BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > Walkovers

Walkovers

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
223669.4 in reply to 223669.3
Date: 8/16/2012 9:20:22 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
i believe i put it as brainstorming into the suggestion forum.

From: CrazyEye

This Post:
00
223669.5 in reply to 223669.2
Date: 8/16/2012 9:42:18 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
The main concerns in walkover are:

1. The point differential (25-0) is atrocious, to say the least.
2. If you are a home team, having a walkover is a big drop on attendance, since your fans know that the team is on a losing streak.
3. Again, i should say once more, i don't really understand the fans' logic where they will buy to watch their teams games, even though they know that they will give walkover.
4. Also, why would teams giving walkovers get a merchandise income? i mean, they don't have players, what jerseys would they sell? do they sell jerseys of their past players who they sold already?
5. Lastly, why would they receive a weekly TV contract revenue if they don't play themselves. i mean, if you gave a walkover in a televised game, what would people watch? commercials?

1. At least increase the point differential, i'll say 50 points, or maybe some other reasonable measures.
2. There must be some kind of an incentive for having a home team play against those teams who gives walkover. i'm thinking of a penalty that they would pay to the home team.
3. The 3rd issue is rather hard to think of a solution to. if realistic enough, a team that gives a walkover should not have an arena income that week, since its logical that no fans will watch their game.
4. The 4th issue, i guess i'm implying that they would not have a merchandise income? lol. i say, they should be given lower.
5. In hear, i'm thinking that since this is a contract, maybe there should be a stipulation that if they give a walkover during a home game, there should be some kind of breach of contract, and so they will pay damages. maybe they will receive half of their TV contract for that week.


1. is 25-0 really atrocious or so bad, i would say giving then +50 would be way to much. Since it don't have an effect on the forfeiting team, and a 25 point win isn't bad for the point differential.

2. can happen with a bad team, too. Since the fans ain't really affected how it comes to an loss, giving the winning team to big advantage against team who battle for there win isn't good in my eyes.

3/4/5. i agree, even when you had to consider that mistake may happen, and team shouldn't be punish to hard for screwing up one game. So your reductions sounds reasonable.

Imho the biggest problem with WO isn't mentioned, the different risk of injurys and weird minute management. I really hope for letting then play against an "basic" bot team when the opponent can not field a team, especially since they seem to calculate something gamelike anyway.

From: Mr AD

This Post:
00
223669.6 in reply to 223669.5
Date: 8/16/2012 9:59:42 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
3232
then here's another solution: all teams must have a minimum number of players in their roster. in real life, its around 12 players. but i think 5 is reasonable for bb.

From: Phoenix
This Post:
00
223669.7 in reply to 223669.6
Date: 8/16/2012 10:12:42 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
689689
Walkovers do happen and I guess that 25-0 is the score that is applied in real life, I don't see any problem in it.
The only thing that might get changed in my mind is that the team that walks over should get a harder hit on its fans' survey.

Le forum francophone dédié à Buzzerbeater : (http://buzzerbeaterfrance.forumpro.fr/) Vous y trouverez conseils et partage
This Post:
11
223669.8 in reply to 223669.3
Date: 8/16/2012 12:56:35 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
My solutions are:


1. Reduce arena income

2. No TV revenue that week

3. Reduction in merchandising

I stole them, I know, but mine are simpler.


I think you're in the right direction. I think something like:

1. Loss of TV revenue for each walkover, with perhaps escalating amounts for repeat offenders.
2. Loss of all training benefits for the week for each walkover (so players are treated as having played 0 minutes).
3. After a second walkover in a season, a very long-term negative on the fan survey (perhaps 2-3 seasons).
4. When calculating draft position, count each walkover as a win rather than a loss, and for tiebreaks for draft purposes, a team with no walkover gets the better pick.

That should hopefully eliminate most if not all of the reasons anyone would give an intentional walkover and be a harsh reminder to teams that do so accidentally to ensure it won't happen again.

This Post:
00
223669.9 in reply to 223669.8
Date: 8/16/2012 5:29:39 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
299299
escalating amounts for repeat offenders.
That should definitely be added in. Sometimes someone makes a mistake and, yes, they should receive an appropriate consequence for it but, no, it shouldn't be too harsh. More than one walkover in a season should carry much greater penalties.

Good idea! +1

From: Fonzi

This Post:
00
223669.10 in reply to 223669.9
Date: 8/17/2012 2:09:18 AM
UK Wildkitties
III.6
Overall Posts Rated:
197197
Second Team:
Berlin Mavericks
Do you want to tackle the cause of the problem or simply regulate its effects?
If intentional walkovers are messing up the league standings, do not allow managers to field an insufficient amount of players. If they do, have the game engine fill the rotation either with lucky fans or autoselect players from the team roster.
Teams can still throw games, but the penalty will be a blowout. Financially, I don't know whether the system distinguishes between a 25 point loss and a 100 point loss.

From: Axis123

This Post:
00
223669.11 in reply to 223669.10
Date: 8/17/2012 2:30:18 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
299299
What if a team only has 3 players? Field "lucky fans"? Yeah right. I think managers need to be given more choices and consequences for their choices, not more concrete restrictions.

This Post:
00
223669.12 in reply to 223669.1
Date: 8/17/2012 2:47:03 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
55315531
There is no need to do something against causing Walkovers. Just take away the reasons why someone intentionally causes a WO, e.g. race for 5th place: you caused a walkover - sorry mate, you're gonna have to pay the players salaries during the playoff weeks.

From: Fonzi

This Post:
00
223669.13 in reply to 223669.11
Date: 8/17/2012 2:56:13 AM
UK Wildkitties
III.6
Overall Posts Rated:
197197
Second Team:
Berlin Mavericks
Have you ever seen a lucky fan go nuts and score in bunches? The ones I came across always had a horrible effiecency rating. That is the consequence of fielding three players or less. Personally, I don't see that as a restriction of my freedom to manage or coach.
It would also have a positive side effect: Every team in the league has to manage its minutes for three full games a week. There will be no one team that gets to save its minutes for the other two games or a predetermined amount of minutes in case of the other team's walkover.
It doesn't punish the opponent either. He can play his trainees in that game.

On the other hand, penalizing the walkover teams financially will surely hurt them and maybe serve to prevent a walkover the next time. But a purely repressive approach doesn't take away the negative aspects for the other teams that are punished without reason.

From: Axis123

This Post:
00
223669.14 in reply to 223669.13
Date: 8/17/2012 3:02:04 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
299299
Have you ever seen a lucky fan go nuts and score in bunches? The ones I came across always had a horrible effiecency rating. That is the consequence of fielding three players or less. Personally, I don't see that as a restriction of my freedom to manage or coach.
It would also have a positive side effect: Every team in the league has to manage its minutes for three full games a week. There will be no one team that gets to save its minutes for the other two games or a predetermined amount of minutes in case of the other team's walkover.
It doesn't punish the opponent either. He can play his trainees in that game.

On the other hand, penalizing the walkover teams financially will surely hurt them and maybe serve to prevent a walkover the next time. But a purely repressive approach doesn't take away the negative aspects for the other teams that are punished without reason.

Actually very good points. Thanks.

Advertisement