BuzzerBeater Forums

That was an extreme that we dont want to see again, and this is an extreme to the other direction.

(y) Finally! I agree!
I wonder how long do we need to wait for some other people to realise this too. The people who erased FA when prices spiked for example, the people who said FA had no effect then but was responsible for creating the super-low prices environment, people who reject any suggestion of using small changes in training speed to affect the quality of players in the game ecc. Imagine home grown teams able to get into D1 in a competitive country because you can train enough players for yourself...

Regarding blank lineups i think that a lot of people in this game are glad that option is gone. Now at least managers has to set their lineup for games. I have to say it was really silly to not have to do that and get an edge over those that did.

What we wanted from blanks was the substitution pattern, not the possibility of the game setting the lineup for you, but Marin was not able to separate the 2 things. To this day nobody really knows why LCD and blanks had a different substitution pattern than LCD with no blanks and Marin hasn't been able to deliver any other change or fix other bugs (like reserves not playing in a Garbage Time game in CPfDC) except for removing stuff altogether...

Last edited by Lemonshine at 12/10/2016 6:26:10 AM

It's not only to blame though as the lowering user numbers have had it's fair share to do with it to.

Agreed, the number drop was the main issue, other policies like FA just made it worse. I hope that you're right and now the BBs see this as a tool to balance the available talent in the game (ie. numbers increasing = loose policy because you need more players for more teams, numbers decreasing = tight policy as the number of retired players soars).

Sadly i think that we will have to live with the sub patters as they are. It seems as changing them includes doing big changes in to actual GE, and changing that seems like a LOT of work and time needed.

Yes and I can respect that.

Market is completely fudged right now. A good rookie costs north of 5 million. How can that be a desired state of the game?

Market is completely fudged right now. A good rookie costs north of 5 million. How can that be a desired state of the game?

It has always been like that. However I do agree that it's not desired. Now, there will always be some team willing to put lot of money to buy draftees and follow them from day one up to the NT. Some are trying to manage training NT players and success, but some others are only interested in training players and produce a lot of money on the side.

Top rookies went for like 2 million seasons ago. How is that even fair?

If you want to pick the cherries... whatever. That does not change the problem.

I dint mean removing blank linups was a bad move. Personally never used that. I just meant that it created additional demand on the players and no move was made to balance it. Small changes like that, tightening fa rules threw transfer market out of balance and no action is being taken to fix it. Also adding utopia created more demand. The way I see it is teams are quitting now (also new teams that were brought here lately thanks to more advertising) because they are not able to purchase players. Supply cant meet the demand and at the moment that should be number one priority to fix imo.