BuzzerBeater Forums

Thanks Justin, great post and this is the confirmation for my analysis from 30 seasons ago.

5. Shooting Fouls
- Increasing a player's ID and OD skills doesn't change their foul rate for shooting fouls
- Increasing a player's SB will slightly decrease their foul rate for shooting fouls

I always said, SB is the skill against the shot. ID and OD are the defenses against the players and they influence the position and fg% for the shot. But in the end, as soon as the player goes up for a shot you need SB.
shooting foul = failed shot block attempt. It is logical that high SB decreases the amount of shooting fouls.
non-shooting foul = failed steal attempt / offense foul / stop the clock foul. For the failed steal attempt (defense against the player) you need OD/ID.

Stamina keeps the performance of the defende skills up, right? So an aggressive player with bad defense skills and a low stamina is a fouling machine?

6. Non-Shooting Fouls
- Increasing a player's OD or ID will decrease their foul rate for non-shooting fouls
- These fouls are "assigned" by comparing a player's Aggressiveness, ID, & OD with his teammates currently on the court

Are the non-shooting fouls based on the attributes for the particular defense that is being played? I.e. Does having low ID Point Guard in a 2-3 zone affect the team's foul rate and the assignment of those fouls?

If I had a player who was going to be a scorer, there are potential strategies where it could be beneficial they are aggressive, particularly if you have depth.
Unfortunately, I got stuck with my defensive C as super aggressive, and I can't see any benefits there at all. I could have dropped training him, but it was about a year irl of training that I realized his aggression skill was really high, and at that point I didn't have the motivation to start again.

At the very least, I think players should become less aggressive in a game after they reach a certain number of fouls.

In addition to what you are commenting on, and as Darko rightly says... it could be appreciated that the more experienced the player, the more he also has the ability to control himself and make fewer fouls.

With those two improvements, the matter could be finished, and the game would be closer to reality, since for now there is no improvement in having an aggressive player.

Thanks.

Please, don't get me wrong - I really appreciate all the insight you have shared lately on various topics. All the work you have done, almost single-handedly, to revive BB and make it a much more enjoyable experience.

The fouls/aggression review was actually requested by me in this topic (312579.1) (by many others in different topics as well, I'm sure) and I'm grateful for your response.

I can't help but wonder, however, if sharing this much data and really giving clear and factual answers on how the game engine actually works is the right way to go... BB has always been (for me at least) about the mystery and vagueness of the details. It's always been fun to explore and try to figure out how things work exactly in order to gain an edge.

If we take this away from users and just hand all the goodies on a plate, it might somewhat take part of the fun away. Answers by the staff are much appreciated but maybe they could be a little more vague, I guess.

Just my 50c...

I understand your point of view and I also think there has to be some things that managers have to find out themselves. However, I think Justin does very good job with his insights being vague enough. Most of the insights are quite vague - for example here he just told what affects what, not how much something affects it. At the same time it is very helpful information, but also doesn't tell much about anything. Us managers just have to test and try ourselves. And probably still never find what is the absolute optimal.

Same with the buffed tactics. We were told what tactics were improved, but not how much - we just have to figure it out ourselves. But it's way better than just buffing some of the tactics without telling which ones.

Same with the buffed tactics. We were told what tactics were improved, but not how much - we just have to figure it out ourselves. But it's way better than just buffing some of the tactics without telling which ones.

Totally agree on that one. Updates to engine must be announced properly.

Existing algorithms however are a totally different animal imo. For instance, one thing that was too much for me, and I cannot remember where I read it unfortunately, were some very specific details about defensive zones - who has X % chance to defend whom, on what type of shot etc. I believe this should remain "inside" info.

On the bright side - those posts usually bring on a lot of discussions and input and sometimes very good improvement ideas are born, so I guess I can live with that at the end of the day! Much better than waiting for a response for months, as it used to be not long ago!

Are you talking about this one? (312732.18)

Still no exact numbers, though from the wording used in jump shots you can assume it's 25% each. I see your point that this kind of information could in some cases be little problematic, but on the other hand, releasing more information about less used tactic is a good way to buff that tactic. With more information, managers can try to make it work. Of course, if the released information was about M2M or 3-2 zone, that would be bit questionable since managers already assumably know how they work.