BuzzerBeater Forums

The game is ment to be based on player skills. If you add specialitys to them and make more things hidden and random, you create a mess. Where noone understand what was the reason behind win/loss. The game is already pretty complicated to new users. Old users will always adapt to any change, but these changes do not make the game better. It just makes the game really random. It will become a scouting frenzy, where everyone is mostly in the dark (even about info on your own team).
Ofcourse the older users, who already are familiar with the system, might handle the scouting frenzy (as there is no other good BB-management game). But the new users, who already struggle at the start of their careers without some proper mentoring, will rather quit than start to calculate all the different little additions to training speed, game performance etc.
This change is not good for the game. It would basically destroy the fundamentals of the game.
Edit: I just googled around a bit. When I started playing BB, there was another basketball manager game. I read it's user manual and surprise surprise a lot of the things suggested in the suggestion boards are in that game. I will not say the name, but I'm sure everyone can google it. Go play that game! I remembered looking at one my friends teams and saw it's crap with all the "set tactics by quarter" etc things. Perhaps it suits your needs better. GL.

Last edited by Kukoc at 12/9/2011 5:52:00 AM

Yeah, so why not leave it up to the manager to decide what he wants to know and how much he´ll pay for knowing it by making scouting points the key there?

i dont think a mess would be created but i agree it would be harder to "understand" the mechanics of the game and how precisely the probabilities work and so forth.

I guess i am in the minority but i think it spoils it a bit when people set out to quantify everything and all the interrelationships. Sure, a guide to it all is great and necessary for new managers - but the more that is revealed and is predictable the more i think some of the "magic" is lost.

And ok if personality, or more physical traits are introduced it would change managers views of what a "perfect" PG/SG/SF/PF/C whatever might look like and there would be no consensus, and even if there were a techinically correct answer given the match engine then the managers dont need to know it - the fun is experimenting and having the discussions privately and on the forums.

i agree that changes that make things more obscure, or reveal new things about players would have to be introduced carefully.

i havent looked in a couple years but im only aware of one other bball sim game but this one doesnt have personality/physical traits or anything that the other user posted to start this thread off. However, the fundamental idea isnt original (football management pc games and no doubt other online games utilise traits and things) but i just tried to apply this in an original way to this game and get some feedback. I apologise if my idea has already been introduced on another online basketball game in a similar way. (I will google later when i have some more time!)

i dont think that these traits need to have a plus and a minus to them, but if it was necessary in the interests of balance or whatever else then of course this would work too

i must admit i dont really know what new users expect when they start managing their own team ... but i think every manager would be different. Perhaps some would be scared off by less transparency of potential, or the need to scout, or having these hidden traits, or whatever. But i think some would see it as something exciting to learn about over time and experiment with.
If i were a new manager again and i was just told by a mentor "the best way to achieve x is to do y or z" then i would have missed out on a lot of fun during my time here. I might not have stayed.
As it happens i learned things by forum research, asking questions of other England managers, experimentation and trial and error. Im still learning now and ive been playing, i dunno 2 years? i would be more excited if there were more unknowns for each of my players.

Im a bit disappointed that there havent been any responses that have been really enthusiastic and trying to turn any negatives that others come up with into positives, or suggesting some different traits/characteristics.

Its a really nice idea - at least to discuss and let our imaginations free for now! :)

perennial allstar 2/48 (very few guys around salary 50k tops, maybe highest skill possible 14)

Seriously? Who needs those 18yo-s, when I can draft 21yo, 50k, U21 player. With this system there is no more of "you have to train that great draftee or sell him in order to benefit from drafting him". There is no incentitive for lower division teams to train at all, as higher division teams just draft the same players the lower divisions would train for a season/two/three.
Completely utter crap suggestion.

As I stated in one of Pinis gazillion threads, I do think that different levels / rules for different leagues would not help in the overall gameplay sense. I do think that the option of drafting "20 / 21 year olds" is intriguing, but I don´t think you should be able to grad a player who will dominate your league / league level just by getting a lucky pick. The conclusion of the two thoughts (same rules for everyone, not too dominant players) makes your concept hard to swallow.

Won´t you agree that the current concept of Potential (and its´ distribution) is key to the overall problem?

Its a manager game, not a player creator game. It has elements of player creation, but basically its metagaming and sacrificing your franchise to make the player. the player himself is a robot you build 1 point at a time...which has absolutely no realism to it at all...especially when you consider the whole minutes at X position requirement, anyway- nothing to do with the real game world of basketball.

Ever been to any of the "training is late" threads? Or especially the "no pops this week, there is a bug" threads? People love their weekly dose of precious pops. I don't think it is an aspect of the game that can be sacrificed for added realism.

The second thread/message I opened after writing that previous message: (204426.12). :-)

Other statements have been adressed already.

So like a 5ball, depending on skill distribution would probably have around 35k salary, but maybe as high as 50k...and players trained steadily from 18 would actually be better

You are aware that 3 seasons of training is 10 months in real time. You are skipping this for higher divisions and leaving the lower divisions with no gain. You need to understand that all real life things do not work in an online game. NBA does not have divisions, does not have different countrys.
I just don't get it. How can you be bored already, to try to completely ruin the game with some of your suggestions. I remember when you started this game. Agressive daytrading (I know because you were one of the teams I constantly monitored and reported your obvious overpriced transfers). Perhaps you are not the type of player that can play a "slow" improvement game. Perhaps you do not have fun in your micronation.
You should determine the problem. Think what consequences your suggestion has (to every player in this community, not just top division). I think you should pursue ideas about merging micronations if you think the game is boring. I agree everyone should have a challenge playing this game. Then again, faced with a true challenge you might be here again, talking about how it's impossible to move up, divI teams should be punished harder and lower divs need to get more income etc. I guess we will not find it out soon enough.