BuzzerBeater Forums

Yeah, it's a bit impersonal when you can have a winning streak and a losing streak and then another winning streak (!!) all on the same day.

I'd like to see some variation of wozz's idea implemented.

Fans should care about your home performance.
Fans shouldn't be so darn fickle (influence of immediately preceding road game is ridiculous).
Fans should appreciate close losses and punish embarrassing defeats.

Do those things and I'll stop losing road games 111-25 and winning cup games by the same score, and isn't that a big step in the right direction? Maybe HCA isn't so bad if we actually ever played games seriously as road teams?

The other thing I think (haven't put much thought into this though) would help would be to tone down the effect of enthusiasm. It's multiplicative with HCA (right?) and it feels like you get punished too harshly for "wasting" normals, making conservative play too attractive. Not to mention no one even really considers CTing most of the time.

Last edited by Peluin at 6/6/2012 6:18:33 PM

(1) Ramp up the effects of 30+ pt losses on future attendance.

This both provides a motivation to keep it close and a disincentive to completely tank.

that sounds good at first. but you'll basically be rewarding/encouraging this:
(45502691).
(only a 13 point game... so no attendance effects, right?) pretty good road loss under the new rules!

There are already blowouts in games where both teams are actually trying as hard as they can. (various leagues' playoffs are full of them). So, what are you supposed to do when you have a tough cup game? Even with a very respectable lineup (very high quality backups, all league appropriate players) it's going to be a blowout loss. Unless you make a run in garbage time. Putting you 100% at the mercy of your opponent (hoping they don't normal for one) & making garbage time way too important.

I don't think that type of loss should be punished to the same degree as a team losing by over 100 points. Which it would be with the arbitrary 30 point threshold suggested... (basically a zero-tolerance policy). That doesn't seem right / fair.

so, teams will probably just start making "mutual scrub" agreements. or something to that effect. where d5 quality non-blowouts are rewarded. but someone putting out a decent lineup, without any agreement risks getting punished.

They already have a measuring system in place for the world rankings. That differentiates between teams trying or not. (blow out a high ranked, but tanking team, & your ranking will drop!) Wish they would adopt that to attendance.


Last edited by shikago at 6/6/2012 8:16:09 PM

Yeah, it's a bit impersonal when you can have a winning streak and a losing streak and then another winning streak (!!) all on the same day.

you pretty much have to have multiple games per day for a baseball simulation though. the regular season is 162 games. so unless you want to have a severely truncated schedule.... which doesn't work for baseball really.

Do those things and I'll stop losing road games 111-25 and winning cup games by the same score

for some reason i assumed by tanking they meant multiple games in a row of not being competitive. & not really single game choices between trying in the cup or league.

What about a randomness in the type of benefits enthusiasm can bring? One game its more defensive focused, the next game everyone runs around screens better for easier looks.

a slight boost to *everything* is good IMO.

or... make it potentially harmful. where you can be so enthusiastic that you commit a bunch of extra fouls, take horrible / ill-advised shots, tire yourself out quickly, attempt overly difficult passes (causing turnovers), even refuse to follow the match settings (players going "rogue"), etc...

"what is Craig Pratt doing? he's calling for the ball outside the 3 point line and asking everyone to clear out. he's supposed to be under the basket.... "

So basically the Josh Smith mentality.

I swear that's the main reason I ditched Run N Gun seasons ago, my bigs kept jacking up 3's.

Last edited by AZ at 6/6/2012 9:18:20 PM

Right, I guess there's tanking (one game) and then there's TANKING (season+).
I think the solution to TANKING is negative feedback on income: you have money on hand, the fans say, why aren't you improving the team? -> attendance drops, something like that.

Last edited by Peluin at 6/6/2012 10:30:22 PM

shut up, tanker.

In real basketball, the Golden State Warriors can go play at the Boston garden against a non-banged up Celtics team and steal a win they have no business getting. In BB this doesn't happen, because there can only be so much randomness in the game. If you reduce HCA but do not affect the degree of randomness, the best team would finish the season 21-1: so here you have a choice point.

I think this is a good point, but the other side of it is that one of the reasons Golden State has a chance to go on the road and steal a game from a superior team is the long 82 game schedule...Perhaps Boston just got back from 5 road games in 9 days, and are whipped, and Golden State hasn't played a game in 3 days?

I think if the NBA played a BB schedule, 22 games, just 2 games a week, you'd see teams like San Antonio, and other elite teams never lose a home game. Take this NBA season for instance how it was reduced to 66 games, and they kept making a big deal over and over and over how important each game is, because of the condensed schedule. This is even more true in our 22 game schedule.

I think without question HCA is very strong in BB, but like you pointed out Coco, you can win on the road if you are better than everyone else. I think the bigger issue is the effect that tanking is having on the competition, the economy, and other variables. Just focusing on tanking, and I agree with Red, a team should have the choice to do what they feel is best for their franchise...however, because tanking is viewed as financially prudent, many teams in most leagues are now tanking, all that same time.

This requires less Normals and more Ties for the better teams in the league knowing they will get free wins. If the competition were stronger from top to bottom, you would have a bigger variation of enthusiasm management, and this would also open the door for more road wins.