BuzzerBeater Forums

You might be linking the wrong game?

no i am pretty sure that it was the right one, the matchup ratings was on every position 10-20 points higher the overall shooting percentage was lower^^

And yes it is not my personal, but a game from someone who i know a bit.

Another random result i would say of this new game engine. With the old even with lower enthusiasm he would have won this game.

This game has lost a lot of tactical sense i prefer to play the old game engine than this random game.

PD: (13105634)

Take a look on this game, it was played yesterday, with same enthusiasm, and it shows how incredible is this new game engine really n/c gogo random results.

Last edited by Marot at 8/5/2009 8:45:36 AM

Oasis was outrebounded and it cost them the game. Playing 1-3-1 zone with such poor rebunding is asking to lose. So he defended the guy's outside jumpers only to be killed on the offensive glass. Plus, not only did he get destroyed on the boards, he also fouled a lot more. If this game happened in real life, I would be surprised if Oasis won. Outrebounded and 14 less FT attempts. This is a very typical formula for losing in basketball.

His attack was 8 and the outside defense of San Blas was 4.

Where is the difference in attack? I dont see it, Oasis had to score with more effective results, in the old game engine he would won it.

39,5 % in shoots, 36,1% in T3.

I dont really think that playing against a 2-3 and having a good attack u score just 98 points, when with new game engine its easy to score more than 110 points, it just sounds me ridicolous that with his attack and his opponent defense he scored that low, and what is worst, San Blas did 41-101.


Its random results, as new game engine is so random.

By the way, another surprising match, i was like Oo: (6784)

I think that last game was a joke of BB xDDDD

Why did this one go into OT, it's even more strange as brian's game?

(13252573)

Its random results, as new game engine is so random.

One thing is a random result,another is a bugged GE.That game was a little randomizede,but there are some signals over valutations that say that it's not so strange the won made by San Blas

If anybody can confirm... there seems to be more instances where your PF/C defends the perimeter, and when your guards defend the inside. (such that players sometimes guard other positions). Therefore, players that are more balanced are more important?

The understanding of the boxscore is always based on the hypothesis that team ratings are a precise description of the match. But from the very beginning of this game, it seems clear that this is not true. A few times, BBs have posted about this, and of course it is logical that it is not easy to summary the whole match, with the sophisticated BuzzerBeater game engine opperating in every single second, in just a few ratings, and logically it cannot be precise (and probably it is designed for not being so precise but this is another topic).
_
Of course, with time, some users can develop a kind of "empirical" or practical correlations between the result of the match and the team rates (i.e. you need two levels more of attack than the opposite defense in order to have a good chance of success). These correlations were not working very well with the old GE, but they were a good approach for a good number of matches.
Now with the new GE, people will have to develop new rules, which does not mean that the new GE is ramdom.
_
Now and before, the best way to understand what happened in a match is to watch de Live. If we were scientists, the experiment is the live of the match and the team ratings are a few notes taken by our just arrived laboratory assistant... We have to believe only what we see... and that is in the live match.
Tactics are always "tactics at the beginning", but the game engine can change them slightly to try to win the game when things do not run well. There are so many things happening in the match that cannot be traslated into ratings...
_

Last edited by Emilio at 8/5/2009 2:30:28 PM

Now and before, the best way to understand what happened in a match is to watch de Live. If we were scientists, the experiment is the live of the match and the team ratings are a few notes taken by our just arrived laboratory assistant... We have to believe only what we see... and that is in the live match.

This does not seems to be truth. Because, the live match has it's own misleading issues. Currently, everything seems to give you a incomplete puzzle sometimes difficult to understand and most difficult yet, to correctly predict.