BuzzerBeater Forums

You're overestimating how random results would become without the presence of HCA, and conversely underestimating GDP and effort. But even putting that aside, the whole point of the suggestion is to make the game more interesting, but at the same time also remove the luck of the draw. By that I mean, if you're the best team in your conference, but have to play away against the best team in the other conference, that really hurts one's chances of having HCA when the two teams meet again in the finals. The B3 is another example, you might get an easy road schedule, or you might have to play all of the top teams away and risk missing the 32 even as one of the best teams in the world.

Not to mention you make the national team competitions fairer by not awarding one country a huge advantage in every tournament. In summary, I believe that taking away HCA would make every game about who has assembled the best roster, with tactics being the tiebreaker if the two are a close match for each other. It might introduce some unwanted random into close games, but at this point I see it as the lesser evil.

PS: I never even said anything about my personal experiences with HCA so I don't know why you're going on about my team suddenly becoming worse if it didn't exist.

I do like that you're talking about this, and I wouldn't mind it if this was discussed. However, I do like HCA - and I've had both the positive and negative effects of this.

From memory, I think I remember reading once that HCA is an advantage of about 7-8 points per game? If you were to ask me whether I would prefer the current 7-8 ppg, or flat out 0, I would still say the 7-8 ppg it is currently.

However, I do think that it could be looked at for being too strong. You do make a valid point that too often it decides games, perhaps it's strength could be halved to say a 3-4 ppg advantage? I think it adds realism and something to overcome for away teams, plus rewarding teams that perform well in the regular season. But reducing it's power might help make it less of a crucial factor, and more of a slight edge, that tactics and other factors could still overcome.

If we could reduce the edge of HCA without abolishing it, reduce OD's power slightly, and increase OD's salary cost slightly, they'd be the improvements I'd like to see (but some of those are for another thread). But BB isn't a bad game, it doesn't need massive changes, just minor tweaking IMO.

You're overestimating how random results would become without the presence of HCA, and conversely underestimating GDP and effort.

It is just an example, but i believe the numbers might be close. Also no need to estimate GDP and effort, because they are used with HCA also, so only the changed variable in this case HCA should be estimated.

By that I mean, if you're the best team in your conference, but have to play away against the best team in the other conference, that really hurts one's chances of having HCA when the two teams meet again in the finals.

It can happen both ways with equal chances, overall there is no advantage if looking from farrer perspective. And from closer it might let weaker team win/promote if draw is lucky, creating more interesting game.

B3 is another example, you might get an easy road schedule, or you might have to play all of the top teams away and risk missing the 32 even as one of the best teams in the world.

Totally agree, B3 is not fair, spread of deviation is toogreat. Exactly what would happen in results, not opponents if getting rid of HCA in normal leagues.

PS: I never even said anything about my personal experiences with HCA so I don't know why you're going on about my team suddenly becoming worse if it didn't exist.

Nothing personal, it was just example. Overall worse team loses. And there is so much stuff to do, because in most cases you know weeks before playoffs you wont have HCA for example, so there is time to preprare for that. HCA is not the only thing which makes lose finals.





Last edited by Vilkai [LTU NT] at 09/22/2020 09:53:02

removing HCA gives an incentive to save money during the season and buy after ASG. i don't like it

Easy fix, we just drop down to a four team play-off format. Could even make both rounds Bo3 on the condition that game 3 of the semi-final (on Sunday) was treated like PL/B3 for weekly player minute purposes.

Last edited by Jay (OTT) at 09/23/2020 04:39:21

not sure making the season feel useless for more teams would make the game better

I don't follow the logic. Those that can't realistically win the title will naturally be battling for a top four position so that they can avoid the relegation series. Besides, didn't you just imply that it would be better to reward regular season success and discourage play-off buy-ups? Can't have that if we keep the eight team play-off, even if HCA stays intact.

Well I clearly overestimated how popular the idea of not having home court advantage would be, though it does come as a shock to me given that right now, a typical season with HCA boils down to "I'll TIE this away game since I'm sure to lose it, but this home game is one I should win."

And that, in my opinion, has made the regular season campaign more boring and predictable than it otherwise could be. Whilst I'd still prefer no advantage, the idea of making HCA weaker is a compromise worth considering. Home court is statistically noticeable in real life, though not nearly as strong as you might think. 2.47 points, based on data spanning from 17-'18 up to the point where Covid shut down '19-'20.