BuzzerBeater Forums

1) TL activity is not the goal.

2) Currently as you said, there is a great peek near playoff time, so we can lower TL avtivity and keep the average TL-activity level.

3) "Team-chemistry" should affect the team, but mostly the new player.

4) This change of event (adding the feature) will not directly lower the TL-activity, but more likely will spread it along the season.
It will make the users to think more on effects of buying a player any time of the year.
This is definetly part of BB managing.

5) How does it needs to look along the year?
Exactly like in the real world!
A player that had played last season and a player that had joined the team at pre-season will not "pay" due to lack of "team-chemistry".
A player that will be bought at any time that week, will suffer from it.

6) Regarding the first point - yes, older teams will have this advantage and they deserve it - they've plan ahead, like a BB manager should.
On the other hand, they suffer from that they are not strengthening their team with new players.
So this is also a good thing - allowing the user to plan and decide and take this things into consideration.

Again, "team-chemistry" will only affect one year at most, so it is not that bad...

1) Killing TL completely is not the goal.
2) Currently there is a bit more transfers at the start of the season (draftees) and near playoffs (teams getting ready for playoff runs). TL pretty much is stagnant during the season and almost dies off after the deadline. What you are trying to do is only make it viable to trade during offseason.
3) "Team-Chemisty" should affect the player (via GS) and this affects the team, if you want to improve that GS you have to play that low GS player.
4) This will drastically lower TL-activity during the season. This does nothing to spread it along the season.
5) We have no player contracts. Using salary per skills is the better option for this game. Thus we can't have it like in the real world. That way TL is pretty important to dump excess salary or improve your team. It's pointless to punish the team and the player the whole ongoing season. Lowering GS should be enough (as it affects all skills).
6) Old teams should not just get an advantage from staying stagnant or switching players only during preseason and then just avoid TL like a plague the whole season.
It's pointless to ruin the player for the whole season, just because you sign him during the season.

1) Killing TL completely is not the goal.

It does not kill the TL as I wrote and explained.

2) Currently there is a bit more transfers at the start of the season (draftees) and near playoffs (teams getting ready for playoff runs). TL pretty much is stagnant during the season and almost dies off after the deadline. What you are trying to do is only make it viable to trade during offseason.

No, instead of having two peeks and almost nothing at the other parts of a season, this will create that it will be more spreaded along the season, as teams (like in real BB) will make the adjustment not on a "single point" of the season, but along the all season.

3) "Team-Chemisty" should affect the player (via GS) and this affects the team, if you want to improve that GS you have to play that low GS player.

So?!? that is the cost of having a player that time of season.
And again, ther are other skills that can be affected in addition or instead.

4) This will drastically lower TL-activity during the season. This does nothing to spread it along the season.

Not true. As I wrote above.

5) We have no player contracts. Using salary per skills is the better option for this game. Thus we can't have it like in the real world.

BB has player contracts.
The contract is defined at the begining of each year, and upon the player's skills.

That way TL is pretty important to dump excess salary or improve your team. It's pointless to punish the team and the player the whole ongoing season. Lowering GS should be enough (as it affects all skills).

The affect is decreasing as the time passes. Exactly as it is in real BB world. The chemistry is being built, and the performance improved.

6) Old teams should not just get an advantage from staying stagnant or switching players only during preseason and then just avoid TL like a plague the whole season.
It's pointless to ruin the player for the whole season, just because you sign him during the season.

A) He is not "ruined".
His skills are not as good as if he would have been bought at the pre-season, but you can still buy players for improving the team.
B) The cost of not planing from the start of the season is (like in real-world) costly.
C) When you need to buy a player you will buy it.

It does not kill the TL as I wrote and explained.

Yes it will kill it, as I wrote above.

No, instead of having two peeks and almost nothing at the other parts of a season, this will create that it will be more spreaded along the season, as teams (like in real BB) will make the adjustment not on a "single point" of the season, but along the all season.

No, with your suggestion there will be only one peak at offseason. Transfers during season will be at minimal.

So?!? that is the cost of having a player that time of season.
And again, ther are other skills that can be affected in addition or instead.

Player transfer during season should not demolish his skills for all of that season. Game shape is a multiplier for all the skills. There is no point of tieing separate skills to player transfers.

Not true. As I wrote above.

It is true as I wrote above.

BB has player contracts.
The contract is defined at the begining of each year, and upon the player's skills.

Player "contracts" are forced playersided indefinite salarys, that change annually.

The affect is decreasing as the time passes. Exactly as it is in real BB world. The chemistry is being built, and the performance improved.

You can not just add chemistry impovement over time (if you want realism), there should be frustration aswell, if the team stays together too long. Like I said, this would be a very complex formulae, if you do not want to give a great advantage to old teams. Player movement is a good thing. Few levels of GS drop should be enough.

A) He is not "ruined".
His skills are not as good as if he would have been bought at the pre-season, but you can still buy players for improving the team.
B) The cost of not planing from the start of the season is (like in real-world) costly.
C) When you need to buy a player you will buy it.

A) The player is ruined for the rest of the season. This is a pointlessly harsh restriction to limit transfers to offseason.
B) There is no such cost in the real world. Where the hell are you living at?
C) Pointless sentence...

