BuzzerBeater Forums

But doesn't this kind of eliminate the fun of getting into a bidding war with someone? IDK about anyone else but when I am looking at the transfer list I target a few players at max. Also this prevents players from making money that they could have made had someone gotten into said bidding war. Also I look for good deals and this potentially makes me unable to get a good deal. Why would I want to risk paying 40k when I might only want to pay 21k but then at the last second I think that I might actually want to go up to 23 to beat someone but I don't want to put 40k down just to make sure I win the bid.

I understand how this may help people that don't have the time to constantly scour the TL (I don't have this time) but I don't think you should take an advantage away from people who do want to invest that kind of time into the game, and it also potentially punishes patient managers who will wait for the right deal to come along even if they have to wait a few days or even weeks as they might not want to commit a large sum of money, but when you make that bid it would keep you from making bids on other players potentially because you have say 60k committed in bids even though you only really expect to pay like 30 but then you have to wait all that time for the auction to expire to get your 30k back.

If you want to spend 60k on a player you already have the option to commit that kind of money by just bidding 60k, this just lets someone who just wants to throw out a bunch of bids still get a good deal if they were the only one who wanted that player. Personally I think that if someone wants to overpay by a bit you have to let them because it punishes me because then I have to keep going up in increments of 1k (this is what I would do) until I found the opponents limit and just beat them by 1000.

...this prevents players from making money that they could have made had someone gotten into said bidding war.

I would argue the opposite, because you are allows more people to bid. There have been exceptions, but usually, I will just ignore players that have auctions ending at times that would seriously disrupt my life.

I look for good deals and this potentially makes me unable to get a good deal. Why would I want to risk paying 40k when I might only want to pay 21k but then at the last second I think that I might actually want to go up to 23 to beat someone but I don't want to put 40k down just to make sure I win the bid.

If you only wanted to pay 21k, you could put 21k, then put it up to 23k at the last second to beat someone. Good deals would still happen, there will always be players that are over or undervalued. Also, people still would changing their minds at the last second and entering bids, just not as much.

I don't think you should take an advantage away from people who do want to invest that kind of time into the game.

I suspect the very best players have spent extraordinary time learning the details of the mechanics governing this game. My opinion is that this game is complex enough to reward players for time investment regardless if the transfer list was easier or not. If anything, I think it would allow users to focus more on game mechanics.

...it also potentially punishes patient managers who will wait for the right deal to come along even if they have to wait a few days or even weeks as they might not want to commit a large sum of money, but when you make that bid it would keep you from making bids on other players potentially because you have say 60k committed in bids even though you only really expect to pay like 30 but then you have to wait all that time for the auction to expire to get your 30k back.

You're right that this would be potentially difficult for the "Available cash after bids" calculation. Would you use the current bid or the max bid? I'm not certain. However, it's not as if you can't make errors with this now by making premature bids.

I disagree with the punishing patient managers as the "right deal." The "right deal" would still be a function of the manager's value of a player verse what the price is. I also think it's speculative how player pricing would change overall.

Last edited by Phat Panda at 7/12/2013 6:50:51 PM

You are multiple Japan champion. Did you sacrifice your life for BB ? I don't think so. It's the same for a lot of great managers throughout BB.

You miss one guy, that's life.

It's a lot more than one guy. hehe I would say that this measure would create an even playing field for all players despite whatever is going on in there lives and make the game more user friendly. That should be what a developer strives for.

I can definitely understand the ad revenue angle. That's difficult. Perhaps a friendly game would keep more people interested and thus make up for the revenue loss, but I don't have no tangible evidence to support that statement. From a business perspective the thought process of "ad revenue is more important than improvement" is short sighted if you want to see this game continue to be successful.

Perhaps this could be a great supporter feature. It would encourage people to buy supporter. The only con is that it might be too powerful of tool and create a competitive advantage for supporters. On the other hand, pushing the envelope on the competitive advantage policy might be okay in the sense that it would make being a supporter more attractive.

WIthout implementing an autobid...I doN't see why the BBs just doN't do what other MMO managers do, sell ingame money for real money. It would suck and ruin the game...but to me every auction worth being involved in expiring while I sleep...kinda ruins the game too.

Uuggghhh!! With or without context, the notion of BuzzerBeater selling in game currency for real world currency is painful to think about. :-(