BuzzerBeater Forums

From my point of view, we (and by we I mean us all) simply failed in asking the right things.

We made so many assumptions about the state of competivity, about "our" problems (micronations et al), about "future development", that we simply forgot what to expect and what to ask to get something of worth.

Asking us first what kind of an answer we really expect, and THEN which questions would make sense might have lead to different answers.

On a side note, Marin mentioned that "doing research IRL how 2-3 works" might help in understanding how it works in the Engine. Similar statement about Patient, Inside and Outside Iso. Those "notes" lead to far more interesting consequences than the "we are looking into... we are planning... we are discussing..." items. It actually leads us to the question whether BB is actualy FAR MORE of a basketball sim than we all expect it to be.

Maybe trying to increase our basketball and our strategical knowledge about the whole basketball related stuff will help us finding ways to successfully handle things more than we need a BB to change things so that anybody can understand it.

Talking about the economical topic.

BBs are mentioning that Economy is in balance, or actually reaching an equilibrium, and people around here are complaining alot about how this would be bad and there would be no room, no fantasy in the market.

Guess what?

An economic balance is the EXACT OPPOSITE of pretty much ANY realistic economical concept IRL. Because IRL economy is based on CONSTANT GROWTH (which is quite an absurd theory overall, but that would lead to philosophical or even political debates, so let´s ignore that).

Working in a STABLE system is a pretty uncommon concept for the most of us, as anybody is "expecting the next boost just around the corner". Maybe we should take this as a challenge, and we should try working around instead of using our "growth based" solutions for a "stable based" problem?

From my point of view, we (and by we I mean us all) simply failed in asking the right things.

Serisouly, you must be kidding me.

''We don't train well the players''

''The 2-3 doesn't work because we don't train good players for it''

''R&G doesn't work as good as LI, because managers doesn't train good outside players''

And now we don't ask the ''right things''

I wonder what's going to be the next excuse.

Is there anything the managers does good in this game from your pov? Do you think that if the 80% of the managers of this game plays LI is because of random?

B3 is the best example to see what works and what not.

Maybe trying to increase our basketball and our strategical knowledge about the whole basketball related stuff will help us finding ways to successfully handle things more than we need a BB to change things so that anybody can understand it.

I don't have to google nothing. I watch basketball(spanish league&euroleague, apart from played some basketball when i was kid) to know that the concept of the zones this game have is REALLY DIFFERENT from the real life. Even if we play less minutes in europe, it's not random that the teams leave the opponent in 50-60 points.


But you gave me a good idea, next time when i want to buy a player i'll go to google and see if that player fits me or not ;)

The zones I play work extremely well in that department. I held my opponents to 61, 80 and 84 points with one "problematic" game of 109. Now the bad side is that I can´t score atm, but that´s a different story. Nevertheless: my zones work. Just have to work out how to limit my fouling ...

If I walk into a restaurant and pay $5 for a beer and give me a glass of water and say 'We are broke'...I rightly ask....

Q: How is this relative to the situation in this game?
A: It isn't. First of all, you have never paid for this game.Secondly, I don't see this game advertising anything that it isn't providing. For free, no less. As a non-paying customer who routinely logs on 6+ times a day, I would say the situation should be you walk into a bar and ask for a glass of water and the bartender gives you a keg. Then you whine that it's not porter, because that's the kind of beer you like and deserve to be given.


What do you think rent costs in Boston? What do you think operating costs (electricity, hardware, maintenance, insurance,tax, etc.) for a business are in the USA? What do you think salaries for however few employees are on this payroll amount to?

ps- I paid for Supporter long before I became a GM. I will pay for it when I stop being a GM.


Last edited by somdetsfinest at 2/22/2012 12:27:17 PM

Wait a second.

First you said this in response to Marin's answers: "he says nothing in a deep way, he seems a politician instead a programmer ..."

And now he's not being polite enough? I'll agree that there are times in the bug forum when Marin's answers could be phrased a little more gently (though perhaps you'd complain about him being too much a politician in that case), but having reread the answers to in the now pinned "Ask the BBs" thread, I don't see a single one that I would characterize as being impolite. Can you point to one specifically? And not your own interpretation of what he said, as you went through, but what he actually said.

And actually, having reread his response to Coco's question on LI, that seems to be the most clear statement I've seen from the BBs that LI is hard to defend because SB is not high enough, and that perimeter based tactics don't work because JR is not high enough. But now you still want more proof, by him making a fictitious team and winning B3 with it? That's simply asking too much. Instead, you'll just have to wait for some members of the community to train up a new generation of players with a new skill set.

