BuzzerBeater Forums

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.

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

guys, stop suggesting this
it's garbage and luckily it's not in consideration

Strong yes for me, despite the fact that I buy one or two players per season.

I always get angry during bidding.
I usually buy players for higher prices than estimated.
I usually sell players for lower prices than estimated.

Argument with current right-away bid is ridiculous;
I have never won bid which I made few hours before deadline or two days before or five days before.
You want to by player for max 1323000$. You bid max available value you can at the moment(all available money).
In the night someone bids and won(or when you are at the meeting or at the highway with no internet available etc).

Don't say that rich managers will hurt poor in this case.
Div 1 managers dont bid on 5k 10k 50k guys.
They bid 100k 150k 200k 250k guys.
Now all of rich managers from Div 1 and 2 are affraid of hurting poor-interesting.


Anyway rich will always get richer that is the rule of this world- look outside.

Advantage which no one mentioned is that we will have more player movement between time zones.
I always give up bids from Americas, Australia and Asia.

Marin and Alonso can check how many teams have 10mil in cash or 1mil or 100k and how these number of teams can affect this.

@ Joe great post with hattrick mechanism- I like it.

Je pense que cela favorisera nettement les gros budgets.

Avec un peu de chance, les petits budgets pouvaient acquérir un joueur par chance avant la limite.

****

Translation:

I think this will be greatly in favor of rich team.

With a bit of luck nowadays, small budgets could snatch a player.

Last edited by GM-Perpete at 2/16/2023 12:56:57 PM

I vote for "No" because BB doesn't tell us the information of fairness.
For example, will the negative effect of cheaters increase or decrease? Will GM find cheaters more easily or difficultly? Will managers make it easier or harder to tell if their players are overbid? When we consider whether we should implement the auto-bid system or not, we must consider fairness.

If the auto-bid system is applied only on staff, then I will vote for “Yes”.
It seems that there is no fairness issue with staff. And I hope the auto-bid system is available for different types of staff, one doctor, one trainer, one PR-manager, one youth trainer, one psychologist and one nutritionist, at the same time. It will be more convenient.

I think it’s a bad idea. I do think giving the seller a “buy now” option to place on their player is a better idea. If I am willing to take $x for my player and willing to risk losing whatever might eventually be bid for him, that should be okay.

Hi,

You're enjoying long lasting bidwars? The proposed feature DOESN'T solve the issue. It will rise the market prices though.

It's good for people selling and it's faster to establish the "winner" of the bid war

You're happy with X last second bids against you? The proposed feature DOESN'T solve the issue.

As long as you haven't reach your bid limit, you'll have the last say.

You're enjoying waking up at 2 am to bid a player? The proposed feature DOESN'T solve the issue. Remember, you're not playing alone. You might just get outbid anyway.

Yes but if someone outbid your price limite normally you wouldn't be interested in that player anyway, either because it was expensive or you didn't have enough money, and at least you didn't lose sleep time to frustration.

My 2cents.

Last edited by gnfpt at 2/16/2023 11:27:52 AM

Hi,

Voted yes but for that system to work properly you would have to remove the "Transfer Price Estimate" at least the way it is now.