BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > Walkover Game

Walkover Game

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
198304.17 in reply to 198304.16
Date: 11/10/2011 6:32:01 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
1) Two out of a team's top three players of your players (upon salary) must play in each game.


A C on PG is very weak. if you mean start, this will mean that at least one of your top 3 players plays to much minutes each week. If you mean backup, sorry i could put them even on the lineup in a way that they just come into the game when i win with a blowout.

2) The team rating (on each game) must be above 80% of the average performance oif that team during that week.
etc.


good way, of punishing teams who play ct, or even have a OT game ;) But CT should be standard, cause else you didn't try everything to win.

Like humans, there will be false-true and true-false cases, but a team who takes a chance in a game needs to take this also in considearation.


so randomly opunishing teams, is the solution ;)

There also could be a field implying whether this team may be a suspect, upon some wider calculations, upon line-up setting.


As said to the transfer, i can not imagine that there are people who judge all games to be thrown away or not. Like defining prices for every imaginable player, so that we could trade for fix prices.

This Post:
00
198304.18 in reply to 198304.16
Date: 11/11/2011 1:57:23 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
587587
It just a matter of finding a good definition.

That - and finding a well-balanced penalty, and then of course implementing it all.

This Post:
00
198304.19 in reply to 198304.1
Date: 11/12/2011 2:30:37 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
7979
Yes, I like this very much. Everytime I play a team that just w/o's I have to rethink about my players' minutes (GS consideration), especially my trainees as minutes distribution follows a strict rule depending on how many players you dress. What's so hard fielding scrubs...

This Post:
00
198304.20 in reply to 198304.1
Date: 11/15/2011 7:05:37 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
916916
My suggestion is that teams who do this to punish in ca$h.

The teams that are doing this on purpose always have benefit from this matches.

Proposal:
The penalty to be in the amount of money that they earned from the sale of tickets for this match,
because they are not played a match and must return money to fans.
The penalty will be charged to the team that did not come to the match,
no matter if home or away team.


Agree. Take a look about what happened this tuesday on first spanish division;

http://www.buzzerbeater.com/league/191/overview.aspx

Anyone did walkover, but just 1 team tried to win away.


I think BB's should punish more when a team is losing for such a difference.

I doubt a manager can enjoy playing in that division.

From: strilfe

This Post:
00
198304.22 in reply to 198304.21
Date: 11/22/2011 10:18:39 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
246246
I just want to say that walkovers should have a penalty.

The WO team shouldn't have any income if playing at home.

If a team does it more than once a season (it could happen) should play a penalty that equals the average tickets of the home team.

By the way, the salary floor is a great idea.

This Post:
00
198304.23 in reply to 198304.22
Date: 1/20/2023 7:43:23 PM
Sindicato S.A.
II.1
Overall Posts Rated:
108108
I apologize for digging up this topic, but I have exactly the same question and I couldn't find it in the manual or FAQ.

What happens to gaming income when it's W.O?

Are there any other penalties for a W.O. besides being a tiebreaker at the end of the season?

Last edited by cataplasma at 1/20/2023 7:43:40 PM

This Post:
00
198304.25 in reply to 198304.24
Date: 1/21/2023 3:44:09 AM
NakamichiDragons
II.3
Overall Posts Rated:
20422042
Second Team:
Little Computer People
What happens to gaming income when it's W.O?

Are there any other penalties for a W.O. besides being a tiebreaker at the end of the season?


No, there are no penalties. The team receives the income for that game.

Teams with WO (losses!) is dropping in the draft-order!

founded in S3 IV.5 (34234) - returned in S28 IV.7 (34515)