BuzzerBeater Forums

100% agreed.

Rosters don't necessarily have to be locked, but the transfer deadline for playoff eligibility definitely needs to be earlier.

Locking the rosters completely would add a certain element to team management though.

Yes. When I say locked I mean playoff eligibility. I have no issue with people still buying and selling guys for scrimmages.

Definitely agree with that.

It seems very simple to me. We obviously have all played basketball and know that you need to play a certain number of games to qualify for finals. The same should apply here. If there was a limit of say 5 - 10 matches to be eligable for finals then the issue would be put to bed. Those wanting to go the big spend up method would need a lot more money and the risk of failure would be far greater.

I think a player needs to have played half of the season to be eligable for finals. This will hurt some if they have injuries but that is life.

A couple of really good suggestions that would certainly add something to the game. Making the playoff cut off date occur sooner or placing a minimum game requirement for playoff qualification. I can see the debates on this firing up!

I've been burnt and seen it happen to plenty of others as well (Beechy comes to mind instantly). Managers are able to buy in huge salary teams, within such a short time before playoffs, that they can easily save enough money to get them through finals without going bankrupt. This has been especially so of late because those high salary players can be bought at such ridiculously cheap prices. Most teams can't afford the weekly wage of a $150k player in Div 2, so more people compete for players between $50k-$120k and pay more trying to purchase those players in bid wars, in comparison to those purchasing the higher tier players due to less trade market competition. There is some risk involved but more often than not, these teams can bank on achieving their goa byl using this tactic.

If they had to keep these high salary players for a longer time, it would make them have to plan ahead a bit better. They would still be able to save up, it would just take longer to accumulate enough cash to make it work. Quite possibly this may deter at least some managers from taking this easy option to a title.

Part of the problem is also that in order to promote and stay up, you need a team worthy of the division before you get there. So it really is a matter of timing and having all the dominoes in place. It's a tough one really and unfortunately I don't see any changes coming in this regard any time soon.

Totally agree, the habit of buying in players for the finals is becoming more and more common... it's also the worst part of the game, imo.

I hope they change it, but I won't hold my breath.

There have been numerous debates in the suggestion forums over many seasons about this issue, some involving myself.

Essentially the argument against changing it is:

The transfer market.

If players couldn't play finals after all-star break, then there would be significant periods of time during a season with which the transfer market would be flooded with players, and prices would fluctuate to a point where the transfer market would become a joke and an integral part of the game and game economy would be lost and you would then pretty much write the game off as being unplayable. Any major implications to the economy of this game would kill it and BB know it.
It is of my belief that BB think that they would lose more users (ie: me and you) to the game if they made this change and resultant transfer market implications, when compared to current save-n-splurge tactics which drive other users away.

The other argument commonly said amoungst forums around this discussion is - There is no one stopping you from using the same tactic. Everyone can do it, and can get exposed to the same risks. Everyone is on the same playing field. So its not unfair, its a legitmate game tactic that is available to everyone.
Again - not neccassarily my beliefs.

I dont totally agree with it all, just summarising some things that came out of many discussions.

It is my personal belief that even one week earlier in the season for playoff cut-off time would be enough to stem users from doing the save-n-splurge tactic, without too much implication to the game's economy. All-star break is too long and would cause the above economy clusterphuk-phenomena and yer.
Even before i had played out a full first season, i remember thinking to myself 'man, i can buy players this close to playoffs? thats a bit wrong isnt it?"...
so yer, it aint natural. But too big of a change would spell disaster.

I personnally love that managers can buy themselves a championship team right before the playoffs! I find it thrilling!

However, I assume that cheap monsters are monoskilled. Therefore, one should be able to overcome a team of monsters with the right pieces in place.

From here, you can enjoy watching your opponent lose and make huge losses for his failure.

In addition to that, I find that kind of move so predictable. If someone is tanking and still makes the playoffs, the other managers can only blame themselves. If you're building a strong balanced team, it's your job to make sure the tankers get relegated.

