BuzzerBeater Forums

Yes, this will most definitely will resolve the "hard" case that I've brought as an example for the need for this feature.
On the other hand, this is just that - the extreme case.

A team that start the season with a roster will be better than a team that have the same players but just acquire an important piece (to have that roster) "seconds" before current game.

Regarding the difficulty of this feature - it is a very easy one.
The time that a player is part of the team is already part of the code.
Now, just add the easy calculation of chemistry and you're finished.

This calculation can be as simple as - GS = (current GS)*(Games in team/4) when (Games in team) < 4, or any other calculation.
This formula had been brought not as the suggested formula, but just to prove that it shouldn't be too hard.

Your suggesting that a team that keeps the same roster all season should have better team chemistry than a team who purchases a player mid-season.

I agree with this.

I just dont agree with a game-time game-engine change to reward this.

it would raise too many 'how the fudge did i lose game X" kind of questions? Did i lose the game because of tactics, game shape, enthusiasm, matchups? Or because of that purchase i made last week?

I dont really want to have to be asking that question every time i lose. BUT..... i do want a better reward for keeping my team intact throughout a season.

Another alternative answer to this, could be that the longer a player stays in one team, the faster his experience increases? It would allow for the use of an existing feature, which everyone understands and doesnt change that much to the game as a whole, but allows for some kind of in-game benefit which would be seen by the players improved experience.

OK, so after we basically agreed on the need, we are now deep in the "how".

There can be many ways.
Another will be to add it into the skills.

Let's assume that it affects Passing (for example);
The Passing skills of that player will look like:
Passing: "Normal value" ("current value").

Where "Normal value" is the value that player will have when chemistry will be achieved.
And of course "current value" is the current level of passing due to the fact that "team-chemistry" had not yet been fully achieved, and as a result he may not exploit his passing ability to the max (will not know how his player moves, where the best position to pass them the ball, etc.).

By that, there are no question that needs to be answer.

Your suggestion about experience is just the same suggestion but with regard to a different skill parameter.
The only thing is that I find it less affected by "team-chemistry" issue.

Last edited by Pini פיני at 10/30/2011 4:35:22 AM

We have already discovered (in all the earlier chemistry threads), that increasing chemistry will give an advantage to older teams in this game. It would be harder to promote and compete with the older teams. This is not good for the game. Changing chemistry (optimum time being 3 years per player) does not work, too many variables and the game would get too complicated to calculate. Taking personalitys (suitable personalitys, personal colors etc) into game, would eventually favor one type of players/teams. Raising the prices of those players and lowering everyone else. This is bad aswell.
We could set the deadline to 2 weeks, before the playoff starts. But as it is now, whenever "the player is not eligible" deadline passes, TL almost dies. So perhaps, that aswell, is not that good for the game. The end of the season is pretty boring anyway (unless you have a long playoff run), removing 2 weeks of active (more players get sold near playoffs for obvious reasons) TL might not be the best idea.
I also think that in highly competitive leagues. The guy who spends average will not make playoffs. If his plan is to ace the relegation games, then by all means, let him buy players for those games. It's a strategy like every other. Getting a player, that is great and has decent GS before playoffs, is really expencive. Is it the most productive strategy, I doubt it. If you can spend average and make playoffs, with enough money to strenghten your team and actually have a chance against HC, then by all means, you are a great manager. Moving the deadline 2 weeks, just makes everyone buy even players with bad GS. As it takes 2 weeks to repair that.
The only way we can stop superstar shopping before playoffs is GS. We already got to that in those numerous threads about chemistry. The only thing needed to discuss is: to what level should the players GS drop. Should it go to GS 1, GS 3, drop by -2 levels. I don't think team entu should be affected. Affecting the whole team with one transfer, would eventually decrease TL activity to minimal.

Last edited by Kukoc at 10/30/2011 12:40:53 PM

1) TL activity is not the goal.

2) Currently as you said, there is a great peek near playoff time, so we can lower TL avtivity and keep the average TL-activity level.

3) "Team-chemistry" should affect the team, but mostly the new player.

4) This change of event (adding the feature) will not directly lower the TL-activity, but more likely will spread it along the season.
It will make the users to think more on effects of buying a player any time of the year.
This is definetly part of BB managing.

5) How does it needs to look along the year?
Exactly like in the real world!
A player that had played last season and a player that had joined the team at pre-season will not "pay" due to lack of "team-chemistry".
A player that will be bought at any time that week, will suffer from it.

6) Regarding the first point - yes, older teams will have this advantage and they deserve it - they've plan ahead, like a BB manager should.
On the other hand, they suffer from that they are not strengthening their team with new players.
So this is also a good thing - allowing the user to plan and decide and take this things into consideration.

Again, "team-chemistry" will only affect one year at most, so it is not that bad...

1) Killing TL completely is not the goal.
2) Currently there is a bit more transfers at the start of the season (draftees) and near playoffs (teams getting ready for playoff runs). TL pretty much is stagnant during the season and almost dies off after the deadline. What you are trying to do is only make it viable to trade during offseason.
3) "Team-Chemisty" should affect the player (via GS) and this affects the team, if you want to improve that GS you have to play that low GS player.
4) This will drastically lower TL-activity during the season. This does nothing to spread it along the season.
5) We have no player contracts. Using salary per skills is the better option for this game. Thus we can't have it like in the real world. That way TL is pretty important to dump excess salary or improve your team. It's pointless to punish the team and the player the whole ongoing season. Lowering GS should be enough (as it affects all skills).
6) Old teams should not just get an advantage from staying stagnant or switching players only during preseason and then just avoid TL like a plague the whole season.
It's pointless to ruin the player for the whole season, just because you sign him during the season.

