BuzzerBeater Forums

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

doesn't exists long enough to have players playing together long enough

Chemistry will be seasonal defined(as I suggested). This is one of the main reason that pre-camp exists in real BB team.

if it is a some kind of personality skill requesting to have some mix of personalities on roster

It is not. New (big) features starts simple. Here we are talking only about playing time together in case a player on the court was not part of the team on Pre-Camp.

it would make them choose between quality or chemistry/personality as they couldn't afford both

Both types of teams will need to decide whether to buy a new player during the season or wait.
Reacher teams may take the buying option more, but by that will lose money and will make the competition easier.
In addition, also today they reacher teams has an advantage of buying better players, so this subject is totaly unrelated.
For this subject I've opened a new thread.

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")

This means that who joined the "marathon" on a later season has no chance.
But what is more related to this subject is that it does not anything to do with that.
A chemistry as defined here - season-based - is just that - season oreinted. No connection to what have happened before this season.

You are missing popints. Newer team need to make changes more often than established teams when catching up with them. And it doesn't even matter whether club is well managed or not - you are either switching from obsolete players while getting up or you are makign changes because of better knowledge of the game while you inevitably made some substandard decision based on first impressuions of the game and initial lack of info. Anything prohibiting makign changes to some extent would harm them majorily.

Any lind of pre-camp would suck as it would only mean logner offseason and waiting for the real games. And new teams join every week, missing start of season would with pre-camp which you suggest would create some chemistry benefits would only make things harder for them.

I don't agree with the middle part at all.

No, it means if new thing is added it shouldn't unbalance things so good managers (both nts and clubs) won't have to make things from the start. If based on season, there ares issues

a) for clubs that almost all teams buyand selldraftees and/or change one or two players (better fit for training, filling a hole at one position, upgrading to level tougher opposition after promotion, cutting slalaries after demotions), so start of the season is not agood date to rely on (plus the amount of processing and occasional unavailability of BB).
b) there is a biggest fluctuatinos of players in NT/u21 at the start of the season for a good reason - if you don't know what I'm taling about, ask yout NT stuff what are they doing at the start of the season. And evn after that smart NT managers left some spots open and fill them only in case of a need or game shape commands that. Forcing NT managers to start with 18 players on roster is stupid. Really stupid.

Newer team need to make changes more often than established teams when catching up with them. You are either switching from obsolete players while getting up or you are makign changes because of better knowledge of the game while you inevitably made some substandard decision based on first impressuions of the game and initial lack of info. Anything prohibiting making changes to some extent would harm them majorily.

1) Before season starts, both new and old teams have the means to acquire whoever they want.
2) The older team will probably have more knowledge of the game and hence will make better accuistions, but this is fair and game related.

Any lind of pre-camp would suck as it would only mean logner offseason and waiting for the real games.

No it will not.
Users will have the same offseason period to complete their accuisitions.
Ofcourse that players that had been bought in previous season will have full chemistry with the team in that new season to come.

And new teams join every week, missing start of season would with pre-camp which you suggest would create some chemistry benefits would only make things harder for them.

First, you could offer new users to neutralize the chemistry issue for a defined period of time.

Secondly, in the long run, the first season goes for tuition, so no harm for them to learn this system also.
You can argue against any other thing already part of the game as "to big" tuition for newbies.

for clubs that almost all teams buy and sell draftees and/or change one or two players (better fit for training, filling a hole at one position, upgrading to level tougher opposition after promotion, cutting slalaries after demotions), so start of the season is not a good date to rely on (plus the amount of processing and occasional unavailability of BB).

I'm not sure what you've meant, but in case you are saying that the day when the season starts is already has high processing to do, I'll argue that this feature could just have an offset of a day or two.

there is a biggest fluctuatinos of players in NT/u21 at the start of the season for a good reason - if you don't know what I'm taling about, ask yout NT stuff what are they doing at the start of the season. And evn after that smart NT managers left some spots open and fill them only in case of a need or game shape commands that. Forcing NT managers to start with 18 players on roster is stupid. Really stupid.

Again, event if I'll leave this as NP-complete problem, I can still have a workaround by giving the NT an offset of few days before chemistry will affect their NT.