BuzzerBeater Forums

one thing is a fined team and other a banned team ...

in first case u are correct, and loose points without giving them, in second case, all matches against that team are won by other teams

the next six weeks, the other teams had to still win the games. After he getting a bot yes, the situation change. Could be also cases, where the ownership change, shortly after a season but this is the same like becoming inactive in most of the cases.
And also playing against the banend teams, is different them cause it affect your weekly streategy. As i said before, normally you TIE one game a week, and maybe let your weaker trainee play, for a very long time of my career, i played to win one game mostly a week. So making the decision to beat the cheating team with succes, while another team forfeit against it would be unfair too.

And even banned teams, just get automated relegated at the end of the season, but not all their games get changed if they aren't manipulated the games directly, at least if you aren't in the turkish football league. And this also happens here.


Last edited by CrazyEye at 11/15/2011 7:14:45 AM

i guess a good way of thinking about this scenario is what has happened in one league here in australia (not basketball)

The team was discovered cheating from previous years (like, 2003, 2004, but only discovered in 2010). They won the championship those years, but were found having breached the salary cap.

So what happened?

The league made their championships null and void for those years they won it (note they did NOT award the championship to the team that finished 2nd).... the league basically changed all the records to state 'Team X won but were later convicted of salary cap breaches)..
so really, it is best to think of a cheating team like that. you cannot go back in time and change your effort/enthusiasm/training minutes/merchandise etc etc etc from a game against a team that cheated. If it was Carl Lewis and Ben Johnson in 1988 olympic finals, that is a lot simplier solution..... but buzzerbeater is not and too complex to 'award' teams who played against the cheater.
it is what it is and I would personally prefer it if the BB's spent more effort in catching cheaters, rather than implemting something that rewards other teams when cheating is found out. Just my two cents :)
PS: The BB's do a fantastic job at catching cheaters, well done to them, keep up the good work. The game would die if you didnt do your good work.

i guess a good way of thinking about this scenario is what has happened in one league here in australia (not basketball)

The team was discovered cheating from previous years (like, 2003, 2004, but only discovered in 2010). They won the championship those years, but were found having breached the salary cap.

So what happened?

The league made their championships null and void for those years they won it (note they did NOT award the championship to the team that finished 2nd).... the league basically changed all the records to state 'Team X won but were later convicted of salary cap breaches)..
so really, it is best to think of a cheating team like that. you cannot go back in time and change your effort/enthusiasm/training minutes/merchandise etc etc etc from a game against a team that cheated. If it was Carl Lewis and Ben Johnson in 1988 olympic finals, that is a lot simplier solution..... but buzzerbeater is not and too complex to 'award' teams who played against the cheater.
it is what it is and I would personally prefer it if the BB's spent more effort in catching cheaters, rather than implemting something that rewards other teams when cheating is found out. Just my two cents :)
PS: The BB's do a fantastic job at catching cheaters, well done to them, keep up the good work. The game would die if you didnt do your good work.

And once again, I find myself agreeing with what you've wrote...

There are no banned teams, there are banned GMs sometimes but teams carry on. This is how the game should be approached by players. Managers are temporary given a team ID to manage in a persistent world. The team existed before and will exist after the manager. Teams with or without a manager are still competing teams.

Managers face active managers, not so active managers, bot teams. Managers do stupid things, they tend to forget to set a line up against your biggest rival for the title and give him an easy win. There is nothing you can do about it. All kind of things, fair or unfair if you want to call it that way will happen in the course of a season and you can't control it like IRL. The goal is to do the best you can with all kind of unexpected happenings thrown at your face.

If one can't accept that, one shouldn't be playing games with unreliable human players.

it is just 6 weeks, not 14.

Intresting thought with pro and cons, since you mentioned the pro's i try it with the cons:

- we aren't always right and manager could defend themself with appeals. I don't know how much time we should give them for doing it, and how fast they are normally handled but i could imagine that even when he appeals after two weeks and maybe there comes up another question which affords communication more then half of the time already passed.(not to mention a innocent player, who is away longer and wanted to use the possible inactivity duraction and get his team back without his star(s)*)
- somekind the NT gains profit, through those cheater. i believe Wolph defends the opposite way of handling it, in removing all NT player who get any training from cheater.
- it would give it somekind of a pillory function, even when it isn't that obvious.

* i know that an highly unlikely scenario

Last edited by CrazyEye at 2/16/2012 5:56:59 AM