BuzzerBeater Forums

Every suggestions I read since the start of this season have the same goal: make the game easier. In my opinion it's not only the BB decisions who explains the decreasing interest, but the suggestions made upstream by the users.

Can we make it harder but be able to train twice as many players? Joemaverick you are a very good manager, do you think you'd make it to D1 in Belgium with an entirely homegrown team?

Now the market is high, it's impossible, even the old and well-managed teams have to tank some seasons to rebuild a good roster (except in the micronations of course).

Come on, when you have a 35 million roster you have the equivalent of 35 million cash AND the cash you have in the bank. With prices going up the 35 million also goes up and that means that whoever has higher value rosters is the least affected by inflation.

When Darkonza rebuilds for the first time in his life I'll be happy to entertain the discussion though.


Last edited by Lemonshine at 12/18/2016 3:20:00 PM

a manager as smart as you will have always an advantage if he has started the game before you. Always. Your suggestions will change the game, but won't help you.

You should know better than this. Because many of the top managers who are still in the game and won B3 and many titles in their nation emerged in the era of low prices and daytrading for a reason. This is the truth. We can name at least 4 relatively recent B3 winners for whom this is true.

So yeah, your statement is probably true now, but it wasn't necessarily the case 10 seasons ago. The changes that have been implemented make it a lot harder for new teams to catch up, because compared to 10-15 seasons ago a) you need a lot more cash to compete and b) it will take you ages to catch someone who has tens of millions invested in players just by generating new cash.

In a sense when players were dirt cheap bank accounts were almost irrelevant. What did you need 50 million back then when you could buy a very good team with 10? Cash and bank accounts became relevant when they decided that inflation was good for the economy and the long term prosperity of the game. It was obvious this would happen as much as it was obvious that the minute prices went up and you eliminated daytrading the users who had 50 million in the bank or tens of millions worth of players would benefit massively.

If a manager is smart it's easier to stay on top right now than it used to be when people could buy very good players on the cheap. At that time you could accumulate 30 million much faster, you could keep it in your bank without major penalties and 30 million would most definitely buy you a B3 contender (in fact B3 has been 'bought' with much less than $30 million as you surely know since you were in the competition when it happened and if you don't remember we can just ask Misagh)

Last edited by Lemonshine at 12/18/2016 4:12:39 PM

My suggestion would change the game and help new users immensely. And yes, long-term managers would eventually face more competition. If they are as talented as you've been with your team then they will rise to the top as well.

However, if you just want to keep the status quo because it benefits your team and other long term managers the most, that's fine. Just don't expect everyone to agree with you.

The game will continue to hollow out and the number of new users sticking around will keep dropping because the mechanics of the game are broken.

And have been for some time.

and now they arent going for big bucks? lol
croatian 18 y/o MVP went for 8M so...

And think how you would feel if you paid that and he got so devalued by new guys coming in next season with way more skills all of a sudden

I don't understand the rest of your post

Lol no it's probably my English which failed there.

My point is that in the past anyone could buy titles and since making money was a lot easier, it was also absolutely much easier to catch up. Maybe it was not sustainable in the long run but you could compete. I completely reject your idea that it's easier to catch up now. My point, albeit poorly stated, is that in the past it was easier for everyone to make a lot of money one way or another (now you can't daytrade, you got penalties of all kinds to income) , it was easier to keep that money (now you have a cap) and you didn't need much of that money to compete anyway.

Misagh is the perfect example of how you save, save, save and then compete. Only, instead of doing it at the national level he did it in the B3 a few times, but if he could do it at the B3 level anyone could have done it in its own national league. You are wrong thinking that for them it's harder now because of high prices. It's not the prices which make it harder for everyone to replicate that model, but all sorts of taxes and penalties, which, incidentally are also one of the causes of the high prices.

You can't use him as an exemple since he doesn't train, he day-trades. He must spend his life on TL.

So who do you want to use as an example? They killed buying titles ages ago, the hampered and then killed daytrading. I point at one manager who has been at the top of one of the hardest, if not the hardest, national league in BB for 15 seasons or so and you tell me no, you can't use him as an example? Who do you wanna use as an example? A lifetime D3 manager?

You said people have to rebuild. I pointed out that people with high value rosters don't need to do that if they keep the roster updated. Clearly, if you keep someone like Marshall until he's 34 for sentimental reasons it doesn't work. But if you roll sub 32yo players you can keep your roster at a similar level over time because they don't lose that much value. In an environment where talent is going down, you can stay on top even with a progressively worse roster, obviously. You are confusing your position of an old and ageing team with what I call a high value roster, filled with tier 1 relatively young talent. In fact if you say that your roster wasn't worth that much because the players were old, then you are a perfect example of how you could compete with a relatively low cost in the past.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 12/19/2016 6:44:45 AM