BuzzerBeater Forums

You dont know exactly this, but you know the exact number of enthusiasm? Seems kind of odd now doesn't it?

I am not saying this way is great..or good..or decent...I am mainly saying the current way needs to go. It is a Republican (ha!) way to do this. The rich get richer. The strong teams dont want change as much as the lower teams do (if you read through the many forum posting on this subject).

This adds in quite nicely to good teams hardly ever dropping down. Aren't teams supposed to have ups and downs. 5-6 years good....then rebuild, etc?

Big teams win...they make more money..they always have better players...they never fall.

I am ALL for that! No doubt. But to make enthusiasm favor them as well? That has got to go.

You dont know exactly this, but you know the exact number of enthusiasm? Seems kind of odd now doesn't it?

No, it doesn't. Enthusiasm changes, and you can affect it one way or the other. HCA is fixed and is assessed to all home teams, unless the game is in a neutral arena.

I am not saying this way is great..or good..or decent...I am mainly saying the current way needs to go. It is a Republican (ha!) way to do this. The rich get richer. The strong teams dont want change as much as the lower teams do (if you read through the many forum posting on this subject).

Right, but unless you can suggest a vastly superior way to arrange the situation, removing a workable solution for ... well, we don't even know for what ... is at the least, naive.

Make no mistake, your suggestion definitely does not qualify.

This adds in quite nicely to good teams hardly ever dropping down.

That's what makes them good, I suppose. And why exactly does it have to do anything with enthusiasm?

Aren't teams supposed to have ups and downs. 5-6 years good....then rebuild, etc?

No. Are they?

Big teams win...they make more money..they always have better players...they never fall.

This reads a lot like, "I still haven't figured out how to manage my team effectively, and haven't come to terms with the realization that Buzzerbeater is a long-term, strategic game". But that's just my take on it.

Hey man. I have played one season, I won my league. I draft...I train..and I am setting up for the future. Love how you pick and choose what you want to attack though.

My examples are examples to spark comments and hopefully change. Why "Vastly" because you say so? Wouldn't a slightly better way ..be better? HAHAHAHAHA. Wow.I understand change would take a long time and incorporates a lot of things. Sounds like you are just afraid of change?

Yes...teams are supposed to have ups and downs. It happens in every sport, in every country, in every single level.

What does enthusiasm have to do with good teams? Ok...maybe I should be talking with someone else at this point. Because you have clearly missed the boat on this one Super Chief.

Last edited by Burger Chef at 6/18/2009 6:00:14 PM

Hey man. I have played one season, I won my league. I draft...I train..and I am setting up for the future. Love how you pick and choose what you want to attack though.

You volunteered the suggestion to the forums. It's certainly not the first proposal on the issue, and it's not a particularly good either. There is a certain amount of randomness in the game, but the main challenge is typically to limit its effects -- and voluntarily adding _more_ randomness is, well, plain bad.

Why "Vastly" because you say so?

Because you don't fix something that isn't broken. Even more so if you don't have a clear idea what you're doing.

There are 2 main objectives in how your season plays out -- a tactical one, where you set lineups and choose tactics, and a strategic one, where you choose which games are important to win, and which -- not so much.

Enthusiasm is in the game to provide tools to handle the latter objective. Does it provide a functional tool to this effect? Absolutely. Is it perfect? Absolutely not. But it's faults are not as big as you think they are, and not where you think they are.

TIE is available to everyone. Nothing is stopping a weak team TIE their way through the league just the same way a strong team does. Sure, strong teams will win games doing this, and weak teams will lose games doing this -- but isn't this the definition of strong and weak?

Additionally, the weak team always has a chance to surprise a stronger opponent with a timely Normal or CT.

What is the problem with the current enthusiasm system? It's not that strong teams can TIE. The problem is that the main mode of play is TIE, which is counter-intuitive, since it's normal for your main mode to be, well, Normal.

So I challenge you and everyone who is interested in this topic to come up with an idea that can reform the enthusiasm in a way in which there will be an incentive for people to stick to Normal most of the time, with a handful of TIEs and CTs per season.

Wouldn't a slightly better way ..be better? HAHAHAHAHA. Wow.I understand change would take a long time and incorporates a lot of things. Sounds like you are just afraid of change?

I am definitely afraid of half-baked changes that offer no improvement, yes. You should be, too.

And no, "slightly better" won't be better, since all changes translate into how the developers spend their time and effort.

What does enthusiasm have to do with good teams? Ok...maybe I should be talking with someone else at this point. Because you have clearly missed the boat on this one Super Chief.

Good teams are good because they have superior players, and because they have managers that have a clue. Remind me which one of these has anything to do with enthusiasm.

Thank you for this response. That is what I wanted. I do understand what you are saying, I just don't agree with some of them.

