BuzzerBeater Forums

In reality, the believe the game engine slowly adjusts how each team plays (learning what works best), so I'm not sure how well changing tactics, even in this manner, would work.

Indeed it sounds like tactics get less importancy. Also coach does it today that he tune current tactic slightly to better, but it is quite strange when it comes to your lineup - you might have there players which arent able to play that effectively.

And thats what Im talking about. Another thing is that you surely cannot anticipate almost anything and with volume of tactics we have in the game already, it is starting to be kind of just about luck. Well, personally Im not complaining, because I build-up whole philosophy of my team on that.

It is just there could be more things to anticipate. If decision between these two tactics (and lineups) could come with every timeout, might be ok. Also you could prefer at which conditions you like to choose one of those (so like 5 points doesnt matter if you dont want to).

Indeed it sounds like tactics get less importancy. Also coach does it today that he tune current tactic slightly to better, but it is quite strange when it comes to your lineup - you might have there players which arent able to play that effectively.

but i think the coach just make it towards the direction it works best, so a versatil roster has his advantages even when he maybe get in trouble through the defence a bit earlier.

Example,You lose the game 45-35 and 2 periods end ,the game give 3 minutes to start 3 period and you can change your tactic.and you can win the game. :)

Tactics are used to outsmart an opponent. You would be playing A or B, and such an option makes both possible, diminishing the chances to outsmart an opponent tactically.

I've seen how they done such a thing with Hattrick and I dare say this game would definitely be less fun. Therefor I'm against it.

I think 1.period is end. we lose 45-35
2.period start 3 minutes. ı think the game must give 1 chance for tactic change :) 1 tactic change :) is good ı think so :)

As already explained to you, the game does not happen in real time. So by the time you find out if you are winning/losing,it is too late. The results have already happened 15 minutes before you even find out.

We are not going to have a live game engine and this will give massive advantage for those that are able to stay online when their game is on.

I suppose the coach is supposed to be doing this in the game engine.

So, one nice step in this direction might be to just publicize the changes the coach is making. Ie, that way you could see that even though you started the game in Low Post, now that you're down 15 the coach has given up on this and shifted to a style with a faster pace. Just seeing the coach's changes to your game plan would be a step forward. And a needed step towards allowing the player-manager to do more.

A system where a manager can set up conditions for changes would be most flexible. Then the manager could program in certain changes for certain conditions. Ie, change the offense if ahead or behind. Could be very flexible. Also probably a bear to test to make sure certain conditions don't 'game' the game engine.

Maybe as a first simpler step, just allow three sets of tactics choices ... ie, you can set your offense, defense, depth chart usage and response to fouls for just these three conditions ...

--Normal--
--Down by 12 or more--
--Up by 12 or more--

To me, I don't so much want to automatically change by quarters as I'd want to change per conditions in the game. In the above, it wouldn't be nice to be trying to defend a lead in the 4th Qtr, with a team fighting off foul trouble to key players, and to find oneself in a fast-paced, full-court pressing sort of game just because that's what the plan said to do in the fourth qtr. I'd rather have that triggered by my team going behind in the game.

just my $0.02 worth. :)