BuzzerBeater Forums

and what do you think of the possibility to change your tactics based on a certain situation, like for example your team is behind by 10 points?

I like your idea of adding situational tactics to the game. I remember a hockey manager game which had these features and I thought it was fun. You could set things like "Pull your goalie for a sixth attacker when down by less than X goals and with less than X minutes to play" or "Play a defensive game when ahead by at least X goals". Yes, it was rather complicated for a newcomer but the fact is that you were not forced to set these advanced tactics, you could just let the AI take all the decisions and still had a fair chance at winning the game.

I read all youre posts.
I also read a lot of forums, prolly more than you. I only write when I see something totally wrong or something I support.

I have read these type of suggestions before. Now you are drifting again to the "old" suggestion of the goto guy. Where you set up a guy who will shoot when it counts the most. Keep in mind that any tactic must have a counter tactic. Anything you can set up can be countered. If you have a star SG in youre team and you set him as the goto guy. Defencive team must also have an option to double team x player in the last minutes. Now the game engine already calculates the best matchup and ability to score from behind the arc in the last minutes. What if the goto guy is crowded with 2 defenders will he take that crappy airball or will he pass to an ok guy behind the arc. Just choosing one guy for taking those forced shots is not tactics.

I will say for the last time, that changing tactics to a lot of different "if" tactics will make the game more complicated and will demolish the point of having defence tactics at all.

How can you still keep calling me immature, when I give out valid points? It seems to me you are just in denial...
Whenever you suggest something changed, you have to see the big picture. What will the change affect? I am all for good suggestions, perhaps something good will come out of this one. You will never know. Just move in a direction that will not hinder/destroy something fundamental this game has (like negate defencive tactics alltogether).

Last edited by Edju at 1/12/2010 4:51:12 PM

I like your idea of adding situational tactics to the game. I remember a hockey manager game which had these features and I thought it was fun. You could set things like "Pull your goalie for a sixth attacker when down by less than X goals and with less than X minutes to play" or "Play a defensive game when ahead by at least X goals". Yes, it was rather complicated for a newcomer but the fact is that you were not forced to set these advanced tactics, you could just let the AI take all the decisions and still had a fair chance at winning the game.

yes, I think also that you should not be obliged to choose tactic modifications. Maybe something to add in advanced tactics. and you would also feel that the orders that you gave before the game changed the outcome (be it positively or negatively) and not just let the game engine do his thing. For me that means in the end more fun and joy watching games and analyzing opponents. You also feel taking part of the game action by having given your orders for certain situations before the game. While right now it is a little bit as if you send out your players with a blessing and hope they make the best of the one tactics you told them to play.

Last edited by Coach Ash at 1/12/2010 4:57:46 PM

I think you overrate the offensive ability to score. A good percentage to score in a season is what? 50-55%. Even the best players of the world don't have better stats that that.

It's an extremely rare feat for an NBA team to have an overall field goal percentage above .500. A good scoring perentage would be anything in the .450-.500 range.

but to look on single players, top values from 50-55% aren't very good, good inside players shot 60%. And i don't think he meant teams, because in this case i would say 40-45% are good.

But i don't think, we should arange higher shooting percentage in avoiding that player defend right.

There are only three players in the entire NBA that are shooting .600 from the field, and a total of 10 that are shooting .550 or better (among qualified leaders).

Good inside players typically shoot .500, good guards shoot .450.

didn't kow that this get worser around the states, i though the players are in favour through the "safety" Zone under the basket who gives a lot of 2+1 chanches.

In the BBL they are lot more 55+ shooters, and normally the game is considered as defensiv and hard:
http://www.beko-bbl.de/linkit.php?menuid=269&topmenu=...

But maybe hit have the reason that our big guys, shots less.

Edit: there is a column with field goal percentage.

Last edited by CrazyEye at 1/14/2010 12:12:05 PM

Yes, but shooting percentages are calculated differently. US overall field goal percentage (as well as BB FG%) includes both 2 and 3 point shots.

this stats include three point shots too, even if the most players didn't take much. The ND field goal percentages is more what you are thinkng about.

Oly place 8 Marko Scekic take a reasonable amount of three pointers(13), which reduce his shooting percentage from 69,6% to 63.

This is i believe the only shooter on the top 50 in that list:

http://statistik.basketball-bundesliga.de/bbl/stats/playe...(place 44)

Wich means that a normal team have in average two scorers, with better shooting percentage then him.

Last edited by CrazyEye at 1/14/2010 12:36:00 PM

probably we should be able to choose how we wanna see statistics, so as there are a lot more users from Europe then US everyone would be happy.

For example I prefer 2pt and 3pt in different columns instead of FG (for me it`s almost useless as I have to count out 2 points percentage by my self)

But all of this, even a few post before main is OFF-TOPIC, mates.