In my opinion, if you lose to that kind of team in the post season, you're probably not good enough.

Conclusion: don't blame buzzerbeater, adapt yourselves!

This is true to some extent.

However
1) Not all teams go out and buy monoskilled monsters right at the end of the season. Some teams go out and buy awesome multi-killed well rounded 30 year olds who are cheap but are about to expire in age. There is no 'overcoming this with a better team'... he has the better team, they just bought it!

2) Tanking vs not playing to full potential. These are two very different concepts - Although the latter is definately a form of tanking. Take this season for example. TL and All-sorts have both signalled their intentions to 'tank'. So if after the all-star break your sitting enough games clear of relegation, and dont really care about finals, why would you keep adding to your team? In fact, why keep half your team? sell them, make some cash, prepare for next season's tilt.

If you do point 2) above, for say 2-3 seasons, you will have saved a bucket load of cash. This move is not predictable, teams will not know that you are saving money. (eg: Stonies went from 3rd to 3rd last in the space of two weeks last season. Was he tanking? he got relegated, so lets assume no! ha.) Other teams might guess thats what you are doing, but how on earth does everyone pull together and prevent that person from finishing finals? and the point is, if they miss finals that season, they dont mind! Another season to save money!
And thats where the timing comes in. If the time to buy up big players is say, eg: Another week earlier, everyone will see this tactic a week early, might be able to do something about it. eg: if team is in 4th, other teams might CT him to make him finish lower, etc etc etc. Plus it would make it more financially difficult for that team due to having to pay another week of high salaries.

These are multi-seasoned tactics that are being used here. Very unpredictable.

FYI, starting 5 salary for Crockers last year heading into the finals was something ridiculous, $700K? The next highest was northcote, who, after also doing a similar tactic of buying up towards the end, had a team (thats TEAM) salary of about $550k. Both unsustainable (? dont quote me here) salaries for a seaon in Div II, and crockers took the cake. well done to him.
AND it was the greatest most well executed form of this tactic that ive ever seen in the game. Took most people by surprise, and now he is 4-2 in ABBL and probably will be there for a while now. So good on him. im green with envy, i really am, because thats what everyone strives for. ABBL

Like i said before, i dont think its totally illegitmate tactic, but certainly the long term effects to the game are detrimental and im sure that a very minor change would make a big difference without making users like yourself who love this tactic, being put off-side.

Also - Thrilling? you find it thrilling? I find close AFL grand finals, Forumla 1 car crashes, roller coasters and pole dancers thrilling.... ezlife finds..... Buzzerbeater tactics thrilling..... well... each to their own i suppose :) kidddinnnnnnnnngggg :)

I completely agree - I hate the game mechanics that allows a team to buy up a championship roster 2 weeks away from the playoffs and totally decimate a team that has been working hard to stay on top all season.

The easiest solution would be to implement a trade deadline mid season similar to the NBA - but as others have mentioned this would totally change the economy. So what? It could be a change for the better. Teams could pick up great players and cultivate them for next season. It could add a new angle to the trade market.

Another solution could be to reset a players gameshape upon purchase. When a player gets bought, their gameshape automatically goes to inept, and it would take considerable time to get that player back up to strong/proficient gameshape.

I also think this issue ties in with tanking. Teams can tank a season or half a season, save up some dosh and then spend big at a crucial moment to buy a championship. I really think the game should reward a team that cultivates its players and grows a team from a bunch of scrubs to premier superstars. Don't get me wrong, I've done my fair share of tanking and buying up at crucial times, but it was really a case of "if you cant beat em join em".

On a side note, can't believe how lucky I've been this season! I really expected to be fighting to stay out of relegation instead of being where i am now. I'm sure things will change as teams drop out of the cup though.

Interesting point about the Gameshape decline on purchase - I think that would be a nice way of managing this situation.

Treat it like it takes a period of time to integrate with the new team, learn new systems, etc.