"Starting season 103 intentional losses in WL and NL games will not be tolerated and will be punished by the FPC." - Does this also mean that there'll be fixes for the significant issues that encourage those intentional losses?
--
103 S
1 d.
Is it possible that with the new training page it is not possible to adjust the training of a newly acquired player (market, scout or draft) on the first day?
Do I have to wait until the first training report to make my settings?
--
103 S
1 d.
"Starting season 103 intentional losses in WL and NL games will not be tolerated and will be punished by the FPC. We encourage the community to report intentionally lost matches by selecting the cheating team and pressing report unfair behaviour on its page."
A nice instant of making it advantageous to win we will punish players for going what is better for team...
Can't we really implement something that makes winning worth it?
You win fast you receive less money, worse training, or an advantage to play in a league where you don't have chances to earn money.
You intentionally play longer to maximise benefits or losses because you can't financially pay to play in a higher league now FPC punishes you. If you try a new tactic and lose miserable FPC will punish you.
I don't support losing on purpose but if there are no benefits in winning it should be the manager's decision what to do not FPS or Administration. You have many examples of similar cases even in real life where clubs cant cope financially and choose to not get promoted higher. Or when they send their younglings when they don't want to win.
--
103 S
1 d.
"Starting season 103 intentional losses in WL and NL games will not be tolerated and will be punished by the FPC."
I told about this last season and the answer was: IT'S NOT IMPORTANT, WE HAVE MORE IMPORTAN THINGS TO FOCUS
Well, maybe I have right. In Spanish WL2, after semifinals ALL TEAMS wanted to lose, because promote to Spanish WL1 is a punish to us. The matches between NL1 and NL2 the same, people are trying his best for lose that matches.
Maybe, solving the issues about WHY is better to stay in NL2 than promote NL1 is the ANSWER, not FPC
--
103 S
1 d.
"Starting season 103 intentional losses in WL and NL games will not be tolerated and will be punished by the FPC. We encourage the community to report intentionally lost matches by selecting the cheating team and pressing report unfair behaviour on its page."
Give prizes for every position in NL so people don't lose 50k when promoting to NL1 while not having enough power to compete for higher positions.
Or give financial boost for demoted players as it happens in many leagues irl.
Not saying the compensation has to be equal to the amount of prize lost but just let us have something that incentivizes the fact of promoting.
--
103 S
1 d.
Since years, we ask to give money to every team in NL, Giv less to the first places to just give something to the last ones. So we would fight to stay in the higher league. Financial part of the game is realy huge, and you never want to get 0 from NL1 while people in NL2 can get money being weaker. That's just a non sens ! Just give money to everyone !! That's EASY, SIMPLE, and that's going to solve your "problem"
--
103 S
2 d.
The way the system is now, the National League should just be eliminated. The post about staying in NL2 is better than going to NL1 ( since your finish in NL1 is impossible to be in the top money making positions is near impossible ) is spot on. NL seems to be just a burden.
--
103 S
2 d.
Klinx, this is what’s known as a collective action problem. It occurs when individuals rely on others to take action, avoiding contribution themselves. As a result, too few people voice the need for change (its not enough for you to say that there is a problem), leading to a suboptimal outcome for the group—in this case, the community. That’s why it’s important for more members of this community to act collectively rather than voicing issues individually.
--
103 S
2 d.
I just had NL promotion game where both teams was trying to lose and I was the one who failed to do that. Which team should be punished for this game?
--
103 S
2 d.
I'm playing this game for so long but recent administration actions is blowing my mind with a combination of their inability to solve current problems and a talent to create new problems as well.
Now the game is made, that sometimes losing is way better for the team and instead of changing this dumb system we will punish the users trying to make the best for their team?
For intentional WL losses just make a payout due fast series of expensive tickets, instead of average, as it was suggested 50 seasons ago already. Other intentional losses in the group stage to help a friend or whatever can be punished if there is enough evidences that it was intentional.
NL is a bit different, but its possible to find a solution there as well. And we should look for that solution how to encourage teams to win not because being afraid of getting punished, but because there should be some benefits of winning.
