BuzzerBeater Forums

"Do we really want people to be able to buy the B3?"

It's happened in the past on more than one occasion. To me, something is wrong if the outcome of the B3 is determined by which manager can throw the most money at it."

I completely agree with you, but I think we have to give credit to Marin re: Overextension tax, because so far it has worked and nobody has been able to "buy" a B3 title since it's been implemented. In fact you have Mloty Stargard in the semifinals or thereabout for nearly 10 seasons and KK Mordor winning 3 in a row.

Fair question.

My plan is not to buy it. But to build towards it. I have trainees, money and patience.

But the way it works now, training and manager skill alone wont win anything.

I gave your post a basketball because I think it is a fair analysis of the problem of tanking, and I think you are acknowledging (not denying) that tanking is a problem.

One of the fundamental problems is that most teams can only be competitive 2 games per week. But what when they want to win that cup game - then they have to "tank" one league match. Even then they might get pummeled in the cup and end up with two big losses in the week. Should they be punished for that? Of course not.

The "fundamental problem" that you put your finger on is a problem in game design. If the game is designed so that a team cannot compete in three games a week, that is a game design problem you should always consider when making changes. And if the problem exists only to serve the current design of training, well...

EDIT: we have to acknowledge, that once you are training players, you are not playing to the fullest potential of your team - thus you should be punished...

No, thus training should be reformed.

We could avoid this luxury tax and get rid of the overextension tax if that attendance drop would be implemented. That would make a lot of things easier and even more realistic.

I agree. I also wonder if the Fan Survey is difficult or even impossible to reform, given what an obvious problem it is and the great (positive) effect that reforming it would have on the game. I wonder if it was added somewhere along the line as just another "bell and whistle" and no one realized what a major element of the game it could become.

If it is possible to reform, I think it should go almost to the top of Marin's to-do list.

Easy way: Increase the salary floor.

Well ... yes and no. Done just that simply, it would kill new teams.

But done only for demoting teams, well, that might be a possibility worth exploring. Maybe it can be done so that legitimate demotions are not penalized but tanking is ... if Marin can settle on a definition of tanking, which isn't so easy as he points out. For example, maybe a demoting team has a new salary floor that is somewhere between that of the division he just left and the division he now enters.

I like making the fan survey into a powerful force (and an accurate one) better. I think there are some real possibilities in that area, not just to address tanking but also in a positive way.

An increase in salary floor hits every team in the league. A drop of attendance (with the mentioned indicators) only hits those that tank.

1) over 9000
2) if thats so, don't threaten do do sthg

The "fundamental problem" that you put your finger on is a problem in game design. If the game is designed so that a team cannot compete in three games a week, that is a game design problem you should always consider when making changes. And if the problem exists only to serve the current design of training, well...

Currently, you have the choice to throw a game, to mix up your minutes as best as you can to try to win all three games, or any combination thereof, depending on your assessment of which game(s) you can win or lose and how important you value each of the three games. Meaningful choices. The alternative (presumably) is one where everyone simply plays their best lineup all three games. No meaningful choices. But the alternative at least makes sure that lower level teams never get a chance to go longer in the Cup by "stealing" a win against a higher-division team who decided that to not field their full strength in the Cup, so I suppose that's something.

This could lead me to quitting after 16 seasons (with this new team).
I have 16million in my account, I have three DI runner-up trophies and three Cup runner-up trophies, made playoffs every time except 2-3 seasons. I have many times challenged $800k-900k roster with mine ~500k by my tactical knowledge and perhaps saved some money. I was Indian NT coach for 10 seasons. I am here just to state my opinion that some managers who do not waste money on level 16 or more of rebounding or passing should not be at disadvantage due to this tax, rather their wise management of money for better cause should be respected as an important trait in BB. The SFs and PFs I want for my team costs around 5 million each, so how many of them I can buy together during rebuilding phase? what if I want to rebuild/upgrade my team to a B3 level team of youngsters around 25-26yr and planning to sustain it for next 7-8 seasons? Can I do that without money in my pocket? I am bored of training as it haven't changed/improved since ages, so should I quit?
Believe it or not you are just listening to one sort of players and taking this game to a unilateral path. I have seen ~60k of players on this game, now ~20k are left, this may further narrow this pool.
- salary floor can be increased.
- If you want to encourage people for training, focus your limited resources over improving training rather than.........