BuzzerBeater Forums

bump threads? pls explain

I think it would be better if you were payed by the week and the teams that played best that week get the most money for sponsors and it still has to do with games, but all teams have a fair chance at making money.

If you win games more people come to your arena. Pointless to make it by week anyway because you might have 2 outsiders one week and 2 top notch teams next week in the long run it is still decided then as a seasonal money + strong teams play better and get more money = same with arena no need for additional source of cash...

I support that idea. Sponsors, yes. But not only stupid random "you've signed a 10k/month sponsor contract" each season. Create numbers of names (real or fantasy, doesn't matter) for sponsors and let managares choose offers. F.E. McDonalds offers 2-year contract for 50k for season but there are 3 better offers and the manager can make a decision of his own. Moreover, because of the fact that sponsors would polarize even further distinctions between financial status of higher and lower league teams, it would be good to add to the sponsors' offers some restrictions. Company X gives you Y amount of money this year, but they expect you to achieve goal Z this season. The higher league, the bigger expectations from sponsors - it's totally understood, beacuse more money given to bigger clubs put sponsors in position to make strict requirements. Not fulfilling the conditions of contract can effect even in turning down the contract and again - the higher league, the more violent and serious sponsor decisions.

That's definitely a great idea and just must be put into the game, because without that BB won't be even "quite" realistic game. I'm astonished reading your 'i don't like it' opinions. When a useful and realistic thing is a 'no, no", explain how the heck you accepted the idea of every week salary raise for staff. How it is suppose to play with the reality? Payment raising every week. Some kind of Eden or something. Lol.

I also think there are some possibilities with the expansion of sponsoring with running contracts.

Some ideas:
- The better your PR Guy, better offers are given.
- reliability of sponsors: the companies get a reliability number between 1 and 5. Low rank companies have the risk of going bankrupt while they are sponsoring you.
=> end of contract + less income when going bankrupt.
=> high level PR guys bring more reliable sponsors.

The basic sponsoring is for every team equal. You get a reliable company lvl4-5 giving you a fixed sum of cash: nothing spectacular, comparable with present system. (= if you don't like the new implementation, nothing changes for you)

You fail to understand that you have arena construction... and everything in a "GAME" can not be realistic, in real life you can not construct more seats in areana over a week also. You just want to add an unnessesary source of income that is based on results like attendance in arena. Now what I like about arena is that you can manage your prices or you can invest in building and get higher profit later. With sponsors there would be just another luck factor on which sponsors you manage to get and infair advantage over the teams in your league...
As you can see in a "GAME" there is a need of raising you staff salary or there would be no need to change them ever again after you buy one. Players will always be changed because of age and skills. You have enough things you can manage in this game that generates income and is afected by your skills decisions we do not need random luck factors here and if you give similar teams the same chances on choosing a sponsor it will just turn out as another income raise for all teams which just raises the amount of income for everybody in game.

So change it. Possibility to enlarge the arena in any time of season is totally unrealistic and it isn't compulsory to have that possibility. THEN change it into possibility to rebuild it only in some let's say three weeks between seasons.

Everything in a game cannot be realistic, however, it should be as much realistic as possible. Poeple want realism in games. We don't live in 80's. And if there is a possibility to put a sponsor factor into the BB, it should be done. It complicates the game - sure; it makes it harder to the newbies - sure. But wait a second? Life is easy? Being a manager is easy? Playing a new game is supposed to be easy? NO!

Talking about the coach issue.

"there is a need of raising you staff salary or there would be no need to change them ever again after you buy one"

Some trainers work in real teams for more than ten years. I mean, basketball teams. In football it goes even further than "more than ten years". But okay! Trainers should be changed to make the game harder, but not just for that. Trainers in real world don't become more expensive with every week, but they become leff effective. Because of lots of reasons. They're bored of the city, the team, players etc. What THAT has in common with the EVERY WEEK payrise? It was okay before, staff were becoming weaker, just as in real life. It wasn't perfect, because they could get weaker in the middle of the season, but better. Closer to reality. Now we have some total fantasy.

Again - sponsors: YES.

Sponsors - no

They add nothing to the basketball part of the game. They merely increase the complexity of managing the franchise's accounts. It's an economic feature for features' sake.

They add nothing to the basketball part of the game.

yeah, but, isn't BB a basketball management game?

IMO, sponsors should be added here... because it add up to the reality of being able to manage a successful BB team.

They add nothing to the basketball part of the game.

yeah, but, isn't BB a basketball management game?

IMO, sponsors should be added here... because it add up to the reality of being able to manage a successful BB team.

I agree with el macca - this is a change for the sake of change, and doesn't really add any true substance to the game, and would unnecessarily complicate the game, especially for newer users.

I can think of many things that would be more fruitful for the development team to work on.

you mean this suggestion doesn't even qualify to be put on the suggestion "wish-list"?