BuzzerBeater Forums

BB changes over the last years are always focused on the training (more facilities, extended years without skilldrops, luxury training tax, etc) and you say that flood the transfer list with young players is a bad thing? WOW

Excuse me to disagree, but there is no problem with that. There will be more players, yes. Value of those players will go down, yes (and? Everyteam will have more opportunities, bringing them to more equality and cutting down prices with develope players, so more team will have chances to create good teams = more competition).

I guess only the rich managers are against this suggestion, because this will bring more competitors to them in a few years. Anyone else who really likes the training part of this game (the fun part of the game tbf) will also have more opportunities.

I keep saying this could be a win-win situation.

It's literally my suggestion, I've never picked from lower then #14, behind a few bots is DIV but also behind mostly human teams...? No? If transferlisting is not as good as I thought then just banish bots from draft...? Even then draft requires money input to ensure a good pick and make use of the #1 pick, also deflation of draftee prices and - int the long run - players as a whole will just raise competetiveness since it will be easier to afford better players, no? What about managers who start tanking in Division I and drop all the way down to Division IV? Also, I don't know how the situation is in other countries, but in Poland the U21 coach always seems to be in need of good youngsters - better draft could get more people into training for U21.
Also, I'm starting to see a logical flaw - apparently, The big issue is that flooding market with draftees will cause mass deflation, making draft not worth it, but also people will tank in DIV 4 will take advantage od #1 draft pick and make easy money? Please explain this combo - managers will mąkę money off off not-worth-it draft? Am I missing something?

Last edited by Hubsoniusz at 8/19/2024 5:17:35 PM

Of course I stand by this suggestion because it would benefit "me" (you don't know how little I care about Draft in Spain as I train 0 players from this country), the same way you don't like because you have other purposes in BB. Where's the problem?
Furthermore, since you tried to "make fun" of my team and my poor results... Yes, I'm a very bad manager when it comes to compete, so I don't like it. I only play BB to train young players. Guilty.

If you can't see that this suggestion would benefit globally more people that don't, there's not much more to talk about. More young player = more motivated managers to train = more managers staying in the game = more Supporters acquired. And of course, more good players will become on more good teams.

It seems you have the need to be always right. Chill out, man. It's only a couple of suggestions. BB Staff will do whatever prefer, as it has been throughout it's life. We, managers, didn't have any option to decide anything ever.
I was familiar with your game in the Forums(specially from few years back), but the past weeks were even harder to talk to you.

I read the messages and your suggestions, you have a very passive-agressive way of writing, if you want to be understood better I would suggest to tone down that attitude and actually focus on writing about pros and cons of this suggestion, instead of bloated messages and false affirmations like "only rich players are against this suggestion".

Regarding this suggestion, let's enumerate a few points we can discuss, with current draft situation:~

- 58 TSP HoF'ers would easily go for 1.5M before the draft skill boosted the 19 year old age tier.

Now we regularly see GREAT HoF'ers going for 500k-800k unless they have a very specifically sought build.

So we are already talking about a reduction of 3x in original player prices in a few seasons, plus now we have way more players to pick up from the transfer list due to the boost to the 19y/s.

I have been scouting and I can easily find GREAT trainess for incredibly cheap (MVP+) that could also reach my national team if traind properly.


- How will your suggested change really impact the market, specifically draftee prices, at the moment?

We already saw a huge reduction in player prices, I repeat, even newbies like me can easily afford great superstar draftees for their teams (MVP/HOF).

You are suggesting that the market be flood with draftees from bot teams, do you understand the implications of this? What are you suggesting is that draftees should become worthless due to the sheer numbers of draftees that would come from bot teams.

I agree that maybe, in leagues where there are 1 or 2 bot teams MAXIMUM due to users who became botified, should not have first picks in draft if they end last. But no more than that. Users in leagues where there are more than 2 bot teams should not benefit from this.


- Nobody said draft guarantees you great players

This is a basketball sim, just like in real life, you never know what can come from the draft each season, it's based on luck, you don't deserve great players just because you tanked and sacrificed a season. When a user sacrifices a season to end up last, or many draft points, they willingly accept that the draft can be good or bad.