I admitted, I hadn't thought it through all the way..didn't I? Very first line of this thread. You throw ideas around...and it sparks more and most of the time, better ideas.

About managers having a clue. Once you are at the top...you dont have to have as much of a clue to stay there. That is a flaw. Sort of like..once you are in..you are in. Someday..I will be there...5-6-7 years? sure..I understand that. I don't get frustrated with not having instant gratification. Nothing to do with me personally anyway...so please keep it that way.

I knew my idea wasn't good...I know that. The main point is the current one is not good either, and just wanted to throw some stuff out there to spring board. I even said in the first post "Example...not to be taken literally."

Offering some ideas is better than moaning with no ideas. But you are on me because my ideas happen to not work. Ok fine. I get it...But you get my point....the current system does not work. So thank you.

I guess the fact people talk about it means it is pretty good. When there is controversy ...usually means it is "give or take a few" right?

Thanks again for the thought out response. That is all I ask for from a GM. I can get BS from anyone.

Here's my suggestion:
You can play TIE for 5 games and then your enthusiasm fall to 5 and stay (playing TIE,not CT) there for 1 or 2 games. You just simply run out of gas. You can still choose what games are more important for your team and your are forced to make some more difficult decisions. But it's still interesting and playable. What do you thunk?

PS: @ GM-kozlodoev
I know that you may know everything that can be known about BB, but please stop being...well, harsh? Maybe even arrogant? I find your discussions very on-topic, based on rules and logical thinking and you are usually right. But can you just chill out a little bit? Nothing personal, just sayin' you need to relax sometimes as long as guys just want to discuss (sometimes knowing that they're not right).

Last edited by piotras at 6/18/2009 6:45:01 PM

PS: @ GM-kozlodoev
I know that you may know everything that can be known about BB, but please stop being...well, harsh? Maybe even arrogant? I find your discussions very on-topic, based on rules and logical thinking and you are usually right. But can you just chill out a little bit? Nothing personal, just sayin' you need to relax sometimes as long as guys just want to discuss (sometimes knowing that they're not right).

I didn't necessarily mean it to come out this way. I certainly don't know everything about BB, but I do have strong opinions for most things. I certainly didn't mean to offend anyone here.

I know you don't want to offend anyone, but your post's reader may have that feeling. It's just a style of writing that might be seen as I would describe as "strict teacher", you know? How many of us liked them? And yes,you know everything that can be known as a not-BB crew member :)))

Last edited by piotras at 6/18/2009 7:07:19 PM

No worries guys. It is good to be passionate like GM Kozlodoev. I would rather have that than someone who doesn't explain why or someone who doesn't talk at all. There is no reason to be personal if you disagree with them. What is half-baked to you, could be personal opinion, me being ignorant, good, bad, awful ..etc. Just ideas being thrown around. That is how one comes up with anything.

Which leads to Piotras3, who without this thread for me, would not have told me his good idea (see what I mean?)

I do like Piotras3's suggestion to limit the amount of times you can TIE. Without re-inventing the wheel and messing with too much development, could be something great to look at.

I like discussions like these as long as I don't get attacked! hahaha. I read forums all the time searching for things. In all honesty, best fantasy sports I have been involved in!

What I am hoping (and I don't think this to be the case) is that things are not implemented because "it takes too much work" or "too much time" even if it could be better. I work for a company that does things out of fear like that and it is disappointing. So far ...really ...this site is an absolute "A" for a grade. If you want me to list the reasons why, I will ...but I want to make sure you know this is more minor ...as the good is the major.

Cheers

I do like Piotras3's suggestion to limit the amount of times you can TIE. Without re-inventing the wheel and messing with too much development, could be something great to look at.

The problem I have with this one is that any number of TIEs picked will be arbitrary, and there is no good way to decide how many is the right number, and why.

Suggestion for Enthusiasm:

As someone who has played basketball most of my life (up to college). I find the enthusiasm element a little too powerful. When basketball teams play each other, they don't go out and take it easy to try and rest. I can't remember ever having a coach say: "Guys, let's not play hard this game because our next game is really important, and we need to save ourselves to try and win it." It doesn't seem realistic.

However, I do think it adds some more strategy to the game. If I were changing it, I would first reduce t he effect of enthusiasm on the games.

I think the enthusiasm needs to be tied with winning. As a player I can't see how I get more enthiastic after I get blown out by 40 points when my team TIEs. I would say keep it the same, but add the element of winning or losing to influence how much the enthusiasm moves. For instance if I TIE a game and win, my number moves just like it does today, but if I lose my game, it moves up half as much. Same with CT. If I win, My enthusiasm will move down less.

I don't know if this is perfect, but whatever is done, it needs to have a little less effect on the games outcome.

Just my .02 worth