BuzzerBeater Forums

I think that there are a few changes that would be VERY easy and would improve the game (some are repeats of what others have said).

The minimum four day contract limit is great, make it longer.
Salary floor is great, make it higher.
The players in draft are too poor shift the median up a bit.

Here is two suggestions that may be medium hard:

Shift the sliders up a little to make the 2/3 zone better and the LI offence worse.

Finally one that is difficult:

"Naturalising" players. Once a player has been on your team for at least six consequetive seasons they should count as a drafted player for all fan based benefits even if they are of a foreign nationality.

I know. It's pretty lucky.

Shift the sliders up a little to make the 2/3 zone better and the LI offence worse.

This is the most important request.
90% of managers plays a combination of tactics LI / M2M.
BB becomes predictable and boring.

While I like the suggestion, the issue with managers choosing the all stars is, some leagues have little to no real GMs and are bot teams. While my league will end with about 6 to 8 real GMs, at the all-star break we had 3 or 4, and those guys sign on once a week or less and don't even set their lineups, much less look around the league to pick all stars.

It may work at the higher levels, though. And I do like the idea.

I'd like to suggest 3 free months of supporter for all teams that win the championship and promote. So basically they get supporter for one season after they promote. Yea, I'm guessing that would be a couple hundred free supporter packages handed out, but on well.

And I'm not saying give it to teams that promote via bot cleanup, only to those teams that win the championship and promote.

I think even if this were to be implemented it.would only be for winning the top division because at the top division if you win you get a birth into B3 and a trophy. No financial income.

i would suggest a few changes-
firstly the impact of the last game on the upcoming home game should be decreased.many times i have had a good games and then i loose a game and my arena attendance drops by quite a bit.
secondly the fan survey should be a bit more realistic.i mean despite having a really good season if u loose form one of the best teams of the country and the fan survey hits the bottom.
thirdly i would love to see 2-3 zone improved a bit so that i can be used in games atleast to defend the inside focussed offenses.

i wish an addionatial tactic on lineup, I want to select 3 of them

-play bench when team is in advance +20 against rival
-play bench when team is in back -20 against rival
-dont change the game tactic acording to score

they should add them to tactic screen. so we should select one or two of them (three of them is a paradox )

100% on this.

More options on when players should go to the bench (and actually have the GE do what it's asked to do, rather than this "strictly follow depth chart" and sometimes change it).

I'll go with Yoda's format...

(seemingly) easy:
1. Modify LI offence effectiveness
2. Modify 2-3 zone effectiveness
3. Modify effects of Game Shape - Keep it random but a little less... Include long term effects. For example, if a player plays (and trains - see below) more than 120mins a week for several (4+?) weeks, his GS is severely affected and may take longer to normalise. Or if a player plays excellent (definition of excellent needed) minutes for several weeks, his GS can improve even further than proficient.

(seemingly) difficult:
1. Modify training process - There is no reason that a player should only get "training time" by playing in games. Perhaps each player has a default 30mins (for example) training time and in-game time is added to those minutes. I actually play basketball and the times I improve the most are during actual training. It's a time when I can try new things and repeat skills without risking the W.
2. An individualised and deeper approach to tactics. For example, selecting two tactics for a game, a primary and a secondary. Or an option to choose if opponent plays x defensive tactic, we play y offensive tactic. Difficult, I know, but it would be good.
3. New tactics that give more benefits to particular stats.
4. Modifying the GE so that there is an advantage to scouting opponents and learning tactical advantages. Base tactics would need to be less effective and specialised tactics more effective (unless opposing team's tactics trump them). For example, RNG vs 2-3 would be more effective than it already is. LI vs 1-3-1 would be more effective.
5. Somehow make effective the tactics that are seldom used (princeton, LP).

One last thing and I don't know if it would be easy or difficult...

The effectiveness of the PR manager, according to my own experiences and what I've read pretty much everywhere, is somewhat redundant. Either remove the option entirely or make it worthwhile through, perhaps, a possible tactical advantage to get a higher level PR manager.