BuzzerBeater Forums

I think the way it happened from my side was fair, and by that I mean that is was predictable within the rules. It was fairly realistic in that I think teams in real sports frequently over expend themselves in the run up to the finals, and suffer because of it. I knew that both I and Nth knew that we were sure to lose in the finals if we CT'd, so I took the gamble that he wouldn't (and from what I can see of the ratings, I was correct). I had to gamble again when I decided to TIE the first game of the finals at Salisbury's place. My reasoning there was that if he tried to win that game by either going out at Normal or CT, then I would surely be able to take him in three games.

To me, what that all means is that the playoff series need a game added at the quarterfinal and semifinal stages so that they are at least home and away with either the possibility of a tiebreaker or aggregate scoring. In addition to making it exponentially more difficult to read opponents, adding those two games would increase the potential gains to be had by making the playoffs, as well as the potential harm of not making them, i.e. teams will probably need a bigger, more expensive roster to have a chance. The higher divisions will be a pressure cooker--either people will have the management skill and gamesmanship to succeed, or they will quickly have to sell off players and go down (or go bankrupt).

These are good points after this round of playoffs. If nothing is changed, I think the SF will become a must to CT since the rewards of 2/3 extra games and a shot at winning the division along with promotion for lower leagues just leaves too much to risk.

Freezing the ability to adjust enthusiasm during the playoffs is an option. Though that seems a bit drastic from the build of the game.

I'd like to see the effect of CT (both in match ratings and decrease to enthusiasm) lowered, maybe so it functions similarly to how it's effected by a TIE. I think this would make it more realistic also.

What was your Enthusiasm for the two games?

I think the main problem this season was the amount of bot teams in the great 8 which allowed demon & myself more TIE games towards the end of the season - that and the fact that neither of us had the latter cup stages to deal with.

If salisbury had have PAN in the semi against the bulls the finals might have been closer. The fact remains that he CT'd to ensure he made the finals which got him the extra 2 matches $$, but didnt deliver the title. Who knows who would've been playing demon if salisbury PAN the semi.

I think the point is that CT has so much of an effect on the ratings (and drop in enthusiasm) it's less about the season, teams, preparation and more about an all or nothing decision to CT. So teams in a weak division or lucky enough to face a bot team get a huge advantage. Also, at some point teams will try to agree to not CT against each other, and that's not something that would be good for the integrity of the game.

If I could vote on this, I'd remove CT as it is now, which is the "nuclear option". To solve this, either get rid of CT or reduce it's effect.

What was your Enthusiasm for the two games?

7 and 8, I think.

Mutual PIC / normal wouldn't really work because you just cant trust the other manager incase they decide to jib you & go harder than agreed - although that would be to their disadvantage long term because of the effects on enthus.

you couldn't plan to do this either way as it wouldn't be avail. I've mutual PIC'd many matches in hattrick. I don't doubt it will happen in BB also.

I was at 2 and 4 for the two games...that's a significant difference but in the end the only numbers that matter are my score and your score.

I think the away CT is marginally stronger, but I'm not really adept at reading ratings yet and determining the strength of teams.

I think that is a good goal to set, so long as the home TIE is calibrated to the away normal.