BuzzerBeater Forums

There is no A team and B team in BB. Last time I checked, you only had one.

I have previously proposed a very simple interpretation of what the team attitude: the time and effort that the coach spends on preparing the team tactically: that would be sitting in a room, drawing stuff on the board, watching tapes from previous games and going through all sorts of team tactics. The direct result is that the team, as a unit, is less prepared for the following game if less time is spent or that (in game terms: team ratings are worse). On the other hand, since basketball players like to play basketball and not spend time in 'classes', the less they do that the more excited they get.

I feel kind of silly explaining this stuff over and over. Regardless of popular opinion, this is a managerial game, not a sports simulation. As such, it has to be flexible enough to allow players to actually manage their teams. If you want to reduce game management to fielding the best five players before, go ahead and do it. I don't think it is going to be particularly interesting in the long run.

As for the 'real feel', it feels very artificial to me that there is no option where players can go to the bar at night and get stabbed, or locked up for DUI, or die by a heart attack on the court. Likewise, we don't see brawls on the court or in the locker room. I mean, it has happened multiple times in the NBA season. Yep, it is probably 'realistic'. But is it really necessary for the game? Probably not.

I think I am done yapping for now. Fire away.

Last edited by GM-kozlodoev at 2/29/2008 1:15:28 AM

of course we have 1 team (but I agree we often think A/B or 1st team and reserves) and as one of the primary ways to create cash is to train players you cant just have 5/6 great players and ignore the rest....

again a thread of mixed opinions and as long as the rules are there for everyone and we get advanced notice of major changes lets just accept and play on...

it seems that when an opinion on part of the game is overwhelming opposed by the boards then alterations have a chance of being made... so lets just see how this plays out..

You can definitely see a difference in the game that you TIE.

not realy. Not in my case anyway. I am surprised more than once about my ratings.

Why? easy, because at first I thought you could see easily if one TIe or CT.

Why can't I predict my own ratings? (well maybe I could predict a littlebit if I realy put much time and effort in it)

Let me explain.
I use an average of 19 diffrent guys every week ( 1 week 20, the other 18, mostly it's 19 or 20 though). Each of these guys has diffrent skills, but more important, their game shape is changing weekly, and I start every line up from scratch, so it is very possible I don't use the same line up for weeks.
So it might be that either by coincidence, or maybe on purpose a lot of good inside defenders and rebounders join 1 line-up, and let's say I play TIE that game. The previous game I played normal, but the fellows that where in the line up are the ones with less rebounding and less indside D. It might very well be that in the first game my insde D and rebound ratings are lower than in the second game! So if you look at the ratings, and say "hey he TIE-ed the first game, and played normal now, since his ratings where low, and now are higher", then you see how wrong you can be!

The fact you can see it only goes for teams using the same line-up every game. This is not always the case.

i think its safe to say you are in the minority.. most people i have scouted have a nucleus of 7-9 top guys they rotate 60-80mins with each week and a few extra players hanging around to fill gaps or to give minutes to in scrimmages. when you do this you notice big differences in your stats... when i TIE at home it does look similar to Normal away.. but when i can get away with TIEing away to a bot in the cup then play a home league game with much higher enthusiasm normally i expect 2 full levels difference in some areas...

as for CT i have only done this twice ever and both away from home so I have no clue what stats I could muster up at home on enthusiasm 10..... good luck to whoever I decide to dish that out to!!

Last edited by Superfly Guy at 2/29/2008 7:58:43 AM

that indeed is a clearly diffrence.
Also when teams use the same players consistently, probably their game shapes will not change that much either.
In my case a player with average game shape today , could have strong or even proficient game shape next week...

Mutual TIE's possibly don't have a neutral effect on game results.

In HT, the effect of PIC's is on the midfield rating, and the effect of the midfield on possession is based on the relative strength of the midfields.

But in BB, the effect of TIE's is primarily on ID and rebounding. A team that bombs from outside, may not see as much performance change with a TIE.

But in BB, the effect of TIE's is primarily on ID and rebounding. A team that bombs from outside, may not see as much performance change with a TIE.

Pretty sure it affects perimeter defense equally.

As it applies to mutual TIEs - I have no real problem with it if TIE is in the rules.

I do think though that TIE should not be a part of the playoffs. The problem isn't that the number one team has a target, the problem is that the number one team could conceivably face CT every round of the playoffs, making it virtually impossible to win unless they are completely dominant.

Finishing first should not be a disadvantage.

TIE makes more sense in the regular season though. Teams that play back-to-backs will try and play their stars less to keep them fresh for the next night. While this is not a precise analogy the proper analogy does not really exist so this is a close as it gets because in this game playing time does not affect performance the next game (yes yes...unless its the week after)

I do prefer the suggestion made earlier though (I forget who made it) of a standard level of 10 (or whatever number is chosen) which is dropped by CTing.

Hoever even with this I still think it should be left out of the playoffs. Any professional athlete worth a dime gives it everything in the playoffs. Perhaps experience could become more of a factor in playoff games or someting.

Well, arguably, if the strongest team cannot withstand a CT, maybe it isn't strong enough. But this is a murky point.

On the other hand, consider this: if the team is _not_ completely dominant, it's probably worth not to CT against them, because CTing in the playoffs is a way to effectively smoke yourself out of the competition in the next round.

That's just the point, if I'm a 4 seed playing a team that has beat me prettily handily twice already that season there's no reason not to CT. Might as well get the extra game and extra money. And with the set-up the way it is now, if I have equal enthusiasm going in a CT against normal will make up a huge skill difference. This is why it becomes a problem in the play-offs, teams will have different goals. The best teams have to plan for future games while the underdog is happy just to advance an extra round.

And the point isn't that the favorite couldn't withstand a CT, its that it is almost impossible to get by two teams CT'ing you in the first two games while still having enough enthusiasm to compete in the finals.

Well, arguably, if the strongest team cannot withstand a CT, maybe it isn't strong enough. But this is a murky point.

How does that make any sense?

I must say, I'm almost completely baffled by just about all your lines of reasoning in this whole thread.

Like I said, I'm happy with people having their own opinion and prefering to keep things how they are, but:

-comments like the above

-linking the prefernce for reality to thinking players should be able to start fights in the game, or

-or how TIE'ing and its result is somehow along the lines a coach preparation, or lack there of

Just an overall big "?" to everything your arguing. I think this IS supposed to be a basketball manager sim, yet you think it isn't that. There's a pretty big disconnect in realities there.