BuzzerBeater Forums

Happy season 23 everyone!

I remember one of the BB saying the game engine treated the court and each end of the floor as separate half-court sets to determine the outcome of each possessions.

But what happens on the A-end of the floor often impacts the outcome of the following possession taking place on the B-end of the floor. Like when a player steals the ball near half-court, it ends up being an easy layup more often than not. But more importantly, the effectiveness of transition offense for a particular team depends greatly on the priority it gives to fast-breaks over defensive rebounding. You have players "leak out" on the break, at the expense of boxing out, effectively increasing the risk of allowing a second chance opportunity to the other team. It's a tradeoff every team faces on both ends.


One improvement would be to have two separate parameters for transition basketball that would go like this:

- On defense:
Defensive Rebouding / Neutral / Transition Offense (leak out)

- On offense:
Transition Defense / Neutral / Offensive Rebounding (crash the boards)


From what I gather, this should be fairly straight forward to implement without messing things up with game balance.

Are there any plans to incorporate open-court situations in the game engine?

I look forward to evaluating the effectiveness of the changes. If the number of people screaming that the players that they trained for a purely LI team is roughly balanced out by the number of people complaining that it's not nearly enough, you will have accomplished something remarkable.

Like the incoming SB Change. Like the new transfer bid addition

Now all I want BB to do is this. (my question)

when will you stop having these forfeits? 50-0 isn't even a fundamental change in the cause of forfeits. All it does is have the guy get lower PD. Now everyone knows basketball right? How many players are there on the court? 5. How many guys per team? 5. C, PF, SF, SG, and PG. Why can't we set the number of players in a game to 5, instead of having lucky fans come in. Only way a lucky fan could come in with 5 guys is if the guy fouls out or gets injured-- if they don't do that it's a forfeit and their ticket income is sliced by 75%. 75% may be too harsh but maybe we can talk about an agreement to the percentage of loss . Still today people tank and forfeit games. If we can stop this then BB would be more fun to watch the games instead of watching people foul all day.

I think increasing the shotblocking is a good move in the current game.

But the game-shape hit to new players I am not so sure. Have you taken into accounts how this can affect other areas of the game where new players are needed other than renting for cup matches? (as division change or rebuilding situation)

Not sure if anyone suggested this. but i Was thinking about this new way of playing:

on offense
1) we can set different type of attacking style in either each quarter or half?
OR
2) setting tactics for primary and secondary attacking. (if primary fail, players would auto switch in secondary attack.)

on defense - (just like what happen to attack, we could do those setting as well.

In real life basketball, i believe coaches does teach his different ways of playing. if the team is smart enough, they would often switch different type of attacking style to prevent other team to counter or stop them. For defense team, either the team or leader on court would command to change their defense as opponent change their court.
With this changes, its harder to play but it would bring more excitement. one wrong move that's it to your game.

This would go in the suggestion forum but eitherway that would only make sense if you gameplan has failed and you have to adjust to your opponents game, but that would mean needing to be logged in during the game. And one of the biggest points of this game is being able to play in equal terms with anyone even if you have time limitations.

I really like the added feature of bid tracking. Thank you, thank you!

I know the new Game Shape hit is meant to deter large purchases prior to cup games, but this will affect club, and particularly NT teams, as well. High salary players tend to sell more often, and having consistent game shape decreases affects not only NT planning but also training (if an NT player is transferred, they will need to waste a week to train Game Shape just to stay relevant). Coaches cannot guarantee any player will or won't be training, getting proper minutes, or for sale, at any given time and this just adds another factor out of their control that may seriously affect the outcome of NT games.

I think the idea to limit the advantage of buying players at the last minute for Cup games is on the right track, but if you're causing game shape decreases, be aware it affects multiple areas. The GS hit must be small.

I think your points are something that would need consideration, but I think that if the changes are considered to be good for the core game experience (clearly, the BBs think so, otherwise this wouldn't be in place) then any inconvenience to the NT structure shouldn't be an impediment. One could hope that this might finally be the last nudge needed to get people to stop training players that are unaffordable and only exist to play on NTs, but I'm not sure I've got that much optimism. ;)

ops, so sorry, post wrong area. can anyone shift the post over to suggestion forum? thanks

regarding this move. things can be set before the game as usual. no changes during game time.
At least this make the game more fun. purely playing with one formation, seem quite dead. no offence but if you get what i mean.

As we talked on the s22 feedback, I think the NT game should adapt to the game, so no worries there. Still there is a thread (238678.1)were you can vote and discuss if the new players gameshape hit is a good or bad change.