BuzzerBeater Forums

How did you get the money to buy that player Manon? Did you train 3 guys for 5 seasons sold them and reinvested in that guy? Did you flat out tank for 2+ seasons? I'm just curious, because I have seen players sold for over 10 million when investigating for cheating and that's not an amount who can possibly be obtained in either way in the current economic environment.

My guess is that people made money through trading, as there was no penalty to GS, no taxes, no limit to reselling within the week ecc ecc. Maybe they made money also through cheating as it was more difficult to notice with a higher number of users and with prices out of control. This means that the cash from new teams not only was more, but also circulated more.

Trading has been severely hampered, therefore in order to afford a $1.5 million price tag today you will likely need more time. Tell me if there is anything you think is incorrect here.

Moving up in ranks has been close to impossible for years

Then again, this game was modelled after HT. In HT the differences in economy between top and lower leagues is nowhere near the differences we have here and you do see D2 teams as good or better than D1 teams. The promotion/demotion system should be modelled after Utopia if that's deemed to be a success, but perhaps the income differences between league levels should also be reduced so that it's easier for newly promoted teams to fight for survival after they promote.

In the long run we have to consider merging countries or remodeling the whole league structure thing. Austria was a nice country when we still had around 80-100 Teams. Now we are approaching less than 50 teams and its becoming pretty boring.

But then again with the raising Prices top Teams are even less under risk to get demoted. $1 mil won't buy you the Player that will win you enough games to compete for 5th place. Back in the day you could buy a top C and two bench Players for that amount.

I've long been suspecting that this theory that prices were as high in the early seasons of BB as they are today, so vehemently supported by some people, is just comparing apples and oranges. It does not stand to reason that people were able to afford $10m+ players if the conditions were the same as today.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 6/11/2015 9:47:35 AM

Young high potential players who are retiring - yeah, it's a shame, but these players would go to those teams with enough money anyway, not to those teams who are complaining that they can not buy a super player for 400k (while actually that was never possible to do). So I don't think it affects lower level teams that much, just sayin'.

I think the new system may affect lower level teams the most. Like you said, most of those teams wouldn't be able to afford young high potential players. However with this new system, players that these teams would usually target (older, lower salaried, mid-skilled players) are almost all retiring.

Based on the new free agents shown on this thread, it seems that most high skilled, high salary players don't retire, even if they are quite old so high level teams should actually be less affected by the new FA system.


Last edited by Mountaineer at 6/11/2015 3:02:32 PM

Couple of interesting points raised in this thread:

Based on the new free agents shown on this thread, it seems that most high skilled, high salary players don't retire, even if they are quite old so high level teams should actually be less affected by the new FA system.

It's interesting, isn't it, that the new FA system benefits the upper level teams more than the lower level teams. One would think they would try to do something to retain customers in the levels where there are the most customers.

(From a different post): "teams who are complaining that they can not buy a super player for 400k..." Interesting also that someone has to completely misrepresent the discussion in order to try to make a point.