1) Killing TL completely is not the goal.

It does not kill the TL as I wrote and explained.

2) Currently there is a bit more transfers at the start of the season (draftees) and near playoffs (teams getting ready for playoff runs). TL pretty much is stagnant during the season and almost dies off after the deadline. What you are trying to do is only make it viable to trade during offseason.

No, instead of having two peeks and almost nothing at the other parts of a season, this will create that it will be more spreaded along the season, as teams (like in real BB) will make the adjustment not on a "single point" of the season, but along the all season.

3) "Team-Chemisty" should affect the player (via GS) and this affects the team, if you want to improve that GS you have to play that low GS player.

So?!? that is the cost of having a player that time of season.
And again, ther are other skills that can be affected in addition or instead.

4) This will drastically lower TL-activity during the season. This does nothing to spread it along the season.

Not true. As I wrote above.

5) We have no player contracts. Using salary per skills is the better option for this game. Thus we can't have it like in the real world.

BB has player contracts.
The contract is defined at the begining of each year, and upon the player's skills.

That way TL is pretty important to dump excess salary or improve your team. It's pointless to punish the team and the player the whole ongoing season. Lowering GS should be enough (as it affects all skills).

The affect is decreasing as the time passes. Exactly as it is in real BB world. The chemistry is being built, and the performance improved.

6) Old teams should not just get an advantage from staying stagnant or switching players only during preseason and then just avoid TL like a plague the whole season.
It's pointless to ruin the player for the whole season, just because you sign him during the season.

A) He is not "ruined".
His skills are not as good as if he would have been bought at the pre-season, but you can still buy players for improving the team.
B) The cost of not planing from the start of the season is (like in real-world) costly.
C) When you need to buy a player you will buy it.

It does not kill the TL as I wrote and explained.

Yes it will kill it, as I wrote above.

No, instead of having two peeks and almost nothing at the other parts of a season, this will create that it will be more spreaded along the season, as teams (like in real BB) will make the adjustment not on a "single point" of the season, but along the all season.

No, with your suggestion there will be only one peak at offseason. Transfers during season will be at minimal.

So?!? that is the cost of having a player that time of season.
And again, ther are other skills that can be affected in addition or instead.

Player transfer during season should not demolish his skills for all of that season. Game shape is a multiplier for all the skills. There is no point of tieing separate skills to player transfers.

Not true. As I wrote above.

It is true as I wrote above.

BB has player contracts.
The contract is defined at the begining of each year, and upon the player's skills.

Player "contracts" are forced playersided indefinite salarys, that change annually.

The affect is decreasing as the time passes. Exactly as it is in real BB world. The chemistry is being built, and the performance improved.

You can not just add chemistry impovement over time (if you want realism), there should be frustration aswell, if the team stays together too long. Like I said, this would be a very complex formulae, if you do not want to give a great advantage to old teams. Player movement is a good thing. Few levels of GS drop should be enough.

A) He is not "ruined".
His skills are not as good as if he would have been bought at the pre-season, but you can still buy players for improving the team.
B) The cost of not planing from the start of the season is (like in real-world) costly.
C) When you need to buy a player you will buy it.

A) The player is ruined for the rest of the season. This is a pointlessly harsh restriction to limit transfers to offseason.
B) There is no such cost in the real world. Where the hell are you living at?
C) Pointless sentence...

Last edited by Kukoc at 11/1/2011 6:21:42 PM

with GS all his skills are affected, and we already have a formula too increase it again iver time, which will show how they understand the system the coach plays and the abilitys of their teammates(what you call friendship .. chemistry).

with GS all his skills are affected, and we already have a formula too increase it again iver time, which will show how they understand the system the coach plays and the abilitys of their teammates(what you call friendship .. chemistry).

I didn't understood what you have meant...

No, with your suggestion there will be only one peak at offseason. Transfers during season will be at minimal.

A team that will learn from, their performance during the season, that they need to change their roster will do that.
And instead of only doing it near playoff it will be spreaded along the season upon their preference.

Player transfer during season should not demolish his skills for all of that season. Game shape is a multiplier for all the skills. There is no point of tieing separate skills to player transfers.

It does not demolish it, but the essence of this idea is that buying during the season will cost by playing performance.
A better BB manager creates his team at the start of the year and does not trade heavily during the season.
Which NBA champion team had added a superstar during the season? Not much if any.

You can not just add chemistry impovement over time (if you want realism), there should be frustration aswell, if the team stays together too long. Like I said, this would be a very complex formulae, if you do not want to give a great advantage to old teams. Player movement is a good thing. Few levels of GS drop should be enough.

Everything can be complexed. It can also be simple as I suggested here.

The player is ruined for the rest of the season. This is a pointlessly harsh restriction to limit transfers to offseason.

Not true - a player that will normally will give you 20 PTs in a specific game will give you less due to team-chemistry.
But he still may give you more than current roster, as this is why you've bought him.
Basically - getting a player during off-season costs more! [by performance]