BuzzerBeater Forums

Yeah the build in my team is not good enough yet either. I think my SF is fine for it (assuming he doesn't need that high SB) but my PF and C are still underdeveloped in SB (although they have at least some of it).

And you are correct in that 2-3 might work even better against LP since they attack even more down low and less with jumpshots. But I think in my old games against DHC I also defended succesfully against LI (he had the worst outside shooting so I only used it against him or unsuccesfully against CSP when I was desperate because he was better).

I'm already in a fun PL so I can't help with your federation but the idea sounds good (albeit a bit difficult due to gameshape) so I'd improve the samplesize a bit and compare only 2-3 and MTM at first. But I like the idea.

So guys, about that 2-3 zone...

(62746167)

My team's not even playing that game Wolph.

But here's my counterpoint: can you prove you won't win that game by less, or even lose, with 3-2 or MtM?

Last edited by Jay (OTT) at 10/1/2013 6:39:26 AM

Sadly , with the recent history of 2-3 zone on this game , i would say the burden of proof lies with you in this case.

Wolph you just failed a spot check.

THAT WAS AN ABBL GAME

Thing is isolated examples shouldn't count, they are countless :)
Maybe 2-3 hadn't worked here (62743514) checking the shots of the 3 perimeter guys. Maybe 3-2 hadn't either checking the 184k PF. So it's not about counter defenses to one tactic, but specific matches when to use what isolatedly.
Nice debate here :) There shouldn't be gloomy ideas about the changes. The game is pretty entertaining and changes can always be empowered or just edited, time tells. So I'm in for experiments to make a better experience in the long run.