BuzzerBeater Forums

I am not sure the global economy is perfectly managed, maybe the BBs are not completely satisfied with the situation, maybe a few mistakes were made or a bit of trial and error.

But you have to reckon it's very difficult, certainly the most difficult aspect of a game like BB to fine tune. And it will never be perfect because the conditions will change heavily after a few seasons and corrections will have to be made, just like IRL. A self-regulated economy is a myth, it has never happened in history, there are only "markets" freer or more open than others, there are always rules and changes of rules.

You need some understanding of macroeconomics to deal with the global economy in BB, not that easy. I wouldn't be surprised to hear the BBs have sought advice of someone knowledgeable in the field.

Funny to some degree. Some days ago, Wolph claimed that "overtrained young FAs" are the end of Buzzerbeater, as they are clearly a sign of cheating, now only a week or two later, it´s the daytraders, who stand for the doom of all things to come, although those daytraders, as another one told us, are actually limiting the impact the "overtrained young fas" have on the market and the NTs. So while the daytraders are good in fighting against what Wolph claimed before, they are still the evil to fight?

In my humble opiniion, daytrading or "talent hunting" is to some degree a pain in the a$$, but honestly it part of a any professional sports for sure. If you can get talent for a price below market value, you often buy first and ask later, if only to be able to sell for good later.

I do agree that sucking money out of the market using the "transfer fee" is actually a positive thing balancing the bb economy.

Tbh daytrading does not suit the game of basketball at all. Even worse, these managers often ruin a just started managers BB career (one bad transfer at the start usually does it). But BB's find this to be a vital part of the game. Limiting it will turn those managers into week or month traders. I would love a 22 played games for the club before you can transfer list someone. You could always release/retire a player, but you could not transfer list him. How often do teams buy a player for the purpose of reselling him a week later in basketball? This just does not happen...

Even though I am on your side here I do know several examples where it has happened here in Australia expecially in the glory days of the 1990s where the Aussie professional league the NBL had a lot of money but a lot less experience and sense. There were so many cases of a particular phenemomon that it got a name, "pacific shrink". Teams would hire a 6'10" C they had never met staraight out of College only to discover that when he turned up he had shrunk 3 inches on the trip over and was actually a 6'7" SF. They were often back on the first plane back home. There was even one case of a guy who turned up to play as an import on crutches having torn his acl or something similar but never actually mentioned that to the team that was offering him a one season contract.

Teams are a lot more careful now, money is a lot tighter and technology much better so it is rare these days.

So I do think it sucks that daytrading is the second best tactic to be successful in this game after the tactic of having started in season 6 or earlier. However it is fun looking at the TL for bargains andyou do need to be able to get rid of your old players when you have just found someone who is better so except for a longer initial contract (we have 4 days now - the NBA has a minimum 10 day contract) there isn't much to be done.

Well there is a simple solution to this. Simply increase the length of time a player has to be on a team before they can be transfer listed. Currently there is a 4 day delay. To be effective, it has to be in the range of 4 weeks. If teams are unable to quickly re-list the players they bought then it does not make sense for them to buy the player to begin with as they risk transfer market uncertainty and having to pay the player's wages for 4 weeks.

I agree, my suggestion was 10 days minimum guaranteed contract like in the NBA, but 4 weeks would be an alternative. I'm not sure it would stop speculation in rookies (their salary is trivial compared to their value, but it would smash speculation in expensive players).

Well we can't create a contract based and trading based transfer list. Because this would be uncontrollable and cheating friendly. We can limit daytrading (even if it's the resell tax) and high listing (which has not been done yet, perhaps a listing fee would be a thing to look at).

You know what would really ruin a new managers career? Buying a guy, realizing you made a mistake, and not being able to relist him until the following season.

Relisting the player will not get him his money back. Usually not even 1/3 of what he spent.
More restrictions on things = less abusers.
Obviously daytrading requires time and knowledge. It can be done by people who are online more, so it gives an advantage to a manager who is online more often (if BB's goal would be more online time then we should have live games with managers able to sub and take timeouts, true/false?). To me it destroys the natural process of building a team. With effective daytrading you can skip a lot of steps. But hey, that's just me. I have monitored a lot of teams and usually those teams get fined sooner or later. Daytrading is about buying low and selling high (not selling at normal). Plenty of teams have a bunch of their players listed at really high prices for weeks and weeks. They get bought really rarely and when they do it's like a jackpot for the manager (obviously there are restrictions of who can actually pull this off, like being in the higher league, divII for example and the buyer is in the lower league thinking the divII dude must have great players).
Took too long got bored:(