BuzzerBeater Forums

Umm, i wouldn't say that losing to a better team means you got screwed. I would think you would be happy because it seems you went one round further than you should have thanks to the enthusiasm system.

it seems you went one round further than you should have thanks to the enthusiasm system.

what about his oppenent in his semis. In my opininion he is screwed. he would have probably lost anyways. Now he lost the semis. If he would have played CT, then he would have probably won the semis, but loose the finals...

Here I would definitely agree with you and is basically the reason why I'm hoping the effect of enthusiasm is reduced by a lot. If we just look at these three teams it seems not right that the strongest team gets knocked out first because he ran into a lesser team that was willing to punt his enthusiasm leaving no chance at the final, just to get one more round.

Look the point of a system like this is to make it difficult.

If someone crunch times your team you will not lose every time. It is very important to watch every opponent you face to see whether they will crunch time you or not. If you think they have built up their enthusiasm (look at their ratings) and for them you look like a challenging team then you need to either play normal or crunch time them as well. If you have been playing with strategy and have your enthusiasm very high (i.e. 11) then you can go normal and have a very decent chance of winning and still not lose much enthusiasm.

Making the game easier is not the job of the BBs. It isn't that hard to figure out how to play this game. Enthusiasm or no Enthusiasm will just make the community complain about how unfair something else is, when really you are playing a game they reflects as well as a game can how basketball is in real life.

Id like to remind you that its your opinion that this system works, if someone else has a different opinion thats their right. Essentially calling them crybabies isn't constructive. If you disagree with their posts stick to that rather than take shots about how the community will complain regardless of how an issue is resolved.

I don't THINK the majority of the players in the community build up to and sit on a 10-11 enthusiasm rating. Your assuming that thats just the way to play might be a little off, Im hoping the changes soon to be brought in help make the system more managable.

A weak team should not be able to wreck a better team off their effort alone, thats supposedly fixed and I think that will help out.

Just my two cents, but put me down as not liking the TIE/CT system one bit; not because I lost or won, but because I see no basis in reality for this system. As others have pointed out, professional players don't need to be told a game is important.

As to the 'it makes for a better strategy game, well it doesn't for me. If there are to be strategic choices, let's come up with better ones.

In reality, telling a group of athletes that it's crunch time, so dig down and give me all you've got does not always work. Many players choke under pressure and if you tell them 'this is the most important game of your life' they will collapse into quaking heaps of nerves on the dressing room floor. An exaggeration, obviously, but this does happen often enough to make the certainty of the CT effect unrealistic.

My suggestion is to make the effect of CT not foreordained to work. That is, there would be a two-thirds chance (percentages to be determined, perhaps your trainers rating would apply here, too) you'd get the benefit and one-third possibility your morale would drop instead because your team panicked and choked.

That would add a realistic risk to the choice, and even though I'm not enthusiastic about it, I think this suggestion would at least place an element of risk in the choice to play CT. And make for a better game of strategy.

Agreed!

The GM's are people too, but all too often their personal emotions are filtered through the threads.

My point of the thread was to identify attitude should not run the game. It's great an adustment is being made, but there should be other consequences for running your team a certain way.

In the last large thread about players entering the market, there was HUGE commentary about how the players were not that good, Div I teams shouldn't get beat by Div III or IV teams, and there should be definitive levels sooner rather than later. My point (as proven in this years tournament and last years playoff) is attitude has way too much effect and LEVELS the the playing field instead of the desired want of the management team.

My commentary came from the fact the game to me is easy if I only have to manage my teams attitude while I buy, sell, and train players. And that is such a waste of a fun game. Why watch another teams game? Why check their ratings? With CT and TIE, there is not reality and therefore it's pointless to really pay attention to it.

Further, there nothing but benefits for TIEing all season long. 1) your team will play magically inspried in a match that really does matter. 2) Should you lose your matches by TIEing, your worse record gives you a better draft pick. 3) Your economy stays strong because your playing more matches throughout the season/playoffs.

I asked for it not to be in effect for Tournament and Playoffs at the very least. Or give a penalty to the team training/form. Have an immediate short term effect instead of an long term lingering. All those are ideas to be presented (we are always told we complain and never give suggestions on how to make the game better).

Finally, no matter what you do with your randomly generated game, I want to win. If I play some crappy team and they come in and kick my butt, then more power to them. I play volleyball and tell my friends (cruzanm423 in particularly) that pool play doesn't matter. When the play offs come around, I will be ready. That is real life and never expected that type strategy to be effective in a video game.

Ok so the community doesn't know how to use CT and TIE in their strategy but this is a new game and most have a lot to learn.

I don't mean to be high and mighty about this but it does work and if it doesn't work for you then you are not following the correct strategy, you are changing it and complaining why it doesn't work.

A better team is meant to lose on occasion. If you follow strategy throughout the season you can win every step of the way.

e.g. I just won the Australian Tournament against probably a much better team than I have and it is because I played TIE whenever I could up until this point. And I will very likely be in the playoffs with a very decent chance of getting to the final.

So you can say as much as you want that the system does not work but I am prove that it does. My team was reset this season (I moved countries) and I started with a fresh team so I am winning against teams who won with strong teams coming up from second division.

I totally agree with you, and I'll throw in a vote to keep TIE/CT. I find it ridiculous that so many people blame their losses on getting CTed, yet the team who beat them probably lost the next several games after that. And if they didn't, then it doesn't matter anyways, because clearly the level of competition allowed them to TIE.

I've TIEd most of my games this season, I think I've only normalled three times. I took a loss early on in the season pretty much on purpose to build my enthusiasm, which let me TIE more games, and more games, and so on, until I was able to hold 10 enthusiasm for several weeks. The result = I've only lost three times (one in the cup) and just got knocked out in the round of 64.

Whatever the BBs do, people will complain about it before adapting to the proper strategy, but just know that those are those of us out here who appreciate a little additional strategy. ;)

e.g. I just won the Australian Tournament against probably a much better team than I have and it is because I played TIE whenever I could up until this point. And I will very likely be in the playoffs with a very decent chance of getting to the final.

So you can say as much as you want that the system does not work but I am prove that it does. My team was reset this season (I moved countries) and I started with a fresh team so I am winning against teams who won with strong teams coming up from second division.

I think this just further proves my point, higher enthusiasm is pretty much the number one deciding factor in games. I just think the system shouldn't be set so that the person who has the higher enthusaism is such a heavy favorite in any game. But this is just my opinion.

Also I don't think there is much strategy to it the way it is set up now. With so many new and BOT teams all you have to do is TIE every league game. Maybe you lose a couple you should have won, but it doesn't matter because you'll make the play-offs anyway. There is really no risk to TIE a league game so it's basically benefit for nothing for teams trying to win either their league or the cup.

Edited by jprochnow (12/13/2007 4:56:07 PM CET)

Last edited by JayP at 12/13/2007 4:56:07 PM