BuzzerBeater Forums

:)))))))
Thanks
I've been playing this for years, didn't catch that.
I thought it may have something to do with the game changes.
Thx again.

After a few B3 games this season, I can now play with lvl9 stamina starters without seing them all exhausted during the majority of the 4th qt, and all of this no matter the subs' skills... So thanks for this improvement cause it was really annoying !

Now, will there be any economical update following all the last changes which have enhanced training and are now pushing us to have larger rosters ?
The market of +200k$ salary players has already plummeted and I know some managers who want to stop training for NT considering how it has become a financial black hole.
I'm afraid we won't see as many crazy profiles as the ones who have been created the last 10 seasons, and that NT will mostly be provided by farms within a few seasons. And I don't see this as an improvement for BB.

There should be a financial adjustment, such as lowering player salaries or enhancing each league revenues. To me, the best would be to enhance TV contracts by let's say 20%, which would not be much but would be enough to give all of us a bit of financial breathing to help training/keeping NT players and having a deeper roster. Of course, any financial boost should be followed by a similar increase of the player salaries floor, so that it doesn't boost tanking effect.

Well yes I know. We've already talked about it in another thread on march (313922.3)

Question isn't who's the first to talk about it but will BBs do something about it ? So far I haven't seen any answer coming from them. And we agree it's an important matter

After a few B3 games this season, I can now play with lvl9 stamina starters without seing them all exhausted during the majority of the 4th qt, and all of this no matter the subs' skills... So thanks for this improvement cause it was really annoying !

That's a nice step but I still think that there's a long way to go.

In a 7-men rotation, backups are only playing around 8' per position (around 9' if the starters' staminas are lower), which means 40' on average for each starter. It's still not worth having really good subs if the 3-position sub will only play 22-24' and the 2-position sub 16-18' on average.

Last edited by Darkonako at 5/19/2022 7:20:01 AM

If all the teams get the same extra revenue, then I don't see how it could do nothing but decrease the gap between each team.

The idea of the +10% could be a good first step but I'm not sure it would be enough.

If the game isn't close or if the starters have a bit less stamina, then subs play even more.
If you have a sub as good as two starters and huge stamina, then I guess the best solution would be a BLU on these two positions so that minutes are quite equally shared. But it wouldn't solve the problem on the 5 positions

The current minutes' repartition seems acceptable though. Well at least it saves us from exhaustion while there are subs that are identified.

Last edited by slamdunk9 at 5/19/2022 7:52:25 AM

I might be a little bit bias since I have one very high salary player in my team. But if we think about real life sports the top players can bring so much merch income that it completely covers their salary and more. For example, Messi and Ronaldo in football, their salaries are easily covered and more for the teams by the shirt sales.

I'm not saying BB should have the salary of the best player 100% compensated but I think at least 50% in total would be realistic while not being game breaking. With homegrown boost, NT boost, top scorer lists etc. my personal guess is that around 30-40% of the salary is now covered. Bump that up by 20% or more and we will have serious competition of these top players.

The bigger the benefit, the more competition it would create for these top salary players. I don't think this would cause more gap between the top and lower rank teams since anyone can train one high salary player for themselves or even for sale. Since the prices would go up, it would be easier to go from rags to riches as a new manager just by training one or two NT caliber players. And the top teams would have to spend more money to buy the top salary players since their price would go up.

In a 7-men rotation, backups are only playing around 8' per position (around 9' if the starters' staminas are lower), which means 40' on average for each starter. It's still not worth having really good subs if the 3-position sub will only play 22-24' and the 2-position sub 16-18' on average.

I'd argue that it might be. If the sub and the starter have similar quality, that means that the sub would perform better than the starters (due to stamina skill decay) in those 22-24/16-18 mins he is on the court. There's always the risk of injury/foul-out that those subs cover as well.

Of course, it will be even better if further adjustments are made, so that the subs could spend a little more time in play, say 28-32 for three positions and 20-24 for two positions. That would bring the starters' minutes to ~37-38 which would be ideal.

I still believe the best way to counter short rosters is via GS, of course.