BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > Contracts instead of Transfers

Contracts instead of Transfers

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
219996.15 in reply to 219996.11
Date: 6/12/2012 10:06:47 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
It's interesting that you make out as though I am affected by confirmation bias, but you deny your own.

A constant rotation of players in and out of the team will affect the fans more than this one part of the fan survey. At the beginning, maybe, they might get over it. After a while, not many will come to the games. I see your point that the fan survey is trying to address this. Now, see my point that it fails or, at most, falls very short.

I'm not making out anything. You tried to claim the fan survey should include something that's already there. If you want to argue its effect is not severe enough -- that's a different argument altogether.

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
This Post:
00
219996.16 in reply to 219996.15
Date: 6/12/2012 10:17:49 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
299299
Ok, you got me on a semantic. I'm not going to look back to see if I did or didn't say it. The point remains that the fan survey isn't realistic.

This Post:
00
219996.17 in reply to 219996.13
Date: 6/12/2012 10:19:37 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
should we also set our lineup and training regimes, one season in advance? Even i had several player who double there salaries withn a season, and i am not talking from 5 to 10k, you can even train from 40k to 120k within a season.


That's a silly suggestion. If you did that you would lose for sure. Surely the tactics of buzzerbeater would get you beaten if everyone knew what your strategy was.


so if you sign a 80k, 21yo Center for three years:

- he might be an 200k center in his klast contract year easily

- he might be consider finished and perfect for the team and remain an 80k center

- can massively trained out of position and end of at an 110k PF

How you put that into one contract? Without knowing the exact training regime.

In reality where you get your ideas, the player will progress a bit but not that massive like here. Here it is possible to play like Kyle Visser this season, and next season perform like Dwight Howard. Yes they improve, but that are really small compared to here.

This Post:
00
219996.18 in reply to 219996.17
Date: 6/12/2012 10:23:25 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
299299
Well you set the training regime, so you set what price you are willing to play for that player. Others will do the same.

If you want to keep his salary low, you train him in secondary skills. That's your choice. It's good to have choice, no?

This Post:
00
219996.19 in reply to 219996.16
Date: 6/12/2012 10:24:54 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
Ok, you got me on a semantic. I'm not going to look back to see if I did or didn't say it. The point remains that the fan survey isn't realistic.

My point is not to "get" you (or anyone else, for that matter). It's hard to discuss anything when the other side is changing the argument all the time.

As for the fan survey being realistic -- BB-Charles is on the record somewhere saying that being able to do trading on the market for some profit. So far, I've heard nothing from the management suggesting that this functionality is not performing as expected.

It is also expected that you should be able to use the transfer market to make your team better by purchasing stronger players. It seems to me -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- that you expect teams to play for virtually no crowd unless they keep the same roster for multiple seasons, and this is just not goign to happen.

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
This Post:
00
219996.20 in reply to 219996.18
Date: 6/12/2012 10:31:23 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
so nnot giving long term contract to create monster get punished, tryining to keep stars or own draft player when they reached are necessary level get impossible. Making it more attractive to train old players, since you can give them imporvement with no cost on a long term contract. To use your word "silly" in my eyes, but they are crazy.

This Post:
00
219996.21 in reply to 219996.19
Date: 6/12/2012 10:32:26 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
299299
I'm changing the argument?

It seems to me -- and correct me if I'm wrong -- that you expect teams to play for virtually no crowd unless they keep the same roster for multiple seasons, and this is just not goign to happen.

Read again what I wrote. Changing players is vital to any team. Move up a division? You'll need to change players. Down? Same thing. Having a roster of 25-30 different players over a season? Fans aren't going to be impressed.

At the moment, I ignore the "I am familiar with the star players, and am not afraid that they will be transferred" section because I know that I will make more money by doing so. This means that it doesn't work.

Anyway, the original suggestion was for players to be on contracts. Perhaps there is another way. Maybe if the player is no longer needed, the team should receive a portion of the money back and the player becomes a free agent, ready for other managers to bid on.

I dunno... I'm just thinking of ways to help with the issues that quite a few people have. Shut me down if you want, but my only intention is to help, not to hinder or create negativity.

This Post:
00
219996.22 in reply to 219996.21
Date: 6/12/2012 10:37:52 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
Having a roster of 25-30 different players over a season? Fans aren't going to be impressed.

And I'm saying fans wouldn't care as long as you win games. As far as unfounded claims go, I don't see how yours is better than mine.

At the moment, I ignore the "I am familiar with the star players, and am not afraid that they will be transferred" section because I know that I will make more money by doing so. This means that it doesn't work.

No, it doesn't. It means there are trade-offs in the game.

Maybe if the player is no longer needed, the team should receive a portion of the money back and the player becomes a free agent, ready for other managers to bid on.

It's funny how you describe existing functionality, but refuse to acknowledge it because it's not called what you want it to be called. In this particular case, you're describing "putting a player on the transfer market for sale". No, it doesn't give you guaranteed money, but things you know what they say about death and taxes.

I dunno... I'm just thinking of ways to help with the issues that quite a few people have. Shut me down if you want, but my only intention is to help, not to hinder or create negativity.

I don't think there's anything negative in having a discussion. But you have to realize that sinking development time in to something that pretty much exists already is not good a good way to do game development.

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
This Post:
00
219996.23 in reply to 219996.22
Date: 6/12/2012 10:50:16 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
299299
Ok, I'm blanket wrong. My apologies.

This Post:
00
219996.24 in reply to 219996.22
Date: 6/12/2012 8:17:30 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
299299
And I'm saying fans wouldn't care as long as you win games. As far as unfounded claims go, I don't see how yours is better than mine.
Would you go and support your city's team if you never knew who the players were going to be?

No, it doesn't. It means there are trade-offs in the game.
Absolutely right that there are tradeoffs in the game. It's what makes it awesome and it's the reason I stay and keep playing. However, this tradeoff is too one-sided. It's far more beneficial to dismiss that part of the fan survey than try to satisfy it, making it not very balanced. See, this is what I'm saying. You're saying I'm blanket wrong. I'm saying that you have great points, but you're not blanket right.

It's funny how you describe existing functionality
I see what you're saying about that now. You're right. I still think there would be a way to do it where contracts expire. Maybe I'm grasping at straws on that one...

Maybe what would be better is if there were particular times that teams rearranged their rosters. Or, perhaps, what would be better is if managers could only add to their roster before (or just after) the allstar break.

Make the game less about the transfer market and more about basketball strategies.

Advertisement