Any changes to the Game Engine will first be tested in scrimmages and PLs again before being implemented in competitive matches (probably for half a season). We're planning to announce the tweaks in more detail in this off-season’s news item so that we can start the testing after the ASW, but until then I would say don't stress too much about the possible effects of the change until we all know the planned change. Even then, of course, this may be fine-tuned (or possibly even reverted) depending on the testing results.
B.B.King is right that in the early seasons indeed people were complaining for Run n Gun being too effective, and that now it's Look Inside. Our aim is to have a balance in the possible tactics to effectively use, so if we have to make a change to the engine we should be careful to not create a new imbalance. As I’ve been convinced for a long time that SB isn’t underpowered but undertrained (just sort the TL on minimum 13 SB and compare the amount of results with minimum 13 ID), I don’t think you should be too worried about the change in SB being very drastic. Yet, testing needs to determine the magnitude of the change.
No team should expect to be able to play completely opposing tactics, as you’ll need certain skillset to play a certain tactic effectively. It’s unlikely that your team’s players have skillsets that utilize the potential of every tactic. Aside from possible game engine imbalances, it’s also likely that the dominance of Look Inside is partly clarified by either teams not being able to exploit the outside defenses in an outside tactic (kind of what Wolph is hinting at), or teams not having the correct skillset to play the defensive tactics that are able to stop Look Inside effectively. The results of a match are partly decided by individual matchups. Having a player who’s able to exploit the opponent’s skillset should eventually always reward.
The kind of tactics that are effectively played depend highly on the training meta. I believe we’ve only seen small changes in the training meta over time, even though we’ve been hinting towards some other skills that may be part the answer to the supposed imbalance. Logically, this meta is highly influenced by the directly visible effects of the individual skills compared to the salary costs of a skill (such as having a higher Free Trow rate will show an increase in the FT%)– ignoring the training methods effects now-, since it’s much harder to estimate the costs of a skill that doesn’t have the clear direct (boxscore) effects. Of course, this doesn’t mean that the skill isn’t (cost)effective, it’s just harder to scale the effectiveness.
Anyways, as often there are many views on this subject and we like to read the discussion on the subjects, but sometimes I think we are losing scope of the discussion too much drawing cause/relations that may be a little farfetched. This makes it harder to keep track of the discussion, so I’d like to ask you al (without being rude
), to not be drawn away too much from the subject hehe.
Good luck next season,