BuzzerBeater Forums

push the ball with high passing on every position sounds best to me

This topic is so much fun to read, too bad I can't participate.


There is no final truth, different teams are.. well different teams and there are infinite things to consider when picking your poison.

I believe 3-2 zone should be really effective if well prepared.

My question is: how much does it costs you? I mean, in a m2m defence ID in a guard or OD in a big man won't change their salaries in a consistent way, SB is useful but less fundamental. To play a 3-2 zone, your guards might be cheaper in terms of price, but your big men are required to have higher ID-RB-SB (at least RB-SB) pushing their salary to higher level compared to m2m.

If on the defensive side this is almost salary-related, talking about offence things are different. If OD in a big men has to be present, ID-SB-RB as high as possibile...to be effective on the offensive end you need to have really high IS (to attack inside), a certain level of passing regardless of the tactic, or at least good JS/JR if IS isn't that good. In other words, you need a top notch big men, very close to the ones of NTs with a very high salary and very high market value.

In lower levels it's easier, if you're not challenging top defences this problem is less consistent.

But the question remains: don't you think a 3-2 zone, very effective in D, might cost you on the offensive side, either as salary (and cost) of players or effectiveness/versatility of tactics?

All that said, I love winning games on the defensive end, I'm just doing some considerations

Last edited by GM-samusaran (ITA-Staff) at 2/14/2018 4:22:29 AM

Yea, so basically you are saying that Nachtmahr and Knätofs havent won anything. You must really know things really well. Credible source of opinions.

HAHA i just checked and they haven't actually won anything. My bad, you apparently did your research. But i intend to prove you wrong. 3-2 can win stuff.

And the reason why this topic is fun for me, is just seeing the thought process that people bring. And it probably helps understand the game a bit better.

Last edited by Inks at 2/14/2018 5:50:42 AM

I would guess he doesn't have the right type of personnel available.

True, and now?
So do you know that I am bored like hell for the last seasons? The only stuff which is holding me here is the swedish NT and my tests.
I never promoted to Div.1. For that I would had to stopp analyzing the engine. And than I would be the same like most of the other managers. Around 20 seasons ago I started my tactic federation and the stuff you read in the forums is a small part of the results.
So you think it is a coincidence that SB has more attention now? Or that more and more teams run the 3-2 zone? Or that the boxes are clear or how steals and blocks work? Almost the whole data came from the tactic fed and this was only possible because I played in the lower leagues and tested this tactics and defenses.
Hell, I even helped other managers from Italy and the Netherlands to plan the training for their players. And these players played later against our german NT. I never turned someone down who asked me things about the engine or skills. So, sorry if I don't have the trophies which are soooo important.


Why I don't play the 3-2 zone with Sweden:

If you have a div 1-3 team with SB and you run the 3-2 zone, you need only 2-3 inside skills. That is cheap and has a big impact in your defense. The guards will score the most points. And it is hard to crack this playstyle. The NT level has far more stronger bigs. And If you go with these kind of bigs into a game, you have almost no offense left. This results in the need of 4-inside skill bigs and these guys are rare and expensive. So yeah, I don't have all players ... yet. But take a look at the german NT. Falke is also part of the tactic fed and he Knies exactly how to play the 3-2 zone. His last game against Czech Rep. was a perfet showcase.

And now I am going back to my FCP. It's one of the last interessting things left.