BuzzerBeater Forums

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.........

Done just that simply, it would kill new teams.

In that post I also said to use a "moratorium" period for promoted teams, exactly as you have one for new teams. That will give a bit of time to get a little more money and wait for the right player to become available on the TL

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.

Unacceptable choices in a sim of athletic competition. In athletics one competes to win. In a sim of athletic competition it should be the same. This is not a game of athletic competition nor even the management of a competitive athletic team, as it purports to be. Anyone looking for a sim of athletic competition, such as basketball, will either be disappointed or accept that this game is something else entirely (as many have obviously done). Question: why on earth in a sim of athletic competition would there be issues of playing your players out of position, throwing games, tanking, etc.? Answer: there wouldn't be.

Easy way: Increase the salary floor.

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

Obviously all leagues under DII should be untouched on such a rule
You simply can't collect and hoard on the scraps available there
There are also a huge selection of countries with division II's that would fall into that.

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.

Unacceptable choices in a sim of athletic competition. In athletics one competes to win. In a sim of athletic competition it should be the same. This is not a game of athletic competition nor even the management of a competitive athletic team, as it purports to be. Anyone looking for a sim of athletic competition, such as basketball, will either be disappointed or accept that this game is something else entirely (as many have obviously done). Question: why on earth in a sim of athletic competition would there be issues of playing your players out of position, throwing games, tanking, etc.? Answer: there wouldn't be.

Look, I know you'd prefer the easy button mode where all you do is set one lineup and they play for you in perpetuity, and that therefore the team with the best roster (usually exactly equivalent to the most money and longest tenure) wins almost every time. But believe it or not, life isn't like that either - pitchers start one out of every four games, NHL goalies rarely if ever play both games of a back to back, European soccer (football) teams often play younger lineups in their Cup competitions and shuffle through more than their best XI plus five subs during the course of a couple weeks of competition.

But humor us: what does a "one lineup for every game" mode *ADD* to the game? How does it make it better, more fun, more challenging, more of anything other than placating your "everything has to make sense" fetish?