Press conference

Game's news: Do the tactics work? Part 1.
-- 89 S 44 d.
Defensive focus strategy analysis!
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+4
It would be good that you explain how did you test it / what was the methodology used?
Why do you only analyze the effect on 2ps accuracy & not other metrics such as number of t2s shoots, last second shoots, blocks, rebounds, steals, fouls, or how this also influences in better 3p/t2m shooting positions?
Why only low post defensive focus only? Any of the rest of defensive focus settings aren t working well either. -- 89 S 44 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+8
Ar cia taktiku itaka didint ar metimu situacijos itaka? -- 89 S 44 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0
I can say quite clearly that the tactics have lost a lot of influence since this season. I prepare basically for all matches individually and have more or less individual tactics based on the profiles of the opponents, but this season it works a lot less. I have a very good example. I had three matches with one manager, I was preparing for the fourth. I analyzed practically every tactical decision of the opponent (it basically did not differ during the three matches), I made the appropriate actions in my tactics, the opponent did not change anything, but even after perfectly combining everything that would cause problems for the opponent, the competition was lost, because at this point in the engine, in my understanding, the main point is not on tactical decisions, but on random basketball moments - missed shots due to the luck factor. What does this mean for the game? Because basketball starts with the good defense, lower-potential teams lose any chance against big money or old managers. Also, I don't know what is the basis of the argument that attacking strategies are often changed and it mixed-up everything. Until this season I often saw trends and pointed out defense there - it worked. Yes, if it is seen that the manager always plays with bigs or with shooters, as well as if he always defends with the zone or man2man - the decisions were changing. But if there wasn't one main defensive/attacking strength, it was normal to play through your best players both offensively and defensively. In this season, this is not the case, the analysis of opponents has much less influence, which makes the game less interesting and engaging. Until now, it has been very important when the main battles come, to have better tactical decisions - whoever has the better tactics wins. Now this is less and less important. -- 89 S 44 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+19
My experience mirrors Catholic's. I was lucky to have developed in house talent that favors M2M over Zone so I was able to make WL3 playoffs. Too many teams in our discord are losing based solely on Unlucky shots (30+ in one game) which you can't tactics out of. As of now there are a handful of teams I know I have zero shot against due to real money spent & then the rest I feel I just need the unlucky shots & no reason turnovers more than good tactics. While the purpose of the new GE was to make it less Rock/Paper/Scissors, it feels like that is more how the game operates where we're both blind tossing & banking more on luck than skill. -- 89 S 44 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+12
Totaly agree with Catolic. Now it les depends on tactics. in previous you could catch on tactics even much stronger players. So you had to analyze each game how he played against one or other team and etc. now its not so important i don't like it -- 89 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+6
Analyse your retention and engagement rates as well. :)
This should be an indicator whether the game is less/more interesting. Personally, I don't play this game as often as I used to because I don't feel the difference whether I prepare for the match or just leave the default tactic.
Before the season, I expected that we will still have old tactic parameters + defense focus and other new options. But now we have very few options to play with. -- 89 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+6
I agree. Last PO games I played with completely different tactics. Results were exactly the same. Scores similar. I am not saying, that I should win or so, but at least should be some differences. Assuming one tactics was better for this opponent, so with other tactics I should perform worse. I am not so experiened in this game, perhaps I miss a thing, but for the moment I think, that there is no reason to set individual tactics.

Second subject. I read so many about to make this game realistic about percentage of made shots and so on. So I have two remarks here:
1. lets say 17 seconds till end of game, I am loosing with lets say 5 points. Why the hell my player starts to consuming time?? I would say, my team should shoot ASAP. This should overpass any settings, as this would be realistic to me.
