BuzzerBeater Forums

Yes I misunderstood before, I get it now.

Edited 7/24/2007 7:26:02 AM by Vikman

well you didn't really address the issue...

the example given.. where player salaries aren't enough to make players be equal....the old vs the new guy.. then people could get their friends to sign up etc.. and trade them all their young players for old players etc... so they could get a killler young team.

but there is a more fundamental problem. If you contrain trades to only allow "fair" trades... then trading really adds no extra value over the transfer market as it is.

basically you can't make trades be a feature which gives people what the transfer market doesn't, without opening the door to "unfair" trades... and "unfair" trades are going to piss people off.. and we don't want that.

Edited 7/24/2007 7:18:50 AM by BB-Forrest

---

the example given.. where player salaries aren't enough to make players be equal....the old vs the new guy.. then people could get their friends to sign up etc.. and trade them all their young players for old players etc... so they could get a killler young team.

---

Here is where the BB's enter with the proper definition of the threshold, in a way that the salary limitation will so that the difference between players cannot be so great to be consider cheat (simple as that). And another thing, I've seen the roster of at least 6 starting teams on BB and I know there is no way in hell that 2 teams could do trades of players with almost identical salary in way that one of the team would become a "killer team". The truth is that they won't make a single trade that would highly benefit only one team. And also we can introduec another limitation that someone proposed here a few posts ago, which is to limit the number of trades a team can do per season (for example 3). I don't think it is necessary, but it is one more option.

---

but there is a more fundamental problem. If you contrain trades to only allow "fair" trades... then trading really adds no extra value over the transfer market as it is.

---

Not correct at all. The whole point is here. Even with a strong constraint, you will still be able to trade players that have the same salary but a different skill set. For example, you would be able to trade a guy that has everything mediocre and jump shot fenomenal for a guy that has everything mediocre and rebounding fenomenal. There can be a lot of different players with a similar overall quality (which by now has the salary as the best indicator).

The idea is to alow, for example, a jump shot trainer to be able to trade a player he trained for another player that was trained on rebounding, or some other skill and position. And that would happen in this trade system, and this (like my domenico said after I disscussed this idea with him): "would make the game f****** unique!!"

Edited 7/24/2007 12:54:26 PM by GM-Raonne

i'll address the second point first... well if two players are really equally valued but just different, then an owner should be able to sell one on the transfer market, and buy the other for the same price... no? if they aren't equally valued then in some sense the trade is not fair...


as to the first point, so we are looking for trades which are close to fair? but not perfectly fair?

to be honest, i'd love to see trades, my heart is for the idea... i'm just trying to play devil's advocate so we think through all the possible issues so we don't hurt the game...

Edited 7/24/2007 2:41:30 PM by BB-Forrest

Its tough to think a way to make trades possible, because when you open it you have many many many possibilities, and when you have many possibilities, you have that many chances to cheat unfortunatelly.

Allowing trades would really put a hamper on the transfer market.

Also, as Forrest said, being only able to trade within a certain salary range also defeats the purpose of trading in the 1st place, especially when a mechanism (the TL) already exists for transactions of this nature.

There's just too much foul play that can occur with trades for them to be worth the minimal benefit that is derived from allowing them.

well, I don't agree. If I have a awesome jump shooter and nobody at that moment has money to buy one, i'm stuck with him. However, people that don't have money could still trade great players.

But anyway, I'm done with this. I give up. We'll never have trades... Not because it was impossible, but because people were to scared or defensive to think together for a solution.

It would have been great, but whatever. This game will be great anyway...

(someone can close this thread if they want)

Say, for instance, I have a really good inside player that I'm stuck with. Raonne needs a big guy, and I need a good outside shooter. So..what if we both list them at our valuation (which is prob higher than anyone would pay on the market now) and then we both bid on each others player. Everyone still gets a chance to buy that player, and w/o any "fair market values" on players to compare against, is that breaking any rules?

I remember that use to happen in hattrick. What if you bid on his player and he doesn't bid on yours? If it is on the TL, there is no rule that he has to bid on yours even if he said he would.

I think the transfers list will work itself out as the game matures and people start to sell trainees. We need to let the market establish itself and see what happens from there.

blabla?