BuzzerBeater Forums

Very good idea.

Teams should not be able to set a line up default or other wise with less then 5 players.

Teams should not be able to set a line up default or other wise with less then 5 players.

Would really make the games between tankers, a more genuine contest and potentially could really test their managerial skills

But people could still get 5 garbage players and play them every game. In that case, people would still tank, but would lose a small portion of profit from the extra 2 players they would have to have.

Losing by heaps should kill your fan survey and in turn kill your attendance.

Whilst I would welcome many of the changes that have been suggested in this thread, I'm not sure expecting them to happen this coming season is realistic.

I agree.....And NO BLANK LINE UPS EITHER. They take the fun out of setting a line up.

If you don't enjoy using a blank lineup, then you are free not to.

That's not the point.....Choosing what position to play which player and who to use as back ups should be part of the game for ALL managers. Putting 12 players in the box and leaving everything else blank should not be an option. If they wanted to make the game harder, if they wanted teams to actually scout the team they are playing next, if they wanted to make BB a game like chess again instead of this checkers imposter we have now.....it would be easy...NO BLANK LINE UPS. Make setting your line up something you have to think about for more than 30 seconds. As of now...It's just LI/MTM and the best 10 GS I have on my team and click the set line up button. That is silly and a reason the numbers are falling. I can play chess for hours but I lose all interest in checkers after about 5 minutes.....So let's make BB more like a game of chess where it is two minds battling each other, not the Game AI battling itself.

Well, there is a lot of thought and preparation put into making a roster that can successfully play a blank lineup. In that respect, it's no different than a team who sets actual positions.

You're making the assumption that teams who play blank lineup, play it every single game. I don't think that's true. People do scout opponents to decide if a blank is worthwhile, and then balance it with other needs of their team.

You seem to assume that people who use blank lineup never set any positions. That's not true. Many teams may blank only some positions, after making the exact same tactical decisions a non-blanking team does.

You're making the assumption that teams who set their positions, actually switch things around a lot. I don't think that's true. Many teams run the same players out in the same positions no matter what.

You seem to assume that there's no downside to using blank lineups. Well, managing minutes can be somewhat more variable, and getting consistent minutes in certain positions (for training) is more variable. So managers are making a strategic tradeoff when selecting this option.

I wouldn't really care so much, except for the fact that many of the substitution patterns don't seem to work correctly. If choose from depth chart or DC until 4th worked well, then maybe people wouldn't turn to using blanks.

The issue about LI/M2M is being addressed through changes in the GE and in salary/cap costs.

Lastly, if you're just setting LI/M2M and blank, then that's your problem. If you don't like it, don't do it. If you're bored with LI, construct a different team (JBBL seems like a place where you could get away with testing stuff. Really, that doesn't seem so hard to understand. If you want to mix things up, use different strategies, nothing is stopping you.

Thanks for telling me, what I should think is fun and not fun. I appreciate it, very much. Even if I don't use Blank Line-ups or if I do.