When you say "tactic", you probably mean "look inside, run&gun, motion...", what is a poor concept of tactic. This "tactic" is not so important in BuzzerBeater. It is just a limited model for the simulation of the "pace" and "focus" in real basket.
Yes, that's what I call tactic and, again, it should be more important imho.
But "Tactic" (with capital letter) is something much wider than just setting "look inside" and set a line-up with 3 centers. This "Tactic" involves the design of players with training according to your long-term strategy.
I call this strategy and, as I have already stated here
(125704.252), that's the probably the reason why I am still playing this game.
I may be wrong but I have the feeling that some users who don´t fully understand how the GE works, are trying to promote GE changes on the basis of a very simple view of the game: tactics and ratings. My apologies if I´m wrong, but that's my feeling from reading this long debate thread.
If after 344 posts you still think so this discussion has been a total failure.
The goal of the game is to build a succesful team and make it work better than the others.
We are still talking two different languages. The goal of the game, at least for me, is having fun. Winning helps, no doubts about that, but it is not all.
If I complain about tactics is because after so many season I am bored of playing r&g 80% of the games and LI the other 20%. And I am bored of playing m2m another 80% of the games and 3-2 defense 20 or so %.
All you say about building a team and players with the right skillset to optimize a tactic is correct and everybody has a different view about how to do that. But in the end, no team (or very few) can have two very competitive starting lines, one for inside and one for outside focus. Being able to successfully play the weaker offense (mainly by surprising the opponent) would help to give more variety to this game.
In fact, I assume that what keeps managers from playing most of the times the same tactics and lineup is the game shape management.
It's also true that with the new game engine there are more tactical options (for example Princeton is not as useless as it used to be). But it'is false that nobody cared before. For me, there was more balance between r&g and LI, but the limited usability of most of the other tactics has always been an issue.
That's enough from me.
Btw, yesterday the GE punished me for all I am saying in this thread and made me lose with a 3-2 defense against a LI with awful OF :D
(17980002).