BuzzerBeater Forums

I agree that this would be a nice feature to have. But i dont set it high on my to create list though. But when/if there is time it couldn't hurt.
The showing of skills could be discussed and could probably be a bit rougher then showing exact skills.

?¿?¿?¿?
most of players are sold when they dont get any train, their skills will be the same!!!!!
are we getting crazy???????????????

And the claim here is...??? What is your claim here, except that you like it to stay the way it is currently is, due to your way of playing this game???

BTW... Does BB-managers in the real world can get information on previous transactions and deals?
They do. Maybe not accurate to the penny on some leagues, but close enough.
No one would think that Navaro is being payed 100M$ a year, or that he had been purchased by that amount.

then, lets make the skills (all) public ...
you want to know the skills of all players however it will be xddddddddddd
i repeat, you want a nintendo game ...
what do you want so easy game for??
if you know the skills of all players what is the funny thing in this game??
your comparations are ridicolous, you can see the skills when you are going to pay, this is a computer game, a good one, but not real

Again, there was a single claim here - "the skills are exposed".
But, that had been answered - the name of the players is irrelevant, so nothing that is not needed is exposed.

I agree. This game shouldn't be an easy game... for those BB-agents. :+D
Hence, this suggestion is such a good one.

Last edited by Pini פיני at 2/18/2012 2:38:54 PM

The TPE misleading direction;

There is a TPE. It is upon a formula to make it worth something.
Currently, at not so rare cases it gives nothing "Very few player like...", and in general, it seems that it is uses a very wrong formula.
I can bet that it uses only few skills, which means that two players that should be priced differently will be priced the same, and vice verse.

TLH is much easier to implement (another reason, why it is better, at least for the first tryout...).
TLH will not give wrong value per skill, and create misleading value for a player.
It will give exactly the value of a player, and will make the market much more balanced, and normal.

The prices will not be upon coefficients that has nothing to do with real market value.
Each user will get all the relevant, and not biased information for defining player value.

TLH will not give wrong value per skill, and create misleading value for a player.
It will give exactly the value of a player, and will make the market much more balanced, and normal.

The prices will not be upon coefficients that has nothing to do with real market value.
Each user will get all the relevant, and not biased information for defining player value.

There is actually no real reason to believe the current TPE method is much different from the TL search in terms of defining what sort of players are looked for. There is no magic to TPE, it compares a player against actual past transfers of similar players. The issue is that what exactly is compared is presented in a pretty vague way; and in case there are no matches or the matches are all over the place, we have no change of changing the comparison criteria to make it more relaxed or specific, respectively. Effectively, we therefore do not know what "similar" really means in this context. It is possible that the comparison looks at only a single skill (the one reported) and some sort of (weighted) sum of all skills. It is also possible that the comparison is based on a number of skills relevant to player's position. It is also possible that the search appears exactly like the TL search where the requested skill levels are derived from some past set of statistics as a function of the player skill set. And so on and so on. There are many ways to approach the problem, but all solutions will give pretty good output on average.

As an example, I currently have 13 players in my team. I get relevant TPE for 5, useless TPE for 2, and no TPE for 6 players. I believe I could at least improve the TPE for the 2 problematic players if I had access to the TL filters and a history search. Improving on the 5 players getting fairly good TPE's would be more difficult and not really needed anyway. I would still prefer to know what exactly they are compared against.

Let's explain it again, and make it more clear.

Currently, it seems that the (current) TPE takes the two parameters they are defining (Potential, and best skill), in addition to age, and make a search upon that, which brings irrelevant data.

Why is it irrelevant data?
Because data on a 25 YO SF with superstar potential that has prolific JS and pitiful skill on all others aspects, should not be taken when comparing for a purchase of a player who his "other skills" (except being a 25yo SF with superstar potential and prolific JS) are all prominent. It has no value, and it just mislead the buyer.

TLH on the other hand, gives the user the possibility to learn the market, and give old and new user the same starting point.
An old user, is more familiar with market variance on current system.

It´s you who doesnt understand Wallys Point, not vice versa. Nice that you keep explaining things.

Just like Wally and some others with a deep understanding for the game and programming work tried to point out:

we need a more precise and maybe more transparent and maybe even a customizable TPE. we don´t need a huge database for virtually nothing but nintendo reasons.

What does your stubborness about that point lead to? If we had such a TPE, what use would there be for your suggestion anymore? What extra benefit would anybody gain from your version of the History TL after the TPE had beefed up the discribed way?

Last edited by LA-seelenjaeger at 2/18/2012 5:08:04 PM

we need a more precise and maybe more transparent and maybe even a customizable TPE. we don´t need a huge database for virtually nothing but nintendo reasons.

Now I understand... We (you and...?) need a TPE that will keep being not relevant like the current TPE.

We shouldn't use (did I understand your deep-understanding on the game this time?) a TLH who will:
1) Give a data that will be precise by definition.

2) Will eliminate the biased advantage between old and new ones, as the old ones are more familiar with players' value, again by definition.

And I've also understand (again, am I right this time?) that TLH will make it a nintendo game, because then users (I wonder who is on that list) could not take an advantage, on the lack of knowledge of other users, so easily as it is today.

2) is wrong by definition. old teams think in old terms and are more often than not FAR OFF the current value on the TL.

And still you failed to answer the question.

With a new TPE in effect, what would be the main advantage of your TLH? Or ANY advantage of your TLH justifying the enormous data required.

Last edited by LA-seelenjaeger at 2/18/2012 5:58:14 PM

Currently, it seems that the (current) TPE takes the two parameters they are defining (Potential, and best skill), in addition to age, and make a search upon that, which brings irrelevant data.

You make the mistake of assuming that only what we see is considered in the TPE comparison. That could of course be the case, but there is no reason to approach the issue based on that assumption only. It is actually fairly unlikely - bordering impossible - that only one skill is considered. Why? Because we get such a large number of "no recent similar transfer" TPEs for fairly common player types. Just look at your own roster, I'm pretty sure you can find examples. If only one skill (and age and potential) are used in the search, no TPE should not be a very common occurrence. I think the TPEs are generally pretty good. (Even then, I would prefer knowing the comparison criteria a little better.) There are obviously many extreme cases where they fail. If one looks at only those problem cases, one fails to understand the root of the problem.

Currently, it seems that the (current) TPE takes the two parameters they are defining (Potential, and best skill), in addition to age, and make a search upon that, which brings irrelevant data.

You make the mistake of assuming that only what we see is considered in the TPE comparison. That could of course be the case, but there is no reason to approach the issue based on that assumption only. It is actually fairly unlikely - bordering impossible - that only one skill is considered. Why? Because we get such a large number of "no recent similar transfer" TPEs for fairly common player types. Just look at your own roster, I'm pretty sure you can find examples. If only one skill (and age and potential) are used in the search, no TPE should not be a very common occurrence. I think the TPEs are generally pretty good. (Even then, I would prefer knowing the comparison criteria a little better.) There are obviously many extreme cases where they fail. If one looks at only those problem cases, one fails to understand the root of the problem.

1) I wrote that it seems that the TPE is using only those criterias.

2) In any case, when the criteria is not known, the information is worth less.

3) I guess that they are also giving information upon data from the recent time. Why not letting the user define this period of time.

4) Generally, I don't see any advantage of improving the TPE over the TLH.
The TLH gives the user the ability to understand market value, and the user will not depend on unknown factors that are part of the TPE (or the Enhanced-TPE) mechanism.

As you seem unable to undestand the TPE proposal, let me explain it to you once more:

3) and 4) are to some degree already part of the enhanced TPE proposal.