BuzzerBeater Forums

I wonder how can someone say that the new FA system is good or bad when WE DON'T KNOW WHAT CHANGED?

BB must have a world record or something of not letting its users know the rules (!!!) of the game.

Disrespectful, at least.

So, now you may continue to debate based on speculation. Don't forget to find out the rules on your own.

Last edited by Villagkouras at 6/2/2015 12:57:28 PM

I wonder how can someone say that the new FA system is good or bad when WE DON'T KNOW WHAT CHANGED?

BB must have a world record or something of not letting its users know the rules (!!!) of the game.

Disrespectful, at least.

So, now you may continue to debate based on speculation. Don't forget to find out the rules on your own.

I agree. We don't know the full extent of the changes to the FA policy, and that's how it always goes with a change/adjustment.

Over the course of BB evolution, the workings of various BB systems (training, enthusiasm, GDP, etc...) have always been figured out (to some degree) over time by the BB community. Managers make guesses, test those guesses, update their info, and work to improve their team and their understanding of the game (sometimes with the help of other managers who share their research).

With this FA availability adjustment, lots of managers are now calling for an open book policy on how the FA system works. It seems that this is somewhat motivated by the retirement of certain players that some managers felt should not have been retired, as if Marin owes the BB community some sort of 'audit' power that he must now answer to.

Clearly, Marin owes us no such thing. As BB managers, it is up to us to determine the workings of the new system, via research, tracking, and observation, and then use these learnings to better our standing and skillset as managers within the Buzzerbeater framework.

Last edited by Iguanadon Joe at 6/2/2015 1:42:39 PM

2 of those were mine and one from Manon. None of the 4 posts were offensive in any way. I thought Manon might have decided that his provocation was not worth the follow up and deleted everything, eh :D. It would make it interesting if some other GM deleted the posts though!

Edit: I've just seen Perpete's reply. #FreeManon

Last edited by Lemonshine at 6/2/2015 2:23:16 PM

He is the 5th of his generation with potential>=HoF in terms of TSP, I guess it has been a really unfortunate draft for us then.

hruuuudey. The rule for 18-20yo is also starting to look a little harsh. If we believe this quote then the 5th best 18yo/high potential prospect in the largest BB nation got axed. Just how strict are these new rules!? I'm starting to think that the 70TSP extreme estimate I gave, might not be that unrealistic after all lol :D

What we know is that high salary/high potential young players (21-25yo) are retiring, while they wouldn't have in the previous system. Also, since we can't see other manager's players, we will never be able to assess:
a)what TSP is needed for FA at every age/potential combination
b) if there are differences between a player fired and a player in a botified team
This is just impossible because nobody is able to gather the data. This isn't like a GS or Training Speed project.

Also nobody can stop Marin from changing the rules to his liking without notice, since he has kept them secret to everyone else, including the GMs as it's becoming evident. This is not even a matter of trust in Marin, it's just that if he changes the parameters nobody will ever know!

Whether you like this situation or not is up to you :?

my my, 6 JR, 7/7 defense, 5 passing, 6 stamina...fabulous prospect at 6'9''.

Dear EGM, can we get an official answer on this player (36177757) as previously asked. I felt it wasn't the case to open another topic on the Bugs forum since many were closed, but the doubt still remains. Is this not a bug?

For an official answer, you will have to ask Marin, only him knows.

If that player is retired, it is likely that he was not fullfilling the minimas to become a FA. I doubt that is a bug. Should the minimas be the lower, it's possible.

Should I contact him directly or ask somewhere in the Bugs forum?
About the bolded. He is the 5th of his generation with potential>=HoF in terms of TSP, I guess it has been a really unfortunate draft for us then.

You can contact him directly, but I would guess his answer will be similar to this, "It's not a bug, he was not fullfilling the TSP". If the main thing you want out of that question is to know if that is a bug, he will be able to confirm to you that is or is not a bug. If you want more informations, I don't think you will get it.

As for the player retiring, for the first 30 seasons, 18 y old would always retire whatever their quality. I don't the new criterias and if they are too high, but they aren't higher than before for 18 y old. I am and has been NT coach in micronations for many seasons now and I personally saved many players by calling them into a NT, sometimes limiting my number of places in the roster. I know it has been used in France NT too, albeit in smaller numbers of course. If NT programs want to keep one in a generation player, the surest way to do so is by calling that player. Better safe than sorry. At least until we know more about the criterias either through the community or Marin.

I sincerely doubt that this player failed the TSP. My best guess is that the owner of the team that drafted the player went bot before the draft since he played as far as I can see the same tactics/lineup since 3/21/15. But then again, the team wasn't demoted as I would have expected a bot would have been. Perhaps they went bot specifically on the date of the season turnover? I presume that might be late enough to avoid the bot auto-demotion, but early enough that the change to a bot processed before the draft and new free agency rules?

I suggested earlier in the thread that this would be the perfect example to post in the Bugs forum.