BuzzerBeater Forums

I dont think this should be the question. in my opinion the question to aks is, why we are having 1 Game series.

Why is it not possible to make play offs one week longer?
why is it not possible to have more games a week during play offs?

There are several proposals in the sugggestion forum. Some of them might have disadvantages (e.g. having 3 games a week) but any of these I like better then having 1 game series.
all we do is waiting and preparing for play offs and after one game the most exciting part is over for most of us.

The problem here is that TiE/CT is unrealistic in the playoffs but is also something that brings in more gameplay.

One solution would have been to make the playoffs have longer series, but we already fit 5 games into two weeks, and I don't think it's very possible to fit in many more than that.

Another solution would be to let TiE/CT effects be smaller either during the playoffs or overall.

I think the key question to ask, really, is this:

How often should the #4 seed be able to beat the #1 seed by playing CT vs. normal?

Without showing any disrespect to my likely 4th place opponent - he will have no option other than to CT me next week. If (subject to GS/injuries I fail to progress by normalling a) it would be disaster and b) unbelievable.)

Both teams in with a shout of 4th are almost certain to have less enthusiasm than me and if my HCA doesnt prove strong enough to do the job I will be severly disappointed and would answer a lot of my own questions on TIE/CT.

WIth a lot of people commenting they have built up such high enthusiasm and like me would be disappointed to lose to a CT it raises a different question in my opinion.

Why can / does the system allow teams to build enthusiasm so often/quickly? Everyone complains about certain aspects of the game not mimicking real life but to send your team out 7+ (just quoting 1 guy) games in a row TIE seems highly unrealistic to me as well.

I saw a post by Brian James a while back about starting with enthusiasm 10 and trying to maintain it (only using CT when required) which to me seemed much more logical.

I sympathise with teams who have enjoyed good seasons only to lose at the business end of the season to a 'Kamikaze' order from a much inferior team.

Starting next season, there will only be two options for the first two playoff games, the last two rounds of the Cup, and the Tournament of Champions: one that has the effect of Crunch Time in gameplay but the enthusiasm effects of Normal and one that has the effect of Normal in gameplay but the enthusiasm effects of Take it Easy.

Why not just implement it for the entire tournament for the sake of consistency?

I'm open to suggestions on that. It seems like in a three-game series, there's enough room for enough possibilities that having both options adds a more interesting gameplay element.

I agree with that. More tactical possibilities are always better, as long as there is an actual tactical (as opposed to a kamikadze) element. On the other hand, anyone who aspires to be a top team should be able to sustain some adversity, such as an occasional CT. I think this is a good step, a Solomon decision, so to say ;)

My comment actually had in mind the early stages of the cup tournament.

The thing is that all of the cup tournament is 1 game only, and a decision has to be made whether one wants to leave more options open for the first rounds (up until the semis, as you suggest).

When it comes to the cup, one should be wary of the possibility that stronger teams will deliberately slide down the divisions to assure themselves home advantage throughout the tournament. This is a known issue in Hattrick, and I am not entirely sure how it ties in with the cup here, and your intended action on the TIE/CT situation. I just thought I'd toss it out there for discussion.

The problem is that half of the teams simply don't make the playoffs, and right now there are teams that go three weeks without a competitive game. That really shouldn't be longer, and teams that play BB more casually shouldn't be forced to play it less casually during the playoffs; that's not fair to them either.

I agree that this is a major problem, but there are several proposals in the suggestions forum to solve it. Most of them I really like.

e.g. playing play downs, regroup the 5th to 8 seed for demotion etc.

I believe this would not only make it more interesting for teams who reached the play offs but also for the teams which are trying to stay in the league.

Is there enthusiasm reset before playoffs?

No.

At first sight, it seem a good solution.
If we cannot make the playoffs longer, at least we should remove or reduce the advantages which are not related to the tactics, players and a good season planification.

1-match playoff is already a big advantage for teams that are less good, because if they have a good day they can pass, probably without deserving it.

3-matches playoffs, it is more fair for the game, and the winner will surely deserve to pass. In a competition the best team should prevail in most ocassions. In the spanish basket league, the best team in the regular season has always played the final, and most often win it!

During the regular season it is OK that some bad teams may surprise to better teams, taking profit of the HCA or of a better attitude.

So I definitely support your proposal. It would be better to find different names for these two strategies (CT-N and N-TIE), so people don´t get confuse with them.

I would also reduce the HCA by a factor of 1/3 in 1-match playoff, to compensate the away team for not playing at home (as it would occurr in 3-matches playoffs).