BuzzerBeater Forums

Every time someone bought a player, it's because nobody wanted to pay more, so every time it was an outbid?

Seriously I don't know if you are serious by this question...
When someone is placing the last bid (and consequently wins it) but his bid is just the minimum requested above the previous bid (or something close to that) then it is most positively not an Over-Bid.

On the other hand, when a user cannot attend an auction so we puts an amount which is twice the value that player is worth (for example), then it is easily called overbidding.

And I believe you know that...

It would be the same with auto-bid, BUT computer would save you of your bad knowledge of the market, great...

It would be the same, comparing to the first case - meaning the player will not over-bid by this system!
It would not be the same like the second case.
Meaning - those who cannot be at the specific time of the auction, but knows they want that player will not be unfairly in worse position for that bid.
It has nothing to do with "knowing the market", it has all to do of removing unreasonable advantage that has nothing to do with the game.

I do agree that you may be right at one point - a user that is unfamilar with the market (which is part of the game), may just try bidding between the current price until whatever value he chooses. Only that this is true also in current system...
So, auto-bid does not change status regarding that, but...

Maybe there is a need to define another feature that will limit amount of bidding (in both systems) per user, for example - the highest bid a user put should not be more than twice the first bid he gaved for that auction.
Again - this has nothing to do with the auction system used.

Many players here aren't able to speak in their own language and you think most of them speak English ?
About translation, you should talk to LA-Wolph, it should be funny to read.

So???
It would be more fair in case the language (which is not what the game is about) wouldn't be an issue here, but it ain't so, and would require enormous work.
It is a limitation for the BB comunity growing, but it is far less limiting than the Auction system, and much more complex to fix.
Anyhow, it doesn't mean that unfairness should't be handled just because there are other unfairness in the game.

And for the developping time, it could close the discussion, it's not a priority, nor by a long shot, We can discuss again in some years :D

Yes it is a priority, has it is causing great unfairness between a very small group that has an unfair advantage (who can allow themseles being connected almost whenever they want) and all the others.
It also has a good priority has the cost of the fix is very (very) small.

Current state is that users are leaving the game because its' auction unfairness.
I guess that the site's owner does not like that...

As you focused only on the time it will take to code it and on the importance of this feature, I'll guess you agree with all other points I've made.

Coding time - Well, there is not much to say. This is their code and job, and they know better.
What we will write here will have no say on that.
I believe it is not that costly.

Importance - As it gives great advantage to those who can get online almost whenever thay can, it frustrates all the others.
Frustration is causing who suffer from it (most of the others, which is the main group) to leave the game.
Due to that, it has great importance.
Maybe not the top one (as they have some engine issues), but close to that.

Well, as I wrote, the developers and their manager will take the call.
I only gave answers to all of the irrelevant claims that were given.

All the other things you wrote will just not change anything here for the site developers, and are totaly due to frustration that your excuses had been answered.

My main problem with this suggestion is that bidding is fun.
It binds users to the game, it builds up their loyalty.
Therefore, auto-bid would make early users not intrigued about the whole game as much as normal bidding does.


Now, I know you will deem this claim as irrelevant, but oh well.

1) They could continue bidding after the auto-bid part.
As currently users that cannot attend auction mught just put the max bidding from start, there is no difference.

2) Auction is not the main thing in this game.
It is not for communicating through bidding.

3) In case those users are not in to communication through auctions, they will just won't anyhow.
The same goes the other way around.
In case they do like communication through auctions, they will just would! (after the auto-bid part).

4) You could always say, let the auto-bid part be hidden and let the process take its own ful time - bidding each auto bid between 1 second before auction end and 3 minutes.

Basically, there is no hole in this suggestion.
Just users who may prefer to keep a state where they have some unfair advantage.

1) I think that a user that chooses to auto-bid, will do it because it's convenient, as in: "Now I can forget about it". How many of them would continue to bid after their auto-bid expires? It's almost a contradiction.
And currently, users either put max bidding from the start OR skip to the next bid, and they actually take part in it.

2) Early users use the transfer market a lot more than veterans. The fun of bidding has a great role in gaining an early user's loyalty to the game.

3) I never talked about this "communication" thing, so I don't understand why you come up with this point here.

4) I didn't say that bidding against auto-bidders is less fun; you are right, one could barely notice that he's bidding against a bot and not a human. But this is not the point. It's auto-bidders who would have less fun, not their opponents. Early users would probably find auto-bidding very convenient, and they would use it, THEREFORE they will be a lot less active and ultimately less bound to the game.

Finally, I never made any deal in "strange" times of the day/night, so I have never exploited the "unfair" advantage you talk about, but still: I like the current system more than the one you propose.

4) I didn't say that bidding against auto-bidders is less fun; you are right, one could barely notice that he's bidding against a bot and not a human. But this is not the point. It's auto-bidders who would have less fun, not their opponents.

Well, I will say it. It is less fun. And you can easily notice whether there is an auto-bid or a real person, unless attempts are made to cover the fact that it is a bot doing the bidding.

1) A player who would like the convenience of it will also would not bother in current system to stay to bid-war, but will just put MAX bid or would just continue to the next auction.
So, this point had been removed.

2) Maybe they use it more, but it does not mean they are interacting a lot on it. Again, see my first point.
It also don't mean that due to auction they stay in the game, there are much more to enjoy as a newbee.
In addition, users are leaving the game due to the unfairness of current auction system.

Summarizing your new claims and their answers.
C: New users prefer get into this game due to the interactive auction system.
A: It is available also in my suggested system.
It is not the main thing here who lore them in.
If they would prefer the conveniency they woud also do it in current system by placing a single bid or by not interacting.

C: Auto-biders will have less fun.
A: Who says so? One who will want to be part of a "regular" auction could be part of one.
When it is in an unconvenient time they could not attend it anyhow.
It is for them to decide.

If the player out of 1) bids the Max anyway if he cannot auto-bid, where is the problem you´re looking to fix?