BuzzerBeater Forums

i think we all know that we have our dis-satisfaction towards the time out how its being address in the games.

truth is how i wish we have a timeout botton we can press whenever we feel things get out of hand and waits for the next possible deadball to cal it

but i doubt that can happen.

i think we all know that we have our dis-satisfaction towards the time out how its being address in the games.

truth is how i wish we have a timeout botton we can press whenever we feel things get out of hand and waits for the next possible deadball to cal it

but i doubt that can happen.

That wont happen, nothing that involves live play will happen, since the games are completed in the 15 minute window before they are shown.

there you go

thats the answer

And who says that you should be running inside offense all the time?

i think he's talking about the idea of adjusting the strategy in-game

I don't quite understand what he has in mind, actually. But the coach already does adjust tactics in-game slightly, to exploit the weaknesses of the opposition.

the coach already does that, he was objecting to the idea of giving US the ability to do so during the game
and i agree with him

i like to see the normal time out rules, that the coaches don't spare all 6 timeout for the last quarter and sometimes take 5 of it in the last minute(wich is PAINFULLY boring ;)).

fixed

the coach already does that, he was objecting to the idea of giving US the ability to do so during the game
and i agree with him

I agree with that too. Not everyone has the time or the inclination to sit in front of the monitor for an hour and a half two or three times a day. Nor should they be required to.

How about this. Give the option to change tactics at every Q, only if both teams agree to be there by checking a box and submitting it before the game. This has to be set X amount of hours before the game. Maybe one or two.

If both teams agree that they want to participate in the game, the game engine doesn't calculate the game 15 min before the match, but calculates the outcome through quarters. After each Q, it takes up the new tactics and calculates the next quarter. You are just able to set the tactics you want to use.

If only one player clicks the box that he wants to coach the team, then the game will just calculate the game as if it were a normal game.

Not really sure if this is practical, but it sure would be fun to be able to do this. It makes the game more engaging and competitive. Especially if there would be a chatbox at every game. It would make this more interesting.

How about this. Give the option to change tactics at every Q, only if both teams agree to be there by checking a box and submitting it before the game. This has to be set X amount of hours before the game. Maybe one or two.

If both teams agree that they want to participate in the game, the game engine doesn't calculate the game 15 min before the match, but calculates the outcome through quarters. After each Q, it takes up the new tactics and calculates the next quarter. You are just able to set the tactics you want to use.

If only one player clicks the box that he wants to coach the team, then the game will just calculate the game as if it were a normal game.

Not really sure if this is practical, but it sure would be fun to be able to do this. It makes the game more engaging and competitive. Especially if there would be a chatbox at every game. It would make this more interesting.

I am almost sure this is not fair on a number of levels. If nothing else, the games are supposed to be the same for everyone.

Plus, BB is not about you coaching basketball games -- it's about running a team. You're Danny Ainge, not Doc Rivers, to put it this way.

Last edited by GM-kozlodoev at 9/20/2008 7:20:33 PM

If it's truly about just running a team, you shouldn't be able to set the initial line-up and setup the training regime. That would be the coach/trainer job as well.

It seems pretty fair to me. It only applies to the teams that are participating in that match and only them. Other teams have no influence on that match whatsoever, with or without the changes made during the Quarters. If both teams are allowed to change during each Q than both teams have the same chance. But i can see where you are coming from that some people might feel that some have more control than others due to this.

Any other unfairness factors i can't think of at the moment.

If it's truly about just running a team, you shouldn't be able to set the initial line-up and setup the training regime. That would be the coach/trainer job as well.

It seems pretty fair to me. It only applies to the teams that are participating in that match and only them. Other teams have no influence on that match whatsoever, with or without the changes made during the Quarters. If both teams are allowed to change during each Q than both teams have the same chance. But i can see where you are coming from that some people might feel that some have more control than others due to this.

Any other unfairness factors i can't think of at the moment.

Conceptually, you can always give the coach instructions about what to do with the squad, and how strictly to enforce your guidelines -- but it's him who makes the decision from the bench, not you.

As for fairness, look at it this way: 'managing your own team' will either be superior to simulating the game automatically, or it would be inferior. If it is inferior, it's useless. If it is superior, then everyone who's willing to waste the time is given an advantage over everyone else in their group who don't have the time to waste.

In all likelihood, it will be the latter case, and not the former. It does not affect just your chances in any given game, it affects your chances in the whole league over the course of a whole season.

And all in all, it is just not the way games like this one are designed to work, and work. Not having to spend an exorbitant amount of time on the game is what is going to let us widen the userbase -- otherwise you might as well play NBA Live with the AI.

Last edited by GM-kozlodoev at 9/20/2008 8:08:29 PM

i would like to add this,

you cant be too sure what will happen during the game, if your afraid that the defensive strategy you made could be wrong during the game then probably there is somewhere we can improve.

true having an option to change during the game is something good, but your opponent on the other hand set up his offesive strategy only once and you set your defensive strategy only once.

now if it was implemented you have many or lets say 2 boxes for other options you just completely ruined the game and the fun of playing this game.

lets say you have an option to check another 2 options of what kind of defense if he plays what kind of offense shouldnt the offensive strategy also have this kind of option since he cant seem to get his offense going then he should change tactic also. in the end you just gave yourself . . . . . .

itslike your playing tic tac toe now instead of relying on what strenght your team is and exploiting his weaknesses your giving yourself so much assurance to make that game go your way.

all im saying is, and im not bragging. just do a little scouting on what kind of offense his team is playing, then check the team stats and the roster here you can already have a picture what your opponent is.

even if he played a different offense and its not his strenght most likely the GE will still adjust his game but if your ready for his team then you wont just give him the game youll give it 100%

there is no such thing as the most effective defense for inside play is 2-3 and also outisde offense can be won by 1-3-1 or 3-2 100%.

also even if you have the most effective strategy , breaks of the game will hurt you such as injury or fouls

just work on your team what is his strenght, i know its not easy as i have to spend a lot of time here devicing a strategy and even shuffling players out of position.