BuzzerBeater Forums

the game when viewed on its own merits is a quite a bit better now than it was in 2010. Since that time there have been a lot of upgrades and fixes made to make it better. There's obviously still room for improvement in many areas, but when viewed in a vacuum I don't think it's fair to say that the game is actually worse now.

Acutally I think the game is a lot worse than 2010.

In 2010 tactics, salary formula and many other things were not fully figrured out, we had more managers and a much better experience overall - the game viewer was state of the art and the game was much easier to play. The few tweaks that have been made in the meanwhile have been of mixed success I would say and the only major upgrade (Utopia) is a borderline fail in my opinion.

The game has become really hard to endure - especially for new users it's a huge drag and thats why like 99,9% quit during the first few weeks. It's no fun to play a full year until you can buy a semi-decent declining old fudge. What's the point in this? Give the people something to cheer about.

Also the tendency to shy away from big changes, just because someone could be offended (micromerger) is a bit awkward - maybe that's why Utopia has become such a lukewarm compromise - it was the least controversial change...

What affected the most new users is the lack of other new users. Before, when you started, there was many other newcomers to compete with. It's not the case anymore.

What you say is true, but even if you join a low league - like I did in Utopia, there is no fun in starting out. Its a huge drag until you win your first game. We discussed many times that newbies need like 1-3 seasons of pure bot bashing to remain interested long enough before they get gangbanged by grandfathered teams. You can't even buy a player (except scrubs) these days as a new team.

I do agree on the fact that there is a fear of big changes (even though Utopia was one, no matter how it's presented and I think it was/is a success). However, any gripe that an user have about BB will suddenly become the biggest reason people are leaving according to that user. We saw that with the discussion about micro-merging and many other changes. What's happening is the fear to lose a lot of users, before possibly gaining more than what was lost, and thus slowly losing some is the default choice.

In my opinion the way it goes its a business decision - the way the game is running the profit is decreasing, but seems to be a better choice than investing some money and redsigning a game. Basically the cow will be milked until death. Okay.

Not merging nations because a handful of users from micronations went buckwild is a bad move. From a business standpoint those nations never contributed financially. So losing them is really no risk. As there is no comparable game to BB, there is no risk losing the players to a competitor either. So even if sb. is pissed with such a move, whether or not he/she quits or not makes no difference.

BBs what you have to say about this?

Last edited by NightWalker at 10/12/2016 1:37:15 PM

We still have money to spend. We are currently between campaigns but when we launch the next one, we'll let you know.

Swing for the fences, do something big! Don't waste your money on advertising.

We still have money to spend. We are currently between campaigns but when we launch the next one, we'll let you know.

Right now one could get the impression that you ripped the players off by scamming some donation money from them. What's going on with the game? With Ryan gone BBs future looks very bad, communication died down completely.