BuzzerBeater Forums

I like the idea, but I don't think that it goes far enough. You guys are going to absolutely hate this post, but I would rather see a buy now price as opposed to a max bid. I hate waking up in the morning to see that I lost a player by one bid or a few thousand dollars.

For the rest of you concerned that rich teams will corner the market I would counter that the sim still has rules that govern your team's finances. You can't just employ 30 guys with million dollar salaries. You would still have to be able to manage your payroll.

Your suggestion starts to lean towards pay to win in my opinion. If auto bid is implemented (which I hope it isn’t) it needs to be the same for everyone.

you couldn´t have said it better,
I completely agree with you

I cannot believe so many people think this feature will create a disadvantage for poor teams in favor or richer teams

It doesn´t seem to me that this people care about the future of this game. To me, one of the first reasons for people to give up this kind of games is when yo feel the game is no fair. I mean, when the rules or the mechanisms of the games seems to favour a way of playing which doesn´t feel right for you. For example when you find a very nice game but the structure is pay to win.
One of the beautiful things about hattrick or buzzerbeater is that, there is no pay to win structures. However, the absence of mechanism like auto-bid create and enviroment which encourage players to spend a lot of times in order to get players.
In my opinion the game should reward players who make great strategies or great decisions, not players who are able to spend their life online
To me this feature would make this game much more fair, and would ease people who sometimes tend to give up because they don´t have the time to compete in bids and bids and bids. And of course, I love the exciment of war bidding, but I care more for a fair enviroment and give the same options to everyone. All of you that said if you want a player, no one stop you from offer whatever you think is fair. Thats not the point, you should have the same possibilitties than other to get the player at the best price.

all in all, to me a game with auto-bid system is much more fair than a game without it, and that should be enough to get you to aprove this proposition

Anyway, It was a pleasure to have the opportunity of gave our approach and listen other people who think so different to me

Concuerdo con tu punto de vista, solo que lo haría igual que hattrick, todos los no supporter hacer 1 oferta máxima, y los supporter pueden hacer algunas mas.

I think, they should create new things to the game, so that the game encourages the players to pay the supporter, look I'm not saying that it's a game that you have to pay to win, but if you have to give a little more things, because friend, let's be clear, the game for this asset must generate revenue, otherwise it dies. So maybe it will give some benefits that people like the supporter, as long as it's not too expensive, I guess it just helps. I don't know, my humble opinion.

The instant BB becomes pay to win, I think that instantly hurts user retention.

Every current feature for supporter I'd say does a good job of being cool features/more convenient but doesn't near the line of being over-powered where people feel like they need to buy it in order to compete. Being able to control the transfer list and bidding market would be too big of an advantage.

At the end of the day, BB should be fun, competitive, and challenging, but not pay to win.

I'm a pretty strong no. Agree with most of what everyone else who doesn't like it is saying.

I think there'd be an inflation in the transfer market - all the less active old rich teams will find it easier to spend their cash with the new system. How big? Who knows, but it should eventually settle down.

There'd be a move towards the smarter teams getting better over the more dedicated ones...some people will like that, some not so much?

Personally I think the top of the game should be filled with the teams who will spend most time being active on BB rather than those who can be the smartest with their cash (BB obviously isn't all cash management, it's tactics, training, many things..). The very top of the game you'll need to be both of course, but say the top division of each country's league.

I see a lot more potential National Team trainees, or actual NT players going to semi-active teams who forgot about their training or mess up the game shape with a transfer market leaning in this direction also.

It'd definitely take a chunk of fun away with regards to the transfer market in my opinion, and maybe that's one of the things I enjoy more than some about BB.

I will leave just my comment here... NO.

This just gonna raise inactivity as managers are not required to fight for a good piece of players and yeah It's gonna be impossible to get a good deal anymore as somebody just gonna "Overpay" from beggining just get that player and we all know it is hard to get good player for a good price now as we have bid wars and this autobid just gonna destroy what's left completely.

Sorry child We can't have dinner together because this Lartvian power forwards auction ends at 530 local time. Sorry don't book any clients for appointments today at 3 because I really need this Point Guard for my imaginary basketball team.

To me that sounds like you're priorities are messed up, and you're stretching yourself thin by bidding where it is a inconvenience to YOU. I am busy with school and work like any other user of this game but i make that choice of this game is just a game. You can look at other players that fit your convenience that player may not be as good but like Nick said its part of building a team, it is a obstacle over come it. Don't make YOUR problem everyone else's problem. You can easily put in your max bid from the start, either system you are getting out bid.

Not saying you are that guy but speaking in a general sense

Last edited by Managed by a computerized player at 2/14/2023 6:15:08 PM

2 questions.

1/ Why bring in something that does favour a more casual BB user? Is it linked to trying to grow the BB user numbers? If so, and if convinced in that direction then sure, fine (not sure the poll does that, not sure the thread does yet...need more opinions from newer rather than older users and they'll be harder to get).

2/ How binding is something like this poll? As someone else noted, it seems more actual posts are a no. If something like 40% of the userbase don't like the change, that's a significant proportion, and why do something to annoy that set of people.

I do like the idea of discussing this kind of thing with the userbase in advance of making a change, but I think you'd want at least a 66% in favour to go forward with changes?

The comments lean more towards no, but the voting (which is likely more casual managers and less die hards) may also be influenced by how Alonso's initial post seems very pro-auto-bid. This is one of those good ideas in theory and bad ideas in practice in my opinion, so many people may just be voting yes after 10-30 seconds of thought. This poll should not be binding in any way.