2. End of game and opponent is leading by 3 points. In the last second my player mades close 2pt shot. Realistically imho there is no chance, that I could score 2+1, because no player will intentionally faul me in 2pt zone. So I could accept missed 3pt shot, even from my player with 1 skill, if my shooters were guarded well, but for Christ sake it should be 3 pointer made! -- 89 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+4
I'm sorry joining disagreements' chorus, but really, it doesn't make sense anymore spending real time and money on it. Beyond the basic values ​​in the field, the quality of the rosters and coaches, the daily attention to training, its percentages, general settings of defense and attack as well as the individual ones, could make the difference and it made a minimum of sense to apply. Not now anymore, given that the settings have been reduced to the bone, the quality of the coaches counts more than our settings and the quality of the rosters themselves, too many random factors that are then continually revised and reshaped in the name of "real basketball. ". Well ... -- 89 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+7
For those who are lazy to read everything: Do the tactics work? NO -- 89 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+7
I support the GM. If tactics have been too ineffective, just to make it a little bit more effective. Not overpowered, just a little bit more effective is enough. -- 89 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
nofixations we have selected post defense focus first as it is second most used tactic in the game following normal. We will go through all the strategy options and explore how it works. We have compared how low post focus defense shooting situations with non-low post focus defense focus strategies shooting situations (including mid-range and 3pt situations that you may find in the part next to the aim icon). We will analyse all the strategies one-by-one and share the results with the community.
Gudrioji Lape in this case the problem is mostly with the accuracy not being affected by worse shooting situations, we are looking at it currently.
Catholic @Šabas cikane yes, tactics play lesser role this season and we want to increase it slightly so the effect on the game events is bigger. The problem we had before was a guessing game, when a team would change tactics anticipating that the opponent will play 2-3 zone for the whole game and choosing to shoot threes. In real life I cannot imagine a situation when a team is playing 2-3 zone for the whole game despite the fact the opponent's are hitting three one after another.
nerdageddon yes, not all the components are working as we want them to and a number of shooting situations had been adjusted. You may find more information here: https://www.basketpulse.com/en/News/article/63306b6e57c00/ar-dvitaskiu-ir-tritaskiu-pataikymas-realistiskas
Psubrat 1. would please share the game with such a situation?
2. I've seen a number of situations like that in real life when all the shooters are closely guarded and cannot receive the ball and the ball handler is left for a wide open layup. If that happens once in a while, this is normal. On the other hand, if that is constant, would you please share the games with such a situation?
EmilianoDeRosa yes, tactical setting should play a bigger role and we will make it happen. On the other hand, I believe it makes sense that a good roster and a good coach performs better in the long-run than good tactical settings alone. -- 89 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
yes it was strange that entire game team play with one defense and other with the same offence, but at least if you choose wrong tactic you could blame your self that its because of you. And now u don't know what to choose , and you can't change almost nothing. So all you have to to do is collect players with right skills and collect the combination of skills that you want and basically that's it . -- 89 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+3
By removing "guessing game" as you call, you removed opponent's analysis part of the game. There is no need to review your opponent's last games and setup the tactics accordingly as the tactics basically have no influence. -- 89 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+3
@Šabas cikane yes, this is a problem we are solving right now. We have solved problems before and we will do it again.
Next season the importance of long-term tiredness will play a bigger impact in the game therefore managers will need to manage the minutes of the players increasing the need to spend some time on the team daily. -- 89 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
dwayne3 About your response to Catholic, Sabas and cikane, I kinda believe basketball is some sort of "guessing game" in many ways so I can understand you want to reduce that effect so it is not determinant a 100% of the times but not at all removing it, as it is part of the basketball in my opinion. -- 89 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
we are appreciated that you paying attention, and communicating about changes , it's very important. but i think only by adjusting tiredness and minutes it's not going to help. As well as tiredness also working a bit strange - even if you using 10 players and they all play 18-22 min and one of the team uses fast brakes and early offence , both teams all players gets tiredness around 66-76 it's to much. Where in euroleague and NBA dis you so that someone use 11-12 players? Usually it's 9 and 10th is around 5-7 min. I think what catolic and other guys wanted to say we would like to get more impact for the game some other way not only by choosing team complication. What you mentioned about tiredness is seams like impact by complication - get 11 players solve the problem. Because now it's not much to adjust. Start players minutes per game and intensity of defense but in the final result it's 2-3 points.....what's equal to 0. We tasted this by playing 4 games with Vasaris before season, each time both choosing different tactics result