BuzzerBeater Forums

you can even make the decline due to over-play progressive:
if a player is over - played one week the effect is relatively small, but if he is over played a second week in a row and third and so on, every week the decline is bigger, making a one week over-play something you can handle, but not for more than that - this way teams can grind one or two players a certain week, and then let them rest the following weeks, and grind a different player - it's called rotation.

Last edited by Shadamher at 5/3/2012 9:52:09 AM

imagine two team fighting for position 7, each has a game left against a mid-level team that tries to go far in the cup - eventually one plays against the team, when it is still in the cup and gets a free win, while the other plays against it, a week later after the team lost in the cup and loses - this can affect which team gets relegated - that is a problem - that is not competitive sport.

I think you are basing your case on wrong presumption that everything has to be equal.
I'll try to keep this as short as possible as I don't want to resemble Wolph. When the season starts every team get's a schedule. At first glance, you can usually see which were good draws and which were bad (for example if you as a weaker team, draw all oposite side weaker teams away and stronger teams at home, you're schedule is already harder by random). As the season is long, there will be a lot of player movement, injuries, unlucky cup draws (and lucky cup draws), that might change that first impression of a lousy schedule.
Taking your 2 teams at 7-th spot example. What if they both play the same mid-lvl team. The first one get's a tough game and loses. The mid-lvl team secures PO or 5-th spot, decides to sell his older players for the "better before playoff market value". The second team get's a walk in a park. Or teams go bot at the time suitable for one team etc. Besides, if you are fighting for 7-th or 8-th spot, you seem to be in over your head anyway. If you have gotten there because you have made bad choises and losing league games you could have won, for cup success or played starters in 3 games a week. Then that is just bad management.
So if you have a tough week with 3 games you want to win. Sacrifice training in order to train GS or drop out of cup if you need those league wins to stay in your current division (cup cash does not make up the hit you take relegating).
The proposed GS change will make it easier for top tier teams (especially in cup, as I can't imagine lower tier teams beating higher tier teams with full lineups) + it makes the system more harder to understand for a new user.

Last edited by Kukoc at 5/3/2012 12:10:07 PM

That's helpful, and now it's easier for me to picture your proposed system.

Overall I don't find your proposal preferable, but that's because we disagree on whether there's an important problem in the first place. I like the fact that the current gameshape system forces any particular team to prioritize league games, or cup games. You can focus on the league games, at the expense of the Cup, which forces you to forgo the extra enthusiasm and cup win revenue for a chance to get a high seeding in your league. Or you can choose the other approach, go for Cup money, glory, and extra enthusiasm, but likely ending up on the road in the league playoffs.

And yes, there will be some amount of luck involved in how the opponents are affected by possible tanked games. But that is random, and changes season to season. So it doesn't have the long term effect of giving undue advantages to the top teams, while penalizing weaker teams. That's balancing between giving well managed, but weaker teams a shot to compete, while not being totally random at the expense of better teams. That's something I think that I think BB does pretty well.

Im not gonna do a pini, i said my reasoning, i hope you agree with me, if not - I KILL YOU.... (:

yes, i understood you completely - but i dont want to do a pini and start writing repetitive long threads on the subject...

told my side once - that's enough for me

Im not saying you done a Pini im saying i feel a bit like Pini. I think this whole suggestion is made so that already good teams can be better. Hence competitiveness gets worse and not better as the suggestion seems to be about.

So where can we find out historical game shape data for large nations for a few seasons ago so that we may find one example and ride it like a horse until its game shape is awful?

;)

I think the idea of punishing bad game shape decisions for a longer period is valid, but I'm not sure I like being able to make up for it by taking an extra break one week. In the end, GS is easy enough to manage with depth - and if a team chooses not to have depth for financial purposes, this is the side effect of that.

Well, i guess most teams here just don't get many thrown games affecting their league unlike the situation in the Israeli main leagues...

Anyway- like Shadamher said- we stated our proposal - and that's as much as we can do.