Bargnani? Dirk Nowitzki (he could play C if they need him there)? I'm sure there are others. Plenty of European big men have quite a bit of jump shot and range which could hit the open jumper. If they get a shot they believe they can make (even if its from the 3pt line) then they will take it. Not every C is built like your traditional American C that is there to dominate the paint and not much else

Last edited by Monkeybiz at 5/17/2011 9:22:16 PM

You belive the GE works in a certin way,but beliving that doesn't say it is really working like that,i think the GE still takes a lot of stupid shoots,for exmple a center taking a 3 point shoot 4 sec after a timeout,come on! how many time did you see that in real life? and it wasn't even in the last quater! if that's not a bad GE decision then what is?

I didn't see okur and murphy play so much but still i didn't see them shoot 3 points on a regular base,bargani and nowitzki are PF,and belive it or not i watch european basketball on a regular base and even was at the final four 2 weeks ago in barcelona,we got PF that shoot for 3 points in europe and some of them are really good at it(taltovich,morris if you know them)buy still since sabonis and vujcic there is no center that has a normal hand for this shoots and also a premission from his coach to shoot whenever he feel he can.

So you expect him to pass up an open shot because it´s only been four seconds after the Timeout?