BuzzerBeater Forums

Finally, some real effort to answer, especially the confirmation with the UK English database.

Of course it is not that much data, but still it points in the same direction as the small amount of data that I have from my games, but I have not CT yet, so I have even less information than you.

In that case I most admit I am quite surprised and dissapointed over the way of communication from BB. From what I have seen this far they have had a very good communication policy, but I guess they can stumble too.

I appologize if I offended you.

Finally, some real effort to answer, especially the confirmation with the UK English database.

Of course it is not that much data, but still it points in the same direction as the small amount of data that I have from my games, but I have not CT yet, so I have even less information than you.

Right, an answer given to a GM by the BB team to be passed on to the community is not to be trusted.

::rolls eyes:

No, it is most definitely not a good way of communication in this kind of matters according to me. If they want to give th answer there is no actual reason why they should not give it directly in the thread. Passing this kind of information through a user, independently if it is a GM or a "normal" user, will create confusion over time.

In that case I most admit I am quite surprised and dissapointed over the way of communication from BB. From what I have seen this far they have had a very good communication policy, but I guess they can stumble too.

I appologize if I offended you.

I don't understand where the real breakdown in communication was.

The News pretty much got it right, but didn't explicitly state what the exact wording of the TIE vs CT message would be. Perhaps it could have been, but it seems that many did understand the message in the 1st place.

I got a clarification so that the community would know exactly what was going on, and I'm told that it's not to be trusted, and that's quite irritating.

I'm not trying to play the role of the crusty jackass (this time), but it's frustrating.

The News pretty much got it right, but didn't explicitly state what the exact wording of the TIE vs CT message would be. Perhaps it could have been, but it seems that many did understand the message in the 1st place.

According to me there was nothing incorrect or bad at all with the News (and I have not saif that either).

I got a clarification so that the community would know exactly what was going on, and I'm told that it's not to be trusted, and that's quite irritating.

Sending out this kind of clarification through a GM is not a good way to handle information according to me, and there are severalreasons for that. For instance we don't know the actual question sent, or the actual answer you where given, we d not know if you might have missinterpreted ther answer (everyone can misinterpret at times), and so on. Actually, sometimes a GM might even forget to forward the answer to the community and then he will have in game information that other users have no access too.

Of course this particular issue is a very small one, but still pipelining this kind of information through a GM is dangerous, especially as the game grows.

No, it is most definitely not a good way of communication in this kind of matters according to me. If they want to give th answer there is no actual reason why they should not give it directly in the thread. Passing this kind of information through a user, independently if it is a GM or a "normal" user, will create confusion over time.

Part of a GM's role is to do specifically what I did - act as a conduit between the BB team and the community.

It looks like you're trying to tell me that it's better to not be informed about something than to have me inform you.

If that's the case, then I'm completely dumbfounded as to why.

Oftentimes a conversation goes like this:

Me: There's been some questions on the forums about how X works. It's being posted that they think that X is behaving in Y manner. Is this how it's meant to be, or is this not correct?

Several responses can result:

BB: That's confidential (rarely ever hear this, since I know better at this point what is and what isn't public knowledge.

BB: Yes, that is how it works.

BB: I'm not sure, I can look and I'll let you know. (In this case, I'll find out and pass on the info for you when it's made available).

BB: No, X should behave in Z manner, not Y. We'll fix that, and please respond with the answer.

Sometimes, when they have time, they'll post themselves, but part of our job is to post these things so that they can do the actual development work.

Truth is, the BBs are much more active with News posts and on the forums than the BBs are.

I mean, BB-Charles, BB's answer to HT-Bjorn (but with a much better point guard game) has posted fairly regularly on the forums. I've never seen Bjorn post. In fact, the whole BB team is good about seeing what the community is talking about.

If you want the more impersonal, robotic approach, then you should look to Hattrick for that.

BuzzerBeater is definitely not Hattrick, and they're doing a fabulous job of taking the good from HT while discarding the bad, and also forging their own identity.

Please, for the love of (insert deity here), don't look to BB to be "the basketball version of Hattrick".

Please.

Sending out this kind of clarification through a GM is not a good way to handle information according to me, and there are severalreasons for that. For instance we don't know the actual question sent, or the actual answer you where given, we d not know if you might have missinterpreted ther answer (everyone can misinterpret at times), and so on. Actually, sometimes a GM might even forget to forward the answer to the community and then he will have in game information that other users have no access too.

If your opinion of the GM team is so low, then there's not really much more to say - your opinion isn't changing anytime soon.

congratulations for the patience you have shown in this thread. :)

No kidding

Last edited by Newton07 at 4/21/2008 3:51:35 AM

Actually my trust in the GMs are not low, but I know from exoperience that handling information the way that seems to be used in this case will eventually lead into problems (it certainly did in HT, but they are learning the lesson) and misunderstandings.

One of hem being that many users will become confused over the role of a GM, and will eventually hold GMs responsible for things that they clearly should not stand responsible for.

Truth is, the BBs are much more active with News posts and on the forums than the BBs are.

I guess you mean "than the HTs are", and yes that's true and that something I have really appreciated as I said earlier on.

I mean, BB-Charles, BB's answer to HT-Bjorn (but with a much better point guard game) has posted fairly regularly on the forums. I've never seen Bjorn post. In fact, the whole BB team is good about seeing what the community is talking about.

That has a very logical explanation. HT-Björn is not part of the HT team anymore and has not been for quite some time. HT-Tjecken has been in charge since HT-Björn left for other Extralive tasks (Popomundo I think), and he is also quite active on the forums.

If you want the more impersonal, robotic approach, then you should look to Hattrick for that.

That is not fair at all to HT. Of course BB is more personal as it is much smaller (still), but as the game grows commuication becomes more and more complex.

BuzzerBeater is definitely not Hattrick, and they're doing a fabulous job of taking the good from HT while discarding the bad, and also forging their own identity.

I compleetely agree, and therefore I get a little bit scared if BB start to repeat the same mistakes that HT did a few years ago (arround 2002) instead of learning from that.

Please, for the love of (insert deity here), don't look to BB to be "the basketball version of Hattrick".

Actually it kind of is, and they clearly state that they are inspired by Hattrick (see on the partner page for instance), and I actually see no problem at all with that.