BuzzerBeater Forums

Wow - since I started this lil ole post, I figured I would be back on the original topic which centered around the benefits received in this BBB tourney. To me, it's been shown that while yes, there may be issues with the amount of games played, strategic teams (with the appropriate sort of BB mojo) can navigate these waters and create a minor windfall.

This is a tournament that should be played in arcade mode at a base attitude level.
I say this because while watching the KDB/BC Torro match, I couldn't help but think if the game was prearranged and if it wasn't why should attitude matter in a game like this. It was a heck of a game until the 5point play late in the 4th opened the floodgates. Those are the types of games I think all of us would want to see and then we could spread the acolades approriately.
We can also see the players as they truely are and then reward the couragous winner of this event who would of had to navigate the matches and would allow this tournament to be kept within the guidlines in which all things are earned in BB.

By awarding them 10% to 20% all the common rewards associated with the game, the teams will get their just reward while the rest of us get to see a true slugfest.

Playing the tournament in arcade mode would more likely penalize the first division teams that didn't make the BB3 tournament. Because of having to spread out the top players and having to play TIE, those teams have a chance to knock off the BB3 teams and get ahead in the race for HCA in the playoffs. For example, in my league, the Sculpins have lost 3 league games due to BB3, when they would likely be undefeated if they were playing BB3 in arcade mode. Even in the controversial TIE conference in the US, next year, when there are only 2 US teams (instead of 5), the non-BB3 teams will have the incentive to not play mutual TIES (why commit yourself to TIE when you know the other team has to TIE?), knowing that the best way to get ahead of the BB3 teams is clinch HCA and win in the playoffs, which would then result in a future BB3 invite.

So you would rather penalize the masses under the current format and help out the top division?

Everyone would play the same games that matter - and the "best" team would get to prove it in a bubble? I like it

So FC Shocker (a US D IV team) would have made it to the second round in the cup without BB3?

Besides, if the BB's want to lessen the benefits of a top division, they can lower TV revenue and attendance.

You make it sound as if he has never lost in the first round before......

There are other "top" teams who have bowed out of the cup in the first round.

You make it sound as if he has never lost in the first round before......

There are other "top" teams who have bowed out of the cup in the first round.

True, the only Cup loss I've ever had was in the first round.

But it is safe to say that Salisbury would have made it out of the first round if not for the B3.

The point about this discussion, I don't like is, that a lot of people seem to assume, that participants of B3 earn huge rewards, that then disrupt the normal league. What is missing for me is the quantification of this.

The advantages of playing in B3 are
- earning money from attendance
- additional training minutes
- Enthusiasm

The disadvantages are:
- Game shape or bigger squad to avoid issues
- risk of injuries

Attendance: if you get lucky and have a big arena, this can mean quite some additional income (I think BC Töröö made 600'000 in the first 3 rounds?). For most participants, there is not much additional income.
additional training minutes:if you have the squad or a lucky schedule you get 48 minutes more per position. How much does this amount to? Maybee 1 pop in two weeks? Maybee 1.5 pops? So how much is that worth?
Enthusiasm: in the first rounds, you get away with playing Playoff normal, and you can push your enthusiasm to around 12 for games. But in my oppinion, enthusiasm is overrated, and not worth so much.

To me, this does not sound huge, and the teams that make it beyond round 3 earn their rewards. An arcade type of play would lessen the fun of B3 a lot in my eyes.

I am not against the B3...go Toroo and Sculpins.

However you don't make much of an argument here. You tell people that they are wrong to claim that B3 gives an advantage without quantifying, yet you go on to make your point by saying things like, "Maybe," and "in my opinion," and, "to me, this does not sound huge."

Then you follow up those gems by saying that you think changing the B3 to arcade would lessen the fun, yet you fail to bother explaining how or why. Would B3 really be less fun in arcade? I'm not sure of that. A lot of people seem to enjoy their private leagues, and I have to think that running the B3 games in a manner similar to the national team games would be at least as enjoyable.

I think it is undeniable that an advantage exists, even if it is not as large as some people seem to think it is. The question is if the advantage is unfair. I do not believe it is either, so I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just saying that you cannot demand that people quantify and then yourself become even more vague than those with whom you disagree.




I do not think that a lot of the people who are complaining about the B3 would complain about a direct monetary compensation for the winner of a league or a cup, so why not just consider this the alternative? I would have to think that most of the participants are not getting as much out of the B3 as they would from, say, a million dollar champions bonus.

Sorry, I did not have much time this morning, so I left out, why I like the current format better than an arcade style game.

okay, I'm in this game, because I like manager kind of games, because I like a challenge and I like Basketball. The current format challenges me more than an arcade type thing:
I have to make a decision, where I set my priorities (choose between doing good in the league, the cup or/and B3). If I had unlimited resources, I could do good in all three, since I have not... To make that decision, I have to see, who are my opponents this week, and next week (although I don't know all of them yet), and then I have to plan whom to play and hope, my good players are not overplayed (or train "game shape"). Out of these decisions, I then get rewarded (hopefully) by winning and by earning some extra Cash, and maybe some training minutes.
So, in the arcade version, I field my best team no matter what. I don't get any rewards, I don't suffer any pains, only my ego is bolstered, when I win. For me, this would not be anywhere near as satisfying, as the current format. I hope, I have made my oppinion on why I don't like the arcade version as much clear.

To your first point (quantifying and then stating opinions): If I had no oppinion, I would not write in this forum. I could have tried to make my point in a better way (first stating facts, and then give my oppinions in a clear and conciese way), that's true.

And when I read a lot of these posts, I do get the feeling, that people are complaining because of the compensation, that participants receive in B3.

Last edited by zimiwings at 6/6/2008 11:17:29 AM

So, in the arcade version, I field my best team no matter what. I don't get any rewards, I don't suffer any pains, only my ego is bolstered, when I win.

I would treat the B3 like PL leagues. I usually play top players but do some experimenting, move players into other positions, or use basic tactics as a barometer of how training/GS has affected my team.

Also, I would hesitate to use my best team/tactics for a no-reward tournament, as it just gives away more info to my opponents, especially ahead of big games.

Last edited by brian at 6/6/2008 11:31:47 AM