BuzzerBeater Forums

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

I thought I qualified it by saying with new and bot teams, I meant in lower divisions where there aren't as many active users. I guess I should try to be clearer.

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.

This, especially the bolded part, seems to be the crux of the argument. In real life, how often do teams "take losses"? Yet, I bet most of us do it cause it helps in the long run. Using TIE/CT to benefit yourself doesn't mean that it's realistic or makes the game better.

I assume I'm on the more extreme end against CT/TIE. I'm sure in real life coaches give rousing speeches to motivate their teams, so in some sense I can see this. But, I can't ever see a coach say, "just don't try very hard, I don't care if we win this". In cases were the games don't mean as much, you could just play backups and work on getting trainee's minutes.

edit - Just to clarify, I'm very happy to see the BB's are addressing the issue with the upcoming adjustment and hoping that it makes a big dent in the current exaggerated focus on enthusiasm.

Edited by brianjames (12/13/2007 7:07:26 PM CET)

Last edited by brian at 12/13/2007 7:07:26 PM

Finally someone has said where i was going with my point. I didnt want this thread to be about the in game element, rather the effect on your team for the next game. This thread was not about complaining and want to stick to the topic. I shouldn't have to mod my own thread here GM's. Thanks for the input as now I know how it's being abused.

Again, the changes seem to make the tactic more viable instead of a deterrent.

If in my league I went 2-11, but made the touney finals then I would call my season a success because I still made money and will now get some top flight talent in the draft.

Usung TIE all season is not a strategy period. I am sure that was not the intended use but someone has to abuse it. Call it what you want but you guys who are pounding your chest as victors because you were able to have a success story doesn't make the tactic right.

Isn't it fitting on the day baseball hears from George Mitchell, we hear about TGH (Tactical Growth Hormone) in Buzzerbeater..... Get your popcorn ready

I just won the English Tournament. In the semi I played CT and won. Others have said now I had enthusiasm 2 I will loose the final as can't play CT again. 1st off why couldn't I? I did and I won. 2nd my oponent in the final probably didn't play normal in the semis and then CT in the final, why wouldn't he have played CT too in the semi? I see the point about TIE all season so you start the semis on say 9 not 5, and sure I now plan to do that anyway to get enthusiasm back up for the playoffs, but what's the big deal? Surely the style of CT/TIE was more important than the enthusiasm going into the game?