Last edited by Kukoc at 11/1/2011 6:21:42 PM

with GS all his skills are affected, and we already have a formula too increase it again iver time, which will show how they understand the system the coach plays and the abilitys of their teammates(what you call friendship .. chemistry).

with GS all his skills are affected, and we already have a formula too increase it again iver time, which will show how they understand the system the coach plays and the abilitys of their teammates(what you call friendship .. chemistry).

I didn't understood what you have meant...

No, with your suggestion there will be only one peak at offseason. Transfers during season will be at minimal.

A team that will learn from, their performance during the season, that they need to change their roster will do that.
And instead of only doing it near playoff it will be spreaded along the season upon their preference.

Player transfer during season should not demolish his skills for all of that season. Game shape is a multiplier for all the skills. There is no point of tieing separate skills to player transfers.

It does not demolish it, but the essence of this idea is that buying during the season will cost by playing performance.
A better BB manager creates his team at the start of the year and does not trade heavily during the season.
Which NBA champion team had added a superstar during the season? Not much if any.

You can not just add chemistry impovement over time (if you want realism), there should be frustration aswell, if the team stays together too long. Like I said, this would be a very complex formulae, if you do not want to give a great advantage to old teams. Player movement is a good thing. Few levels of GS drop should be enough.

Everything can be complexed. It can also be simple as I suggested here.

The player is ruined for the rest of the season. This is a pointlessly harsh restriction to limit transfers to offseason.

Not true - a player that will normally will give you 20 PTs in a specific game will give you less due to team-chemistry.
But he still may give you more than current roster, as this is why you've bought him.
Basically - getting a player during off-season costs more! [by performance]

A team that will learn from, their performance during the season, that they need to change their roster will do that.
And instead of only doing it near playoff it will be spreaded along the season upon their preference.

I think you do not understand the word minimal. Go look it up. Your suggestion kills most transactions during the season and moves all transfers to offseason.

It does not demolish it, but the essence of this idea is that buying during the season will cost by playing performance.
A better BB manager creates his team at the start of the year and does not trade heavily during the season.
Which NBA champion team had added a superstar during the season? Not much if any.

NBA has contracts and can only trade contracted players for similar salary. BB TL is a lot different as we have no contract negotiations. There is a simple system of who pays more buys the player. Did Carmelo suddenly start playing badly when he went to NY? It might take a player week or two to learn the playbook. It does not take a full season.

Everything can be complexed. It can also be simple as I suggested here.

Your suggestion is not better nor is it more resembling to real life. As stated ubove with player frustration.

Not true - a player that will normally will give you 20 PTs in a specific game will give you less due to team-chemistry.
But he still may give you more than current roster, as this is why you've bought him.
Basically - getting a player during off-season costs more! [by performance]

Moving all transfers to offseason is not a good idea. It really makes me wonder how old you actually are? You seem to lack any sense of logic.

All: Please keep the discussion non-personal. It is difficult to find the constructive bits when filtering out comments about discussion contributors.

And repetition, and repetition, and repetition, and repetition. And repetition.

Last edited by GM-WallyOop at 11/3/2011 7:01:32 AM

I am getting more and more intrigued by Pini's world.

A world where Chandler and Butler didn't have a big role in the Mavs.
A world where scouts are paid to tell you that Ray Allen is a legendary shooter.
A world where only Pini is right and if someones tries to prove him wrong, he's part of a Conspiracy of Dishonest Egoists.
A world where auctions are made by robots.

I can't wait for the next spectacular episodes of Pini's world!

:-P

You should know that in case of lockout it is not like thre is a season so managers don't have their hand s full of usual things - oh, wait!


Now to the nitty gritty.

For the record, chemistry has no place in sport simulations multiplayer games for numerous reasons. The biggest is it makes the underdogs - newer, poorer, less traditional teams - far less likely to succeed against powerhouses which found some equiobrum of their stqrting five and second unit playing them together and getting a bonus for that - which is out of reach for a new team because it 1) doesn't exists long enough to have players playing together long enough 2) if it is a some kind of personality skill requesting to have some mix of personalities on roster - then it is much harder for teams withou prior savings to get those players everyone wants to comlete the set, while it doesn'T bring anything not lame to the game 3) they don't have money yet to complement team based on that 4) it would make them choose between quality or chemistry/personality as they couldn't afford both - a choice proven teams wouldn't have to make 4) manager games are about improving - while you are climbing the ladder you are dropping players who were once useful for you on lower levels but are little of use for you now -> with chemistry implemented that would mean you would shoot yourself in a foot
5) those things would only frustrate considerable bunch of people and make the game far less enjoyable (while hitting already problematic and somewhat frustrating processing a bit too) possibly making a difference for some whether to stay in agem or not; while on the other hands supporters of chemistry/personality thing can quite easily anjoy the game without it being implemented
6) in sport manager games you simulate things; yo ucan only simulate numebr of them; in real world you have teams with traditionally strogn fanbase or without it, with big company sponsoring/supporting a club or clubs with on limited budgets - you can't include those things the unfait way , it has to be the same for everybody so that managing skill and some luck makes a difference not other things

In case of current state - adding yer another impactful skill/feature after 17 full season would spoil purposfull hard work (as many say "BB is a marathon") when they would have to reshuffle things dropping players with conagious skill like many did with the fouling "physical" hidden skill before. With BB experiencing problems with delays bigger than usual I wouldn't risk adding something that could be a last straw for many (to quit the game ot not to continue being supporters) if I would in BBs shoes