is always the same +- 1 2 points. Now it's a little bit better . You guys are listening what we saying, and that's good . But not good enough. Don't get me wrong we not complaining conditions is the same for everyone . and we will use to it , but what's most important the game loosing his interest, because it's not so depending on you. So what's the point? I connected to game - collected my daily surprise and scout. And that's it . There is no point even watch the game because in previous you could saw some things that you can't see in final stats, like good r bad shooting positions and etc. And what's the point now? each three -four days i see how it's going. if somethings wrong , i do trades, than trades again . if this not helping ... oh well i release few players and wait for the next season to collect new one. Even home field loses his power . Yes in previous it was to much. Bet if you lost the one game you could thing something else. Tur around tactic 180 degrees , lose money and take risk on cheep tickets. And now we can have 15players and set different players and minutes . that's it. yes this engine has some benefits but it would be great if we could combine old and new somehow. Like setting defenses. Lets just say not entire game play 2-3 but consider that most of the time game goes 1*1 but sometimes use 1-3-1 or 2-3 . It's like you do in real life . when you score you defense one way usually 1-1 if you miss you have to make some changes to avoid fast brake and etc . so you do swich, step out or something else . we trying to make some dialogue how to do it better not complain or criticize. because it's to much good players already left left the game. Other is watching and hoping that you figure out something. We trust in you . But no one is willing to play with the guys who sit's in 5wl for 15-20seasons -- 89 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+4
This indeed is not a simple problem. I don't think it's fair to draw a conclusion that tactic is completely useless
1. The effect of defense focus is obvious, but it doesn't mean it can change the result because most of the teams are all around. If you defend the low post scorers, the shooters score. If you defend shooters, the low post scorers score. I believe that's the main reason why the result depends heavily on strength (RT) rather than tactics (and luck of course). If you use both tactics on a team with pure low post scorers or pure shooters, the result would be different. dwyane3 can prove this if you are able to
2. It's also not fair to blame only the ME because how users train the players also influences the game heavily, free throw is the best example here. Users indeed have very limited options on the tactics because they don't have the best players who work well with a specific tactic. I don't know how Darius balance the game but I could imagine he should have an internal testing engine in which he can create players with different skills and simulate matches 100 times and look at the result. I don't think it's easy to see various balanced tactics playing out with the existing 12 8 12-12 6 2 and 12 12 4-2 6 12 clones. This is a big topic for GM how they can drive the community -- 89 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+6
It's not just tactics, it's skills that are not as important as well. I had a game today (wl3 vs. Wl3 teams in a national league) in which my only PG fouled out after less that 15 minutes. I played the rest with a 204cm defensive SF that has dribbling 3, passing 4 and OIQ 3 as my PG. I was down 3 when my PG fouled out and won by 3 in the end. My 343 PG had 7 asists and 4 TOs. I should have lost by 20 at least and my guy should turn the ball over a ton, but none of that happened. Something is seriously wrong with this GE. -- 89 S 45 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+8
So as you can see i'm from a low level world league. With the sponsors at our disposal, we mainly have access to specialized players with big flaws (or the other kind: good at nothing, bad at everything)
I feel that tactics at our level seems to have a good influence on results, whether by drawing on strengths or compensating flaws. They also come with palpable drawbacks: using that or this, and you open up this and there
As i am quite new to the game, i still enjoy trying to analyse my opponent game and just trying to understand how it's all related. Even if they're not all equal in usefulness, i can feel (mostly) their impact on games
From what i've seen of the higher leagues and their players, it seems to me the there is some kind of rounding where everyone (relative to position and speciality) ends up with quite identical distribution/values, not to mention their overall good performance in every aspect of the playfield
I can imagine a system where the fewer differences there are between players and their capacity to do wrong, the less impact it can draw in tactical choice
Maybe you'll want a system where it is the opposite: the more teams are identical, the more impactful strategy and their tactics will be meaningful
Though, in order to be constructive, it is critical to remember that the range of the game is not restricted to oneself point of view

Also an unrelated note about lucky/unlucky shoots: don't forget it is just a coat of paint. Would you be less bothered if it were not written but still in the game engine statistical management? -- 89 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
Psubrat shared a couple of examples that I would like to further comment on:
In regards to Matches we have had a lengthy discussion with our community before and we decided that if the team is losing by more than two shots, i.e. 7+ points and there is less than 24 seconds, the losing team is playing for the better points difference rather than a win because trying to hit a quick shot and then foul usually end up in losing by more points.
Matches game end seems like a bug, we were not able to replicate this situation. If you see it again, please share and we will analyse what happens there.
zurda10 agreed, we are making adjustments to make it more fun.
