BuzzerBeater Forums

I do think that if the current CT/TIE is to be used in the regular season, it should be used in the playoffs as well. I can see it having some relevance to real life. In addition, I think the BB's said that when a team on the road CT's, it achieves the equivalent enthusiasm that the other team got with a normal and home court advantage (assuming both started with the same enthusiasm). Of course, if the home team, TIE's then that is a problem (I have thought about doing it myself many times, but never quite had enough confidence to do so).

That said, here's another vote to implementing brianjame's suggestion for enthusiasm.

That's just the point, if I'm a 4 seed playing a team that has beat me prettily handily twice already that season there's no reason not to CT. Might as well get the extra game and extra money. And with the set-up the way it is now, if I have equal enthusiasm going in a CT against normal will make up a huge skill difference. This is why it becomes a problem in the play-offs, teams will have different goals. The best teams have to plan for future games while the underdog is happy just to advance an extra round.

And the point isn't that the favorite couldn't withstand a CT, its that it is almost impossible to get by two teams CT'ing you in the first two games while still having enough enthusiasm to compete in the finals.

Precisely. If you are not a contender to win if you are sure to lose without then you use it. Meanwhile the better team faces a series of CTs from teams that have nothing to lose.

This is essentially the difference. The tactics are unbalanced because teams with nothing to lose couldn't care less about them while the better teams have to save some enthusiasm for later rounds.

I am all for having a wide variety of tactical and/or strategic options, but they have to be balanced. In essence the current system is a handicap for the teams with a real chance at winning their respective leagues.

If we were playing chess (since we have seem so many allusions to tactics) nobody would approve of taking pieces from the better players as a tactical option for the lesser ones. This is what this is doing at playoff time. Good teams do not really have the option of playing CT in the early rounds while the lesser teams might as well since they have nothing to lose.

The key influence should be your players and their quality and your tactical choices. Secondarily, how you manage training and how well you do at adding and selling players and building a team with good depth.

If you think so, then your battle is lost before it started. The financial conditions in all divisions are the same. In the long run, the divisions will be comprised of teams of comparative strength that will not be able to improve much. At this point, the key influence will be how you manage your season, not what you have on the roster.

Unfortunatly, you could be superior in all those, and lose because you lost the "rock, paper, scissor" game of enthusiasm.

But then again, the whole game can be reduced to a rock-paper-scissors routine to boot. Two balanced teams meet. Both can play inside and outside with relative success, both can defend inside and outgside with relative success. Inside-outside, outside-inside, success depends on how well you guess.

If you think so, then your battle is lost before it started. The financial conditions in all divisions are the same. In the long run, the divisions will be comprised of teams of comparative strength that will not be able to improve much. At this point, the key influence will be how you manage your season, not what you have on the roster.

I understand what your saying, you prefer that enthusiasm is a key driver of sucess in the game. I'm not disagreeing that, as it is now, it isn't very important. I've TIE'd all but one game this season so I can live on the benefits of high enthusiasm, clearly the system is not hurting my team.

But, I'm arguing that this is not how I feel the game SHOULD be. I shouldn't be able to network with my fellow NBBA teams and make mutual TIE's so when I have to play a tougher team in the cup, ill be at the highest enthusiasm. What about team's that don't agree with mutual TIE's, or just don't feel like networking with fellow teams and making TIE's, they should be at a disadvantage?

And what if we all just start mutual TIE'ing? The game is reduced to a series of mutual TIE's, until someone decides to break the deal or something. I feel this is a big distraction from the management and tactical choices in the game, and the GE is random enough to mix everything up.

Last edited by brian at 2/29/2008 5:31:52 PM

Well, arguably, if the strongest team cannot withstand a CT, maybe it isn't strong enough. But this is a murky point.

On the other hand, consider this: if the team is _not_ completely dominant, it's probably worth not to CT against them, because CTing in the playoffs is a way to effectively smoke yourself out of the competition in the next round.

not true.. i CT my first game away I finsihed 3rd (but in fairness because I was likely to play a bot who had just quit ahead of the playoffs or the 4th place team at home which I fancied my chances against.) i hadnt CT'ed all season up til that point and my philosophy was i would hate to go out not having given it my best shot...

oh and the rest as they say is history!

reading some stuff here (but not to the last letter, so sorry if I missed something) I conclude that it might be interesting to change the point of the enthousiasm reset to right before the play-offs, and then, just like in scrimages (where your players try to impress your coach and just try as hard their best) scrap CT and TIE from the options for play-off games (wouldn't players do their best to impress their coaches in play-off games either, hah? ;) )

motivation:
first off, there would be no reason to gather many points early in the season, just to give it all away in the end to gather enthousiasm when you have clinched a play-off spot, since it will be 5 for everyone. So teams that do not have the benefit of being able to TIE all last 5 or 6 games of regular season would not be punished for it, further more it might even prevent a team slipping in the play-oofs by winning agains such a TIE-ing team, while his team normally is not good enough for the play-offs, and the other better team that had to fight out a duel, but would still have made it if the lesser team lost, would now miss out.

secondly:
I think it is correct that the CT TIE game dominates the play-offs. Team strenght is just a minor factor. At given points playing TIE or CT is just gambling.
My play-offs last season, I was basically afraid of 2 teams. The first was out in the first round. His opponent must have CT-ed, he could not, since he knew it would kill his next round. I was lucky and my opponent thought he could handle me without a CT, and I won playing normal.
Next game, instead of my feared opponent I got a team that was not only weaker than mine, but he also just CT-ed, giving me an easy victory.
In the finals I met my other feared team, and I can't tell wich was strongest, but I gambled right, and he gambled wrong. I won, but I would be happier should I know it was not because of right gambling, but because I was better...
The outcome of a play-off is DOMINATED by TIE/CT play, and that is simply not right.

I can live with it if it stays as it is, but the effect or TIE and CT, once again, should be lowered conciderably.
The effect as of now is way to big.

A team of players can go for it, and play a little better, but they can only push their boundaries so far. Also if they play with less enthousiasm, they still will have some basic level of performing.
If I hear that TIE or CT can cause a diffrence of 2 levels in 1 rating, I start asking why it is needed to make it that powerfull.

In my opinion CT should give you an EDGE over a team that is a worthy opponent, but you should not be ably to kill a better team with it. Nor should TIE make you loose to a clearly worse team, and give you the ability of defeating a clearly better the week after. This smells like a means of choosing your teams to win, or loose against, if you just make sure you have an average team yourself.

I say keep the system. Just reduce the importancefactor in the calculations for it. If it is a 10 now, make it a 1. It should give managers the change to get over an edge, not to pass a whole river.

Good post! I agree wholeheartedly.

Ok, so we all agree that the TIE system is crocked (except for kozlodeev, who turned into Paula Abdul on American Idol about 13 posts ago).

What is going to be done about it? The system now encourages mutual TIE'ing, which is dumb and adversely affects non-believers. It also skews the playoff results, which mean EVERYTHING when it comes to season ticket holders.

I dont think the TIE system is crocked, I like it the way it is now, It adds plenty of oppertunities and strategic play. Of course it might not be entirely realistic, but it's fun.

When you are not the best of the 2 teams in a playoff game now, you still have a fair chance of winning when your opponent is just too arrogant to play normal, so you crush him with your CT vs his TIE.


Last edited by BB-Patrick at 3/6/2008 12:51:52 PM