BuzzerBeater Forums

for me the hight of the results play a role, if you try you don't loose with 50 points. But currently the survey judge win/loss only and if you loose with 5 instead of 50 you maybe have a half ball more.

Yes that will punish people who forfeit games on tactical porpose, but in this case you maybe have to change tactics or B when more games count into the survey you have also good games into it.

Teams that have a bad injury run where 2 or 3 starters get injured will be affected and they are not tanking. just unlucky with there injury's.

You know what. I may promote to D IV next season. If it is a really tough one to play in maybe I won't buy any players and keep my 50K team maybe make it a 30K team and make a ton of money so I can buy 2 studs for the next season. IMO this is bull shit. I would never do it. However, that is what is happening all over in many divisions. It needs to be stopped, especially in the higher leagues where the money is in huge amounts being given to these players.

Tanking has to be contained. I think if a team's salary is significantly less than the average of their league then there should be some kind of consequence for all this losing. One example is Wake Forest (22795). They are 0-22 in USA NBBA(1st division) Yet somehow their lowest attendance rate in the last 10 games is about 63%. I remember going on a 3 game losing streak and then winning the next two games and my attendance was at 67%. I understand that he is in the top division and I'm in the fourth division but that is still ridiculous. His highest salary is a 3k scrub. His tanking makes him an abnormally large amount of money. He probably is one of the richer/richest players in the game. That is unfair. Teams like this should get severe drops in their fan survey and attendence. If you drop his attendence to 25% then tanking isn't as "worth it" as it is before.
Either do that or make a "double demotion" for teams in the first division(and maybe 2nd) that are CLEARLY taking, ie. selling/cutting best players and having abnormally low salaries. Tanking in D.V,D.IV or even D.III isn't that big of a problem because that won't have a huge impact. But tanking in D.I in many major countries is a huge problem that needs to be corrected.

Tanking has to be contained. I think if a team's salary is significantly less than the average of their league then there should be some kind of consequence for all this losing. One example is Wake Forest (22795). They are 0-22 in USA NBBA(1st division) Yet somehow their lowest attendance rate in the last 10 games is about 63%. I remember going on a 3 game losing streak and then winning the next two games and my attendance was at 67%. I understand that he is in the top division and I'm in the fourth division but that is still ridiculous. His highest salary is a 3k scrub. His tanking makes him an abnormally large amount of money. He probably is one of the richer/richest players in the game. That is unfair. Teams like this should get severe drops in their fan survey and attendence. If you drop his attendence to 25% then tanking isn't as "worth it" as it is before.
Either do that or make a "double demotion" for teams in the first division(and maybe 2nd) that are CLEARLY taking, ie. selling/cutting best players and having abnormally low salaries. Tanking in D.V,D.IV or even D.III isn't that big of a problem because that won't have a huge impact. But tanking in D.I in many major countries is a huge problem that needs to be corrected.

I think WFU is quitting, not tanking (he hasn't logged in since the 28th of March), but that's beside the point.

Here's two perfect examples of what's wrong with the attendance formula in relation to tanking:

Match #1 (29542562)

In this game, #8 Wake Forest (0-20), who have lost every game of the season up to this point by an average margin of 80.7 points per game, host #7 King Drive Ballers (1-19), who have lost every game not against Wake Forest this season, and whose average margin of loss is 60.4 ppg (with the win heaped in there for good measure). What was the attendance? 19,936.

Match #2 (32667165)

In the semifinals of the playoffs in the top league in the country, Big 8 #1 seed Chicago Bulls (21-2), fresh off a QF win and riding a 15-game winning streak since their Cup loss, host Big 8 #2 seed Manhattan Beach Metal Detectors (15-8), who have won two straight, most recently a QF victory over the USA Cup winner, Silverbacks. What was the attendance? 19,910.

I know he's quitting but his actions are still similar to a tanker, low salaries, no effort,etc. I agree tanking teams need severe drops in attendance(like 5000 attendence in a 20000 capacity arena) or a double demotion(From NBBA to D.III).

and if u just give up a half season(with the current transfer prices you get every 4 week an elite player), you could still stay in division without getting relegated. Or when more people drive this strategy, we had for asmall time 3 of them and 3 other who drives then with a drastically reduced but still somehow competive rooster(which is ok, but in such scenario you could give up a bit and stay in league - and i think that was the plan of some of them).

And for me there should be a motvation to try not to relegate, even when your chanches are considerly low instead of giving up completly as tactical choiche with a lot of benefit against possibility one.

Last edited by CrazyEye at 4/13/2011 3:21:02 AM

So how should this be solved?

I was contemplating selling my team off, loosing half a season and then building my rooster up again to fight for relegation, this would make me mirrions and have the same result I had this season, I guess.