Community is talking about this issue FOR YEARS and nothing was changed. Now nothing was changed too, but somehow administration decided that it would be a great idea to punish users, while administration is responsible for this system we currently have. This is ridiculous. Did administration ever considered punishing themselves for their ignorance of problems community keeps saying them? What about having a discussion to find out actual solutions for problems we have instead of threats banning everybody who actually cares about this game? If Darius have no idea how to communicate with customers maybe somebody else should try?
--
103 S
3 d.
We and the community have slightly different priorities for updates.
One of the biggest factors in how we choose our priorities is our resources. For example, we have more resources to update old pages since we use our freelance developer for that. However, we have far fewer opportunities to work on sensitive topics such as finances or match engine updates.
Another factor is the size of the update. In this case, the community often underestimates the effort required. There are no quick updates when it comes to finances, and there should not be any rushed changes that affect finances for all teams.
Another factor is what we actually want to achieve. Will a finance system update drastically change the game? Will it significantly improve BasketPulse's chances of surviving another year? Will it reduce server issues? Will it attract new users? Will it introduce new possible actions for users?
I agree that such an update would be great and the right way to solve these issues. However, I don’t see any possibility of working on this soon.
You’re saying this is a design flaw and that we should allow complete freedom. Look at the NBA—even such a big organization has "design flaws" and fixes them with "fines." For example, teams risk penalties if they allow their star players to skip games without a good reason.
By the way, that won’t solve the problem, but maybe we should eliminate NT promotion games altogether? If both teams are trying to lose, is there really a point in having them?
--
103 S
3 d.
I don't know how much are the prizes of NL1 because I never reached one, and I'm aware that they change depending on league strength, but I know that the winner of our NL2 gets around 55k prize.
Would it really make such a big difference (that can't be adjusted over the season by market offer-demand) to make the Last teams in NL2 earn from ⅓ to an ⅛ part of those 55k (or whatever the TOP prize is in lower league)or something like that?
It wouldn't still pay off too much but at least you get something. I don't think anyone here is asking that the 12th of NL1 gets similar or more than 1st of NL2, just some incentive to promote.
WL doesn't have that issue because even if you finish last after promotion (don't get prize) it really pays off (or at least the loss is minimal compared to NL) just by the tickets income (bigger interest) and the new sponsors.
--
103 S
3 d.
This whole idea of punishing community and managers for intentional loss is just stupid. Everybody knows that BasketPulse besides bringing fun of managing your own team - it's business (or should be).
So why the administration are deaf to community and instead of making good changes and encourage new members - they just going downhill and making this game stripped of fun.
And at then end they are supriced that they have more inactive managers then new ones. Shocking
--
103 S
3 d.
Personally, I'm not happy with some of the recent changes to the game myself, but why it should be more fun when non-competitive play and contest distortion should be allowed is beyond me Szulim.
I can understand the frustration with the financial iniquities (especially the unbalanced funding in some National Leagues) that are mentioned here. a-Darius has also emphasized that they simply don't have the capacity for a more constructive solution at the moment, because there are constantly new trouble spots that distract from the actual issues.
--
103 S
12 d.
I'm no longer surprised by anything in this game with its fair play committee, even less transparency when it comes to justifying a canceled exchange... and now with this thing about them punishing with the loss of matches... I think that nowadays if you fart in this game you get a 100k fine, just for anything.
--
103 S
57 d.
Here you can see the main information about the team.
Green icon next to Activity indicates that user is presently online.
If the user is active and experienced, medal indicating his rank is displayed. Row of ranks from the lowest to the highes: paper, wooden, bronze, silver, golden, platinum. Rank depends on playing time, activity and the highest achievements.
The rankingsof the team represent the place it takes among all teams of this game. At the bottom of the page you can see the titles of the team.
Latest and highest club's achievements are listed on the right. More achievements and other club related information can be found in the section of Club's History.
In the bottom, 5 latest news related with the club are displayed. PREMIUM users can also overview older news.