BuzzerBeater Forums

#4 Design. The game is decent but has some flaws, GE imbalance, league balance, economic balance. Addressing the first 3 issues need to happen though I think before design changes can be done. no point in a good design if game is unstable (#1), can't develop WELL without resources (#2, if they add new stuff on limited budget, they create more #1 problems), changes are never met well by all good PR is needed for the release of any major change and the buggy period usually following (#3).

All the issues you raise, allthough I agree with them, fall in #4, there is some other things that realistically BB needs to wrangle (#1 probably they have gotten under control now) before they can address nuts and bolts issues.

ITs a ticking time bomb now though because the bulk of the user base has learned the game as is, we are learning more about ins and outs of economy and GE, and that gets boring. As time progresses without chagne people get bored and leave, word-of-mouth which is a big tool for BB early on (I came word-of-mouth myself) is hit hard by stagnation, killing their promotability. and stuff.... so #4 may be low on a list of things to do, but its kinda like eating, still very very important (just maybe not as important as breathing and drinking water etc.)

The game in the last few seasons (the ones I had been part of) had performance issues, but that is not what changed my opinion about it.
Having a training delay, is annoying, but much less than knowing that there is a wall that cannot be passed.

Every product has bugs. Competitiveness is the main problem (bug) of this game, and not the performance issue. [Which is surely even less a factor this season while there is still no growth,, as I wrote before].

I'd suggest that mismanagement of nations with fewer users than 100, and the reticence in improving basic mechanics for new user entry have a far greater impact than any problem regarding "ebay players".
This game loses more new members than it retains, merely because of the situation many new users get thrown into.

This is the third point that mainly focused on the competitiveness issues this game has.

A user who gets to a no-chance situation, and more accurate - something that is merely defined upon the date he joined the game - will leave it.
A user who will play against BOTs that just play awful will get bored and leave the game.

I think that part of the case why the competitiveness is not addressed is that the BBs are also playing the game and not just developing it, and hence its affect their observation of the issue.
It is a psychological known that being part of something affects the desicion one makes.

Is this really a thread to give out suggestion that will help the game grow above 50k or a new thread for you to yet again go against everything everyone says and then just pointing to another suggestion you made?
It sure seems to be about the second part. And if so this thread probably can be closed as we seen it all before.
If you actually start a thread like this you better be open minded to what others have to say and not just throw it away like garbage.

You know that the BBs will look at the content is written (if they actually looking at this forum), and all the tryouts to pull suggestion that some users don't like it, and those users are a very small group, will just be ignored.

No one is blocking you for suggesting relevant alternatives about the topic - what causes this game not to grow, and what could be done.
And please don't add something like - changing the name of the game, using a button that creates a buzzer, and other non-relevant suggestions.

Not supprisingly - for improving the game and growing its community there is needed a drastic change on it.

What will happen in case of a salary-cap?
The richer teams will have less money to invest. They may do it more wisely, but that could have done also prior of the cap, so on any case, it means their team would be worse, and the league they are playing at will be more competiive.
This is the same idea that had been used when David Stern added this rule to the NBA on his first season as the commisioner.
No one could argue about his success with that (as well as other sport that posses this rule).
More competitiveness, less users will leave the game due to it.

Why does a luxury-cap is needed?
A luxury-cap assist by giving some small margin for the richer teams to use their extra money for being better while strengthening the other teams while doing so (by the tax they are paying them).
In BB it will assist by allowing those teams to compete a little better in the B3.
The same idea that the NBA had just added this summer is the right way to do it - the tax should be incremental.
This will make the BB-managing desicions more interesting and different then they are currently are.
More interest in the game, less users to leave due to it.

Why all BB-nations needs to have a similar size?
It is less meaningfull at the BB-nation level, but a small BB-nation makes it easier for a team there to pile money and then win a B3 title (as we saw on the last seasons).
A top team that has no competition "in house" would welcome a real competition in the B3 tournament.
How can it be done?
The NBA unites teams from different part in the USA (which is basically a continent size).
Tournament on other Internet-games are divided with no relation to the actual nation a user is from.
So (one) of the solution is to unite and break the BB-nation upon size and not upon real-nation.

There is a single world they are all part of - the BB world.
The BB world does not need to look like the real-world.

So (one) of the solution is to unite and break the BB-nation upon size and not upon real-nation.

There is a single world they are all part of - the BB world.
The BB world does not need to look like the real-world.

I believe that doing something like this would be the death knell of the game.

What will happen in case of a salary-cap?
The richer teams will have less money to invest. They may do it more wisely, but that could have done also prior of the cap, so on any case, it means their team would be worse, and the league they are playing at will be more competiive.
This is the same idea that had been used when David Stern added this rule to the NBA on his first season as the commisioner.
No one could argue about his success with that (as well as other sport that posses this rule).
More competitiveness, less users will leave the game due to it.

it is not always more wisely to spend on fewer salary, when you make a bigger initial investment(+ a bigger decline in player value). With a salary cap it would be the way to go, so those salary optimated player get more expensiv and people who buy championship today will also do it in the future. So the same competiveness, a big rumble in the market which will p*** off users. And big problems with demotions and promotions who cause problems, and that lead usually to less users.

The problem with the less competivness as you call it is also a artefact from the past, and is solving itself atm.

Also i doubt, that a online game, with very limited possibilities of interaction will have a future with your weird merging of nations. Even if i overall agree, that merging some nations together will help a lot, but this should be done with looking at languages, tip off times etc. that you could interact with your league mates and your "BB-nation".

I don't like the thread that much, since it brings nothing new and just makes it necessary to explain stuff the X time.

Last edited by CrazyEye at 4/11/2012 3:46:37 AM