BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Season 26 Feedback Topic

Season 26 Feedback Topic (thread closed)

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
252782.123 in reply to 252782.122
Date: 1/2/2014 10:48:35 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
16031603
4 of 16 for our DIV I.

If thats the goal of developing new stuff, namely add sthg. useful for 20-30% of the users, the GDP is a great success. If we see like less than 80% usage against bots tonight it should be a huge disappointment/suprise. Why would someone miss an easy opportunity?

I think if we see low usage it tells sthg. about communication from top to bottom.

Größter Knecht aller Zeiten aka His Excellency aka President for Life aka Field Marshal Al Hadji aka Lord of All the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Seas aka aka Conqueror of the Buzzerbeater Empire in Europe in General and Austria in Particular
This Post:
00
252782.124 in reply to 252782.117
Date: 1/2/2014 11:27:25 AM
Maddogs-Hellas
IV.5
Overall Posts Rated:
13091309
I believe we all agree that overspending is a problem that needed addressing.
The BBs have done just that. Now its obvious that some people disagree with the action taken in order to counterattack the problem. Fair enough. But...


No, we don't all agree on that. In my opinion tanking and it's gain is the real problem.


I wrote "overspending is A problem", not THE problem. Do you disagree on that or you just wrote something irrelevant to my post?

I agree with you that tanking needs addressing more aggresively.

Last edited by maddoghellas at 1/2/2014 11:28:48 AM

This Post:
22
252782.125 in reply to 252782.124
Date: 1/2/2014 11:35:47 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
55315531
No, I really don't think overspending is a problem. It's only a problem if you can get the money back easily by tanking a season. Season after season I'm watching teams promote to first or second league, selling off their players soon or directly after promotion and starting tanking. With those millions earned they demote and one year later they destroy their opponents in 2nd or 3rd league to promote again, this time trying to stay.

The problem is not the overspending itself - it's the way they fill their accounts. If they earn the money through trading, training and competing (that's managing a team!) then it's ok to risk everything for this one attempt to win / promote. But if you can risk everything because there is a totally easy way to get back a lot of money - that's neither good managing nor good game design.

Last edited by LA-Karangula at 1/2/2014 11:37:16 AM

This Post:
00
252782.126 in reply to 252782.125
Date: 1/2/2014 12:03:43 PM
Maddogs-Hellas
IV.5
Overall Posts Rated:
13091309
I really agree, as i stated in my earlier post, with your views on tanking.
But do you honestly believe that overspending itself, is not a problem(a damaging one too) for the game?
New managers coming in and buying 150k players in division V, going bankrupt and leaving the game disappointed, wasn't a problem?
Debt producing teams, that "mortgaged" their way into a higher division, with the promise of more income, even without the intention of tanking, wasn't a problem, that disheartened other managers too?

Its one thing acknowledging that both problems exist and perhaps disagreeing on the BBs prioritization and a whole different one, when a LA member of the community, denies overspending is a separate problem, whatsoever.
Im trully amazed by the latter!

Nonetheless, i revoke my statement that everybody believes that overspending is a problem, as a false one!

This Post:
00
252782.128 in reply to 252782.127
Date: 1/2/2014 12:29:42 PM
Maddogs-Hellas
IV.5
Overall Posts Rated:
13091309
You're absolutely right, i admit that the way i wrote it, could easily get it misinterpreted.
What i mean is that im amazed how an LA, as in an experienced member of the community, could so lightheartedly and completely dismiss overspending as a problem itself.

Congrats on your newly announced EGM status!

This Post:
00
252782.129 in reply to 252782.126
Date: 1/2/2014 1:13:21 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
55315531
You know poker? The moment you think you're going to win this game you can do this: risk all your money, go "all in" - if you win - fine. If you lose you might even be bancrupt.

In BB it's like this: go all in, overspend. If you win: you'll have the jackpot and promote. Then lose the next 22 games intentionally and they are throwing money at you. If you risk everything and lose: do the same...

This Post:
00
252782.130 in reply to 252782.129
Date: 1/2/2014 1:27:55 PM
Maddogs-Hellas
IV.5
Overall Posts Rated:
13091309
Μy friend, we agree again on your example!
Where we do not, is that you associate overspending strictly with tanking, as a consequence of it.
I say that it exists and causes problems, without tanking as well.


This Post:
00
252782.131 in reply to 252782.130
Date: 1/2/2014 2:06:54 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
55315531
Μy friend, we agree again on your example!
Where we do not, is that you associate overspending strictly with tanking, as a consequence of it.
I say that it exists and causes problems, without tanking as well.

Maybe you're right and I'm not. But imho the easiest fix for overspending would be a salary cap & luxury tax. Now we only have luxury tax, kind of half-hearted.

One of the problems I have with the overspending rule is that it relies too much on people attending your games. There's too little influence for us managers and too much up and down with people attending games (and yes, I'm using a PR of higher level).

Another problem is it doesn't stop overspending, it just makes it more expensive. So all those tankers out there have to tank a season longer before they overspend again... (seriously 5 million + 900k for a draftee - you never make that much money in a season by training a player)!

This Post:
11
252782.132 in reply to 252782.131
Date: 1/2/2014 2:39:45 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
55315531
Another reason why I dislike this overspending rule: injuries. As a serious manager you estimate how much money you make a week and how much salary you can afford (say 450k/week). Your league is competitve and you have to fight to stay off relegation / demotion. Then suddenly one of your startes (60k/week) is injured for two weeks. So in reality he'll most likely be out for 3 weeks (gameshape). You need another player to play instead of him. So you buy one. And all of a sudden you're "overspending" although you've got 1 million on your bank account.

I'm not exaggerating here. Happened quite a few times that one of my players with 80k / even 200k got injured. Tieg even twice in his last season with me, second time for 4 weeks. My doctor wasn't that bad.

These injuries occur and they have to, because they happen in reality, too. But another time one is punished twice by this new rule.

Last edited by LA-Karangula at 1/2/2014 2:41:24 PM

This Post:
00
252782.133 in reply to 252782.132
Date: 1/2/2014 3:01:38 PM
Maddogs-Hellas
IV.5
Overall Posts Rated:
13091309
Excellent point there and one for the "suggestions". Injured players excluded from the OT mix.
Or injured players exluded if replacement is bought before financial update and has minimum x % salary, comparing to the injured's one.

Salary cap and luxury tax would be ideal, but i suppose there are great technical issues, let alone that there should be special provisions for every division and every division group, in order to be just.

Attendances is another matter i see as a separate problem, that encourages tanking as well. Some tweaking went on last season, but personally i dont think it was nowhere near enough. More is needed and its urgent.

Last edited by maddoghellas at 1/2/2014 3:03:05 PM

Advertisement