BuzzerBeater Forums

understood
thanks for the reply!

I think a GS drop is not such a bad idea. (In addition to the possibility of moving back the deadline for PO eligibility.)
You say it doesn't make sense? I say call it "jet lag" if you must.

btw. the problem is not to make a manager think about how to do the divine trick, it's to make it so expensive that he won't do it

that is your opinion.
And there are likely a bunch of other that share that opinion, I'm not arguing that.

But this looks bad.

in the same way, should I for instance dislike the transferlist and want to play with the same players for at least 5 seasons, I could also write: the problem is not to make a manager think about how to use the TL often, it's to make it so expensive that he won't do it.
Or if for instance I dislike teams that have 4 cheper players and 1 expensive one, instead of 5 who cost more of less the same, I could write: the problem is not to make a manager think about how to get a higher payed player in his team, it's to make it so expensive that he won't do it.


There is tons of likewise sentences to be made, from ridiculous, hilarious to actual good suggestions. It all depends on what people like or dislike.

We need to know what the vast majority likes. It won't help the game if we 'solve' 1 ' problem', only to notice most users dislike the solution, and even worse to discover the majority didn't see it as a problem...


But, since it has been brought up here several times, I think it might be okay to only have a player play in your games, after you paid his first salary for instance.
Since this is a great source of irritation that the managers don't even pay 1 wage, this would solve that irritation, and won't harm the game.

I don't think we should be looknig for economical penalties. Like taxes, or forced hire for a period, but certain conditions to be met might work fine. As with the deadline now: if you don't have the player in your team before the dedline, he can't play in POs.
Maybe even an alltogether new solution might be: if the player isn't on your team x days before your PO-game, he can't play in it. Cup games in the final stages are treated like PO games, with the same tactical choices of PO crunch or PO normal.
The big trick will be to attend people to the fact they won't be able to use the player for game X, without being annoying.

it's not about not letting someone buy players, but about buying monsters for only one game... what you wrote about we have already commented before, 1 week salary is not enough to stop divine tricks (it will just make mosters cheaper), moving the deadline a couple weeks back is ok for final games and not enough for the games in early stages of the season (1 win is still 1 win in the league, probably some managers will show you that winning a couple games early in the season is enough to avoid relegation, thus they can lose all remaining games)... I believe that BB should be about competitive games all throught the season, this is not happening because playing on a certain level whole season won't win you any trophies, you'll lose later on to the teams that saved money and bought a couple of mutants/monsters for the deciding games

Well, I didn't manage to read it all, as the same repeats again and again :D

But the idea about the GS drop - is the best here. I mean that in real life it is pretty rare that the player manages to play 3 hours after the signing ;) He needs to get at least 1 training with the team. He should at least learn the names of his new teammates ;)

You know, I had the idea that there is the "hidden skill", smth like "adaptation" for every player. Most of newsigners didn't play good enough in the first few weeks, but then they became star-players. Or it could just seem to me :D

Also the idea with the GS drop is a nice one since it doesn't affect economy. But.. it will affect on National Teams. WHich is a serious problem. There will be lots of intentional buyings or sellings in order to damage NTs.
No idea how to modify this idea. From one side - it makes the game even more realistic. From another - there new parameter is needed to be added then. Possibly, to add "adaptation" is a nice idea. For NTs it should be always at maximum level(or depending on number of NTgames played) and for club it should depend on the time in the club. 5 levels of "adaptation" could be ebough I think.

Also the idea with the GS drop is a nice one since it doesn't affect economy. But.. it will affect on National Teams. WHich is a serious problem. There will be lots of intentional buyings or sellings in order to damage NTs.

I don't see problem for NT. It would force NT communities to have players mainly in domestic teams and not moving from team to team around the world.

Also the idea with the GS drop is a nice one since it doesn't affect economy. But.. it will affect on National Teams. WHich is a serious problem. There will be lots of intentional buyings or sellings in order to damage NTs.

I don't see problem for NT. It would force NT communities to have players mainly in domestic teams and not moving from team to team around the world.

I agree that it would make NT's more fun when we get rid of salary-inefficient players.

But while it is realistic that a traded player gets a GS drop (lack of chemistry with new team, jet lag..) it is not realistic that it affects him for the NT, because he was already in the NT and he has chemistry with the NT coach and NT teammates.

So a hidden(or not hidden) chemistry attribute could work as it would tend towards full after 1 season with a team, but drop after a trade.
Add a similar (but separate) hidden/not hidden NT-chemistry attribute.

But if it's just GS drops, I'm not going to cry because some monsters become unusable for NT.

I think I said all I have to say.

even though I am not 100% sure a solution is needed. I did give some solutions, or at least partly solutions to the things that where brought up.


The one last thing I want to say here is: it is easy to critisize, and easy to demand for solutions.
This is not how it works. If anyone wants a solution, they should propose one, and not just anything, but a solution that most players will like.

So far I have seen many just demanding a solution. The few that did give possible solutions, didn't give one that I like yet. And it looks like the things I proposed are not satisfying.

So with the info we have now, I'm in favor of not changing anything.

Last edited by Lord of Doom at 4/6/2011 2:09:38 PM

I think I said all I have to say.

even though I am not 100% sure a solution is needed. I did give some solutions, or at least partly solutions to the things that where brought up.


The one last thing I want to say here is: it is easy to critisize, and easy to demand for solutions.
This is not how it works. If anyone wants a solution, they should propose one, and not just anything, but a solution that most players will like.

So far I have seen many just demanding a solution. The few that did give possible solutions, didn't give one that I like yet. And it looks like the things I proposed are not satisfying.

So with the info we have now, I'm in favor of not changing anything.

now I really don't understand your attitude... there were at least 4 suggestions in this thread that are well thought over and discussed not only in this thread but on mational and league forums:
1. moving the deadline back for POs
2. paying 4 week salary as a fee if a player is sold/fired before 4 weeks from the purchase
3. GS drop
4. Team attitude

each of them has potential, but has to be analyzed by BBs, not by managers on the forum... the only thing we can do is to describe the problem, give suggestions and turn somebody's attention towards the issue, this is exactly what is happening in this thread

you don't understand my attitude, yet you explained you do in the text you write.
let me clarify:

I wrote:

The few that did give possible solutions, didn't give one that I like yet. And it looks like the things I proposed are not satisfying.

So with the info we have now, I'm in favor of not changing anything.

I call 4 solutions a few, especially based on the number of posts. I believe there where e few more then 4 in total, but still few...
didn't give 1 that I liked:

1. moving the deadline back for POs
2. paying 4 week salary as a fee if a player is sold/fired before 4 weeks from the purchase
3. GS drop
4. Team attitude

1: I gave that one myself as well, but got the reaction it wouldn't solve cup games, so wouldn't be a solution. (at least that was the reaction I got)
2: I don't like that one. We should not be giving penalties when players are not breaking rules. Moreover, this could mean a team goes bankrupt, and that's not what we would want at all!
3 and 4: I don't like this either. It's a personal thing. But there will be a problem with drawing the line for which players this will happen and when, and to solve this, we would need to have the same thing happening for every possible buy at any time in the season, and this doesn't feel right by terms of good management (or in other words, it might hold back good management decisions all the time, just to prevent occasional happenings)

so that explains the part didn't give one that I like yet.

which brings me to my conclusion: So with the info we have now, I'm in favor of not changing anything. Which is my personal opinion, and as I see it, is part of the discussion.

Hope this clarifies abit.