BuzzerBeater Forums

I am very opposed to the idea: if players are able to auto-bid, it severely lessens the chance of getting a good deal on a player. Being able to get a stronger player for a bit less than their forecasted range can be seen as a way for newer, smaller teams to catch back up, and with an auto-bid system in place, a player setting their max value means that those deals disappear and leave the “budget bidders” up a creek. If a player wants to bid up to a certain amount for a player and no further, he or she should bid that amount if he or she will not be around to see the auction’s resolution.

Great idea finally not to lose a transfer cause is out of your time zone!!!

Quiet frankly, the people against an auto-bidding system are being ridiculous.

One of the main points brought up is how newer/poorer teams would lose the ability to get good deals:
1. No they wouldn't. There are so many great players for lower division teams out there for cheap. If it's limited to one autobid at a time, there will still be plenty of steals on the market for lower division teams.
2. Players should not be going for way under their market value in the first place. Getting such a player because the player is listed at a poor time is basically taking advantage of a loophole. Complaining that a loophole is being fixed is very strange in my opinion.
3. If you are upset about newer teams being at a big disadvantage, there like 5 other ways to better help them out that are largely ignored. Go on to those threads and advocate for those things instead.

I do believe that this system will affect the stronger divisions than the lower divisions, because the amount of DI-tier players is much lower.

The obvious quality of life improvements have already been talked about ad nauseum, and is really why this thread is filled with people saying "no," while the polls show people prefer "yes" - people don't like to state the obvious. I've been playing this game for close to 7 years - the most exhausting and annoying part is always trying to find "the right player at the right price" because of how much of a time commitment it is, on some predetermined schedule. The whole idea that you HAVE to be available at some specific time is so antithetical to what buzzerbeater is - a chill game where you login about once every day or other day on your own time. The truth is, being promoted to a higher division often times is so draining and has the fun almost ruined by the fact that you know you're going to have to spend hours in total in multiple bid wars trying to get your roster up to par.

Some other thoughts on this system:

I do think that transfer prices will, on average, go up because of this change and I think that that is a great thing:
1. Higher transfer prices encourages training your own players, which I think everybody would agree is one of the most fun aspects of this game.
2. Richer teams will initially have an advantage, but it will move money from the rich around much quicker.

One of the possibly unintended consequences of this that should be mentioned is that less bidding wars means less ad-revenue from people constantly refreshing their screen. I don't know how significant it is, but it is something to take into consideration as well.

All-in-all, I understand the hesitancy to not change something if there is a sizeable portion of the userbase against it and that portion of the userbase is passionate about this, and probably log in more often than the rest of the userbase. But to me, this decision is a no-brainer. It'll retain more users by taking away an annoying aspect of the game. It'll retain users as their personal lives get busier. The people upset about not getting a player for $100k cheaper than they normally would will get over it.

No, thanks

I Will say to my wife: give you a Kiss
And for the face she made i´ll say: maybe 2 kisses?
Well i Kiss the air (10 kisses) and give what you need/want

One of the possibly unintended consequences of this that should be mentioned is that less bidding wars means less ad-revenue from people constantly refreshing their screen. I don't know how significant it is, but it is something to take into consideration as well.

I don't think this will be the case. We have to remember, manual bidding will still be the superior way to bid. It gives you more control over the price you pay, it allows you to increase your bid in case someone bids more than you, it increases the odds of you getting the player.

Auto-bidding will mostly be a quality of life improvement, used by managers who cannot be online at a certain time. If you really want a player though, you would still try and be online if possible.

I HATE bidding and the times spent on checking new offers... it's both stressful and boring!
that's the worst part of BB!

Welcome autobid!!!

HAHAHAHA THIS IS A GOOD ONE

If you do this then you should also consider adding a “Buy Now price”

Otherwise it is pointless and managers who choose not to use the autobid will basically be competing against the system

I think an impactful feature like this should not be implemented in this way (based on whether users like the feature or not). Everyone wants lower taxes, but only a few realize the impact of such wish.

What I think you should do is inquire about the pains and desires of users, and then find solutions (plural!) for those with the staff that fit in your view on the game. Make sure you develop the right solution to the right problem. Take into account the core principles involved:

- Do we want time on site to be a competitive advantage or do we want other aspects to determine success?
- Do we want as fair competition and prices as possible or do we want variance for managers to take advantage of?

Personally I don't think this feature will result in what proponents like to see. Because what this might seem to do is improve the chances of buying a player below market value, because you place a max bid that you don't have to pay if no-one else bids that high. But because this feature will be available for all, others will also use auto-bid and thus generate the higher bids that drive up the price towards actual market value. So the hypothetical situation in which a user gets a player below market value because of this auto-bid wouldn't occur a lot I expect. Instead, you'll get what you would get if you just bid your max bid right away in the current situation, and people already have that option. And in both cases you can still get outbid at the end by an online user, because I also think managers don't have a set max bid (that's why you see bidwars).

What I do think that auto-bid helps with getting prices that are currently below market value closer to market value, since accessability increases. If that's what we want, great, but I don't see that a lot as a reason in favor of the auto-bid. I do see it as reaons against the auto-bid, since there's less opportunity to buy below market value and there's a fair share of managers that like that. At the same time there's people that prefer equal opportunity prices, so you won't be able to please everyone, that's why I think you should decide what best fits in your view on the game. You can base that on the % of users that like one or the other, but then you should inquire about those principles, not about features.