BuzzerBeater Forums

Well, I think

1) is true, it could be made a little bit easier to find. But still, you posted in the right thread, so if you really want to find the thread, you can.

2) They already fixed part of the problem. Only teams with competitive games have to pay their players salaries. Therefore a team that finished 5th won't have to pay players salaries - but still get TV and merchandise-money. You're kind of describing a situation as it was 2 seasons (and more) ago.

3) I don't really get your point ... do you mean, you want to shorten the regular season and prolong the playoffs?

1) I still don't get it...
How can I see where this "Suggestion" thread is?
This is only my second full season, and I didn't used the forums much...

2) OK, I didn't know about the salaries issue, but yet this is not yet fully solved as:
a) A full game income (1/3 + 2/3 in case of a single relegation week) is usually higher than player salaries.
At least this is true in my case...
b) A semi-finalist dropper will earn only for a single game (1/3 or 2/3 income), while the relegation team (that will win the RL in a single week) will have earnings of a full week (1/3 + 2/3).
c) Also a finalist losser may earn less in case the finals ended after two games, while the RL ended by 3 and the finalist loser had been the Away team in both the finals and the semi-finals.

3) Yes, this is what I suggest.
This suggestion is due to the fact that I guess they don't want the season (regular + PL / RL) will get longer.
The second and the main reason I suggest it is explained in my previous respond - a weaker team may win this situation and stay in a league while the other will drop to a lesser league.

BTW - is your name is upon the basketball player?
You know that he also played in Israel? [He also played in Alba. Am I right?]

Can you please explain how do I find a specific thread?

Specily when I don't know the thread name...

I've also replied regarding the other points in a separate message.
Can you explain the reason behind the manager desicion regarding the last part?

I think it's mor than fair that the 7th gets income and the 5th doesn't since he is struggling not to get relegated if you want the money insted of the 5th place put your self in that situation, and about the number of games i'm on the other side i encourage more games.

Thanks, but I still think that things are missing...

1) I think that still for a newbe to know that there is a Suggestion thread is not something one can rely on, and good suggestions can be lost due to that.
I think it should be added to some general page where suggested threads can be found at easily.

2) I didn't understood at all your answer for the second issue.
Which manager?
I thought you first spoke about this BB manager, but now it just does not fit.
Can you please read again my response to Wendell? I've tried to better explain it.

Thanks!

I think you've missed both issues...

1) The one who got to the 5th place put more money and more important more effort to get to this place.
Why should he get less?
It also could lead to a team lossing just to be in this RL round, and this is not a realistic scenario.

If I need to think on a solution regarding it, I would say that a prize, upon team's place at the week before RL/PL round starts, is needed to be given.
This is another way for making it more reliable to the "real world".

Basicaly it is absurd that a higher team will earn less.

BTW, in case you are in my situation that you are winning from current situation you don't need to fear, as it will cannot be assigned on current season.

2) I'm not saying playing less.
I'm saying that under current total games limitations, the regular season is better shorten for a longer (and fairer) RL (and PL) round.

OK, so you didn't realy follow my way of thought...

I'll try better explain it using an example (kind of).

In the relegation there are 4 teams.
Currently it will end after one round, that will have two series. Each team will play in a single serie.

In case the better two will be in one serie and the lesser on the other it is not that fair...

What I suggest, for example, is having a short "inner" league.
Meaning, each team will play a single game against the other three teams.
The total of games will always be three (which is the max number of games in the RL round today as it is), and the unfair situation described above could be avoided.

BTW, what about the first part regarding having a page containning all of the usefull threads?

Thanks in advance

I think you missread my messages.

1) Calling "rubbish" to a game-improvement suggestion is kind of wrong.
First, you cannot say that money-wise the example about the 5th place is fair. No matter how rare it is (and I believe it is not that rare).
The other scenarios adding to the propabilities of unfairness.

I've also suggested a very simple solution that is totaly not difficult or causing much change to the engine.
Having a price or a fee, upon the place a team ended the regular season at (or the full season as a total).

2) I've also wrote regarding a second case of unfairness. In this case, regarding the RL winners and lossers.
Again, I've suggested a solution - a RL 3-games round where each team that will get to this round (5-th and 6-th places on the regular season) will play each other. The winners and lossers of the RL round will be upon this short round only.
This does not change anything regarding season lenght (number of max games for the RL teams) and solve very easily the RL fairness issue.

Thanks in advance for your time and advice.

Last edited by Pini פיני at 10/16/2011 4:42:39 PM