- Micronations

I see that you are managing a micronation, let me ask you this, if bot teams start to release drafted players in the market, how do you think it will impact micronations? Positively or negatively?

Let me answer my opinion: VERY NEGATIVELY.

For every good Andorrean player that would be released from nations of Europe, 100 good polish draftees would be released, 100 of spanish players would be released, 100 of USA players would be released, 100 of Italian players would be released.

Now let me ask you, who do you think people will try to train to eithe sell for profit or try to reach NT, micronations players or polish/italian/spanish?

I think you know the answer to this question.


So my opinion on this suggestion is a VERY BIG no.

Hey, putting young people on the transfer list is unfair. A manager investing in the draft in a given league has no chance of selecting a legend because you want to take him over and put him up for sale. this is not fair play towards teams with a small budget who will not be able to afford to buy such a star. A rich man will buy this star, train him, sell it for a higher price and become even richer. That's the point. Where is the thrill of choosing when you know you won't get a star? so where?

Alright, if You don't agree with Gerard, then please listen now to me, the OP, and I'd like You guys to disprove these points is You don't agree:
1. Fine, let's agree that we do not want auto-transferlisting players drafted by bots, but we can just disallow bots from drafting - less unnecessary players on the market, but bots will not steal potential NT players.
2. Lower prices for trainees means more people venture into training in BB, and in the long run this will increase the level of competition, as more managers will be able to afford better players or train them themselves, and we need this with the ever-decreasing number of users (we will see what Spicy Sparks do to stop that).
3. "We can already easily afford top draftees" - why is this an issue? easy access to top draftees will also help kickstart newer teams and get newcomers into training, which has always been recommended for them as opposed to buying veterans and quickly pushing for promotion out of Division IV.
4. "People will tank in lower leagues and easily get good draftees" - since the prices of young players will go down, this will be a difficult and risky way of tanking + it's not like people do not already sit rock bottom in Division IV training players unbothered and I don't see too much problem with it. Furthermore, more than 1 manager might try to go for #1 draft pick, making it even more risky.
5. Micronations - they will be less affected by this, because the changes suggested by me (not talking about Gerard) would make micronation youngsters very unique + it is easy to train a NT or U21 star for countries like Andorra than big countries like Poland (BB-wise, not geography-wise, of course).
6. Top managers who do training would make great use of the top-notch draftees (18 years old + 10 or 11 potential) who are right now being lost due to bots drafting, while the good, but not the greatest draftees will be happily taken by smaller teams whose managers just train for their own clubs, not NT.
7. "Bots pick randomly, so there is still a good chance you get a good draftee" - see, this will not break the market as the bots do not always take good draft picks (though excluding bots will still be, at least in my humble opinion, a change for the good). Removing bots from the equation does the trick for the issues i mentioned in (324644.1).
8. Bots taking part in draft in the higher leagues (if they appear earlier on) prevents players from going for #1 draft pick, which is an issue for weaker teams or poor teams, for which a good draftee can be a saving grace.
Also, I'd like to mention prezes111, who inspired this suggestion in a BB-Mail which he sent to me, I thought up the finer details and did the research. I did not want to bring him up in case the idea was met with negative reception, but since he decided to take the matter into his own hands... Dzięki! Niech moc będzie z Tobą - potrzebujesz jej w tym wątku! ;-)

I've had such a wish many seasons ago after seeing out ATG and HOFs fall to bots and human teams drafting only MVPs. But I've never suggested it, because it's not really healthy for the game (points have been brought up by several people here so I won't repeat them) and I'm pretty sure even if no one objected to it, the devs wouldn't even implement it.

But reading this thread make me think:
How about we omit 5 potential players from the top draft choice of bots? If the default draft order of all teams are different, then just omitting it from the top pick itself should guarantee that no bots draft any 5 potential players in the first round. If there is a chance 2 or more bots to have the same top draft choice, then it's still okay, because the possibility of two bots having the same draft order is low, and if they do end up that way, the second choice might still not be a 5 potential player, and even if it is, it would solve the problems of teams winning and still getting a solid trainee.

IMO this should be the most balanced and natural way to reduce the chances of our high potential players going to bots.