BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Tanking

Tanking

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
33
218937.188 in reply to 218937.187
Date: 6/2/2012 7:37:37 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
Tanking and the whole concept of trying to finish fifth instead of fourth are both problems, to be sure, but those are symptoms rather than problems unto themselves. If it truly is better to tank than to compete honestly, and if it is better to finish fifth than fourth or even third, the answer is not going to lie in punishing those who tank or who finish fifth, nor necessarily just giving rewards to those displaying preferred behavior. What needs to be fixed is the underlying economy itself, and while actions affecting tanking may well improve the game, more focus needs to be dedicated to finding the real root of the problem and coming up with real and effective solutions to that.

This Post:
00
218937.189 in reply to 218937.188
Date: 6/2/2012 8:55:44 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
299299
The fan survey is an issue.

This Post:
00
218937.191 in reply to 218937.189
Date: 6/3/2012 4:32:24 AM
Ghost Masters
BLNO
Overall Posts Rated:
4949
The fan survey is an issue.


But if you punish teams that loses, you would also punish teams that want to fight, have relatively high salaries and still finish last with record for example 7-15. What about teams that can't actually afford high levels of doctors (for example me) and have relatively have high salaries and constantly have lots of injuries and loses because of that. Punishing forfeits maybe smart at first glance, but I've seen teams that uses forfeits in the second finals game so they don't get injuries in the third, so it's a good strategy not tanking. What you are proposing about punishing teams because they are losing, I think will only make a lot of unnecessary constrains on other teams, that don't make profit from losing.

This Post:
11
218937.192 in reply to 218937.191
Date: 6/3/2012 4:45:00 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
952952
In real life forfeit is punished financially. It happens mostly when teams don't pay salaries to their players and they go on a strike by not playing; then the organization who holds the league penalizes them. It doesn't matter if they forfeited home or away game.

So I'd like to see a fine for going 0-25. Smaller fine for lower leagues and big one for higher leagues, maybe in the form of TV contract for one week.

From: FenXas
This Post:
00
218937.193 in reply to 218937.191
Date: 6/3/2012 4:47:12 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
269269
As I see we need forget about tanking and do think about other improvements

This Post:
00
218937.195 in reply to 218937.191
Date: 6/3/2012 5:11:09 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
299299
The fan survey is an issue.


But if you punish teams that loses, you would also punish teams that want to fight, have relatively high salaries and still finish last with record for example 7-15. What about teams that can't actually afford high levels of doctors (for example me) and have relatively have high salaries and constantly have lots of injuries and loses because of that. Punishing forfeits maybe smart at first glance, but I've seen teams that uses forfeits in the second finals game so they don't get injuries in the third, so it's a good strategy not tanking. What you are proposing about punishing teams because they are losing, I think will only make a lot of unnecessary constrains on other teams, that don't make profit from losing.


What you're talking about is not punishing people for no reason. In fact, it's not punishment at all. It is a part of competition. If you make bad decisions, you lose out financially. If a team has a very high salary roster, and they lose, there is a reason for that: some form of tactic, whether it is to do with the game engine, or it is something else to do with the way they manage their team.

I, and many others, would prefer to lose money and BB prowess from messing up tactics or managing badly than being part of the group who doesn't tank.

The other thing you mention, about injuries, is luck. That is part of everything we do, including this game. The trick is to minimise the possibilities of for negative results.

This Post:
22
218937.196 in reply to 218937.195
Date: 6/3/2012 6:19:48 AM
Ghost Masters
BLNO
Overall Posts Rated:
4949
Again someone will have to be in the last place if that team is for example newly promoted, has small arena and spends all it's money to have competitive roster and fights to survive, but just doesn't succeeds why it has to be punished the same as tanking team. This is why BB asked what is tanking team, so that we omit teams that uses loses for strategic purposes or don't have intention to hoard large amounts of money and want to survive but still loses. IMO affecting tanking teams through fan survey would be a bad choice.

Last edited by Ghost Master at 6/3/2012 6:20:44 AM

This Post:
11
218937.197 in reply to 218937.196
Date: 6/3/2012 6:32:37 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
299299
if that team is for example newly promoted, has small arena and spends all it's money to have competitive roster

...then they aren't managing their team properly.

There is the promotion bonus to help teams that move up a division. Also, a part of the fan survey is for "last season". If a team promotes, they will score highly there. I don't think it's realistic to move up a division and to expect to do well in that division straight away. It should be something that you have to work up to.

If a team makes good decisions, they should be rewarded. If they make bad decisions, they should be penalised. The fan survey is a fundamental part of this.

This Post:
22
218937.198 in reply to 218937.197
Date: 6/3/2012 6:45:58 AM
Ghost Masters
BLNO
Overall Posts Rated:
4949
There is the promotion bonus to help teams that move up a division.


Which they usually spend to expand their small arenas.

If they make bad decisions, they should be penalised.


No word about tanking, it's sounds like - penalise all losers there must tanking team amongst them :-)))

Advertisement