An economic balance is the EXACT OPPOSITE of pretty much ANY realistic economical concept IRL. Because IRL economy is based on CONSTANT GROWTH (which is quite an absurd theory overall, but that would lead to philosophical or even political debates, so let´s ignore that).

Working in a STABLE system is a pretty uncommon concept for the most of us, as anybody is "expecting the next boost just around the corner". Maybe we should take this as a challenge, and we should try working around instead of using our "growth based" solutions for a "stable based" problem?

About the economy, working on a stable system doesn't mean encouraging the teams to tank&stand by's and having a poor competition, with the same teams going down&up every season like a lift.

The actual system subsidizes the managers who decides to give up the competition, it's a fact.

(low salary salaries allowed and when they promote they have a bonus for promoting so they have great incomes on that season).

Meanwhile there are other managers that if doesn't like to give up matches because it's not fun, they lose money week after week and if they want to promote they have to play a risky strategy like training in 1 seasons only primary skills or selling sustainable players and hiring monsters with the consequences that if it doesn't work they will go 2-3 steps back

The only escape for the competitive managers was the transfer list. Those who tried to build nice players had the option to go to the market and pick up some benefits by selling the players, but now the demand and supply is far from reach an equilibrium, in fact i don't see any equilibrium there, the inflation of the past wasn't good, but the depreciation we have now it's bad too.

The ''stable system'' has to attract the managers to play the games(at least on a competitive way), because if not then the managers lose the interest on the competition and end leaving the game(it's not weird to read opinions from managers that they just keep playing the game because they want to keep in touch with the community but anything more).

From my experience on this game, i know that making a change on the economy won't satisfy everybody, but a change on this area is needed to change the incomes of the teams.

Last edited by Marot at 2/22/2012 12:40:29 PM

Just an example so you see it's not a theory about what i'm talking

(76132)

S17 wins the Cup losing money during that season.

S18 he still have a nice team, keep advancing on Cup, but at the end of the season he decides to make an stand by and even of that he won the semifinals of the cup, but on the final he gave up because he already took the decision to save money.

(42332602) It's a final cup, not joking

And this season he directly tanks and sold 3/4 of his team.

Last edited by Marot at 2/22/2012 12:56:29 PM

I think any growing system supports a bunch of few, while any stable system has a huge "floating" and convexion part and is easier to get to the top. Trying to win means spending more than others and most likely a period of less sucess as you have to "refuel" your tanks. So to some degree, economical up and down is really part of a stable system.

What many people seem to be missing is that Marin opened up different "backdoors" how to exploit the current tactical choices with concepts which -might- be less expensive. I read his statements as if there´s a shortcut many people fail to see because they get blinded by the succeess (and the jam, nowadays) on the "fast lane".

by the way, the other part, saying LI is hard because SB is not high enough is like saying nothing, because its impossible having a good team and have a high SB ... for that i want to see a practice match without seeing skills, but seeing how a good SB team win a good team ...

how much is high SB ??? 18? 15? 10? have we go up SB to 20??? then we dont attack ... we only defend or we have a 2M roster

If you intend to build a team like everyone else, yes, it's going to be impossible for it to be functionally different from everyone else.

The overwhelming "wisdom" is that SB is too expensive, never mind that a pop in SB costs half a pop in IS, ID or RB.
But, you might say, we can't give up IS, ID, or RB, because LI is the only way to play and 2-3 doesn't work.
One might then counter that you could give up IS, and maybe play outside.
But, you might say, we can't do that because JR is too expensive and outside game does not work.
One could then suggest you could use some of the savings from giving up IS and apply that wage room to JR on the 1, 2 and 3, and instead of having guards with huge passing and bigs with low passing, balance it out.
But, you might then say, nobody does that, so obviously it can't work.

And so on. At some point, the crux of the matter is that it always comes back to the "proof" that nobody does it, so it's impossible. And then because it's "impossible" nobody does it.

I, for one, don't know that it is impossible, nor do I know that it is possible. I do know that as long as nobody ever tries, and instead just complains about the option not being possible, we'll never know. And as I'm not good enough of a manager or trainer yet (or possibly ever) to do this one way or another, I'm not sure I'll be part of the answer either. But intellectual curiosity makes me feel like dismissing 2-3 / outside / shotblocking / JR as impossibilities with the absence of an actual documented attempt at making it work is poor logic, whether or not it turns out to eventually be proven or disproven.