BuzzerBeater Forums

Not for players already drafted, who are seeing a % deducted.

Taking an agent's % on drafted players is just a tax on top of the cost to scout, bit overkill maybe?

Only the last phrase... Until now it was more than easy, you buy a mediocre player and you put an higher basis price, that's all. I didn't because I think this is a basketball game, because I've to work and because I think is not fair to get money "stealing" from noobs. When I saw that a player wasn't so good for my team I've re-sold him and every time I make some $.

LET THERE BE DOOM! ;)

This is supposed to be a basketball simulation... Well, now picture this: Let's say, Kevin Garnett is transfered from Boston to Chicago for 30 million dollars... 3 days later, he is transfered to Detroit for 35... Another 3 days after that, he's sold to Milwaukee for 40 millions... Realistic??? I don't think so...

I don't have problems with someone having a lot of money, but I do with daytrading... It's ugly to see your transfer record... You can buy a player, train him for some time and then sell him... That's more realistic...

And just as GMs like to say, BuzzerBeater is a long term game... So, why would someone try to get rich over night??? That's not even fun... You don't have a team, you have a players-market... I come, see your players, OK, I like that one with the blue eyes, I'll take him... It just doesn't seem right...

Your whole post is kind off irrelevant, since everyone knows what DT's are doing. A few even mentioned that you even need a bit of skill for daytrading. I even pointed out that when daytraders are there, there is no possibilty to get a cheap buy, because daytraders will pick that player, buy it and sell it for more. So nobody says something about daytraders asking to much.

It's just total nonsense to say 'try it yourself'. Lets compare that to the reality with a small example. Cocaine dealers are making millions of dealing. Almost everyone agrees that dealing isn't right, but still everyone knows it's happening. Don't say everyone should just accept that and try cocaine dealing themselves, because you will be rich when you are a good dealer, but you will be poor when you aren't a good dealer and you will go to jail etc. So 'try it yourself' is just nonsense.



Edited by PatjeBono (12/19/2007 2:04:43 AM CET)

Last edited by BB-Patrick at 12/19/2007 2:04:43 AM

So 'try it yourself' is just nonsense.

So is comparing day trading to selling coke. I see where you're going here (and I don't necessarily disagree), but that's not really a fair analogy.

Edited by GM-BadLarry (12/19/2007 2:25:03 AM CET)

Last edited by ReDonkulous at 12/19/2007 2:25:03 AM

DT on BB > or < than dealing Coke...mmmm

Now come on... we are talking about a minority of players who were heavily speculating on player prices in a very volatile market.....and you have yet to concede that there are risks taken....

I prefer the analagy of investing into emerging markets... Brazil, India, China etc Everyone with a decent size portfolio probably has exposure to them in some shape or form... the average Joe sees, reads and wants to get involved when the economies are bullish but doesnt... not because he cant because he is afraid. He sees the double digit returns but cant bring himself to modify his portfolio. Now any financial advisor would forewarn him against doing it with his whole portfolio as if it blows up he has nothing. So in BB terms where we all start with the same money to risk your whole roster/money/results/fan attendence is pretty ballsy and although it is an irrational decision it is a decision where the rewards justify the risk.

You and others morally or not have actually just not been prepared to take the risk and think any old manager can do it. Well i'd be willing to bet that alot of the recent Bot teams started - werent too chuffed with their starting roster and then decided to have a go at DT... and then there team got into even more financial difficulties then they gave up.

Hindsight is such a wonderful thing and instead of praising you are simply jumping on the it isnt fair bandwagon and taking the higher moral ground of saying how you could never be drawn into such a thing. Is it fair that alot of teams start and give up too easily or lose interest?

Lord of Doom and to a lesser extent myself have openly admitted that its not what we set out to do and we have not set out to try and justify our approach... simply pointing out (and i think he raised a couple of very valid points..) that there are more than the 'you' and 'us' camps.

If you are emotionally attached to your stocks/funds/investments then sadly you will normally underperform the market. I like the majority of my players - sure. But if someone wants to offer me 200k more than i paid - am i going to take it? In most cases yes. You cannot even start to try to figure out the reasoning behind why someone will pay more. If that manager isnt cheating by dumping money that is simply his perceived value of a player. If you arent prepared to list yours for the reasons above or because you are afraid you cant find a suitable replacement then that is you being scared of the underlying potential inflation in the market.

One of the first HT threads i read was this is a money game BASED on football. BB in my eyes is an Economy game admittedly more heavily BASED on Basketball. For a lover of football and sports and being impartial about BB I think this game has the potential to be more addictive than HT - but lets not hide behind the fact this is a young game and everyone cant make the same decisions about the good of their team.

I don't know why everyone insists on over-complicating the issue.

There are 2 issues:

1). Realism
-as a simulator I assume that the game wants to be as close as possible to being realistic. Day Trading is not even close to being a realistic element of professional basketball.

2). Competition
-there are a million and one games on the internet that are dominated by those who are the most active. Since this is supposed to be considered a strategy game a player should be able to succeed with normal activity levels as long as he has sound strategy. While I concede that DT is sound strategy it eliminates any other strategy from effectiveness and means that once again only the people with the most available time can compete. If this is fine with the developers than so be it, but I have been involved in other games that were largely abandoned (except for the hyper active element) over similar issues.

As I have stated before...I am waiting to see if I will have a fair chance at competing in this game, or if it is simply going to be automatically dominated by those who have the most time, before I become a supporter, and this is a key issue, if not THE key issue. If I lose because people ran a better team then me, fine, but I don't want to automatically be a low division team because I cannot Day Trade and there is no other tactic as effective.

IF THIS S INDEED A MONEY GAME SIMPLY BASED AROUND BASKETBALL THEN PLEASE LET ME KNOW ASAP SO I CAN FIND A DIFFERENT GAME. I want a game that takes all factors into account, not just who can raise the most money. Hell the Knicks are still the most valuable franchise in the NBA, but who would want to be them right now?

True enough I suppose lol, but I bet you would still rather be with a different team.

This is an excellent post, I think, especially the last paragraph.

If this game is going to evolve into a game of buying and selling players like commodities, then I hope it fails.

If it is going to be about training hoopers and setting a smart gameplan, then it will be my favorite game, because I know a lot about hoop and have loved it my whole life.

I am already a SUPPORTER because an internet game about hoops is something I will enthusiastically support, but if it collapses into a game where the haves buy their trophies and the havenots quit, then consider me a one-and-done member.

Edited by somdetsfinest (12/19/2007 9:35:52 AM CET)

Last edited by somdetsfinest at 12/19/2007 9:35:52 AM

well then the next step is to place a limit on the amount of transfers per season....maybe starting with an amount so people can juggle their opening squad and then after 1 season reducing further to a sensible annual amount

surely this can be imposed pretty quickly and that will surely satisfy the masses and put this to bed?

Edited by Superfly Guy (12/19/2007 10:20:44 AM CET)

Last edited by Superfly Guy at 12/19/2007 10:20:44 AM