@Šabas Having more players is useful over the whole season, for example you may use 9-10 players in the most important games and then rest your leaders in the less important games, like National League. That is often the case with the clubs in real life, Žalgiris is one of these examples - they have 13-14 player roster and players getting plenty of minutes in the National League are often different to those in Euroleague. I understand the frustration due to lack of activity needed for daily management and with updated tactics and increased long-term fatigue I believe we will have more input needed from the managers. If that will not help, we will look how to fix it. Our current focus is on making the tactics work as they are supposed to work.
fanling3 yes, we will adjust the tactics that do not work as they are supposed to and we will share the results of the changes.
liverduk thank you, that is an interesting case, we will look into it further, may be a bug.
ratun great points, thank you! -- 89 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
ok but maybe in this case there is possible to have double licences as in the real life with the youth team . to at least a bit reduce cost of the team with 13 players -- 89 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
This is good idea and to not get into situation, where players play both games, manager need to choose in which game player from Youth play - either in Youth League or in Main Team. Good idea might be also adding limited amount of this type "double licences", for example max 3 players from Youth could be used at the same time in Main team -- 89 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+3
@Šabas, good shout, I think that this is a likely update of the game in the future. Our current priority is getting the game engine adjusted and running as it's supposed to run, then we will update the coaching system and then we will have a community vote for the next big update of the game. Thank you! -- 89 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
Yup ME is first for sure, but thanks for noted ideas. Looking forward for new updates -- 89 S 46 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0
Why my SG is consuming time 27 seconds before the end of the match instead of my PG, why we make a tactical foul 9 seconds before the end when leading with 2 points when i set tactics not to foul when leading with 2 points? Matches
Why i lose 3rd quarter with 16-2?
Matches
Why my SG, who has 12 jump, 12 speed, 12 three pointers, 8 OIQ, shoot 1/11 from 3 points in first game and 1/8 in second game?
Matches
Matches
In general he shoots much less than last season in WL3 with old engine when offence focus is set to normal, this game when he shoots 1/8 offence focus was on shooters, he is set to shoot whenever possible. -- 89 S 47 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0
sasho what role does Hristov and Maulė have?
Sometimes team have bad runs, and losing a quarter 2-16 might be the case of that.
Despite having good offensive skills, Hristov is 1.91cm. Your opponent has taller athletic defenders that were able to stop Hristov 3 point shooting, especially considering he was set to be shooting whenever possible. -- 89 S 47 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
I completely agree with Catholic & others - What worries me most about this is the statement
"we want to avoid the excessive influence of defensive tactics in order not to return to a situation where the offense is chosen at random, with the aim of opponent guessing it wrong. In our opinion, the team should play to their strengths, not to guess the opponent's defensive options."
That's exactly the most fun of the game - to analyse how teams play & try to set tactics that permit exploit other teams weaknesses, or to hide players or best tactics to surprise better teams when necessary If you eliminate this, all fun is over. Game gets reduced to get better coach & better players & let them randomly win or lose. You won't need to see previous games anymore, not even to follow your own games to see what's happening, just play with default all games. No difference with am idle game.
Each offensive tactical setting should have an optimal way to defend , and vice-versa each defensive setting an optimal way to attack. It's pure games theory. This is also realistic - if a team focus defense on bigs - 3 pointers have more space to shoot better, vice-versa - if a team focus on 3pointers - bigs have more space, - and same with other tactics -pace, pressure, etc. -- 89 S 47 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+3
We need more tactical choices where we can specify things like 'offense tactics 1: try to feed post players' but have stipulation that if shots made % is < x% switch to outside shooting with its own parameters. No coach allows teams to constantly go at the same methods if it is not working. -- 89 S 47 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0
nofixations The statement is talking about "You play offense focus on shooter because you have better shooters, not because your opponent plays defense focus low post"
People still need to review what offense tactics their opponents were using to choose the best defense tactic, but they don't need to bother their offense tactics depending on how their opponent defended. I'm not saying he is right but that's what the statement said. I have no idea what you are talking...
And the optimal way to defend offense focus shooter is to use defense focus shooter, same for low post. Again, I am not saying the tactics work correctly, but that's what they are supposed to be -- 89 S 47 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
dwyane3, Maulė is play making, Hristov is shooter. -- 89 S 47 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1