BuzzerBeater Forums

Ok Moderators, sorry if it seems I'm posting in two places including in the B3 thread, it seemed more active recently and I started posting there, then i found out 5 more replies came here so I do intend to best that I can to put it all in one place so from now on descriptions and notes on the format I will put here, responses on posts put in B3 I'll put there, I will put just this one message i posted in B3 also because I think it's important to acknowledge here

I put in database the list of all the countries in BuzzerBeater and the number of users for each country. Total of 50822 users are online. That means if 16834 users will be part of worldwide competition, 33% of the total users would be able to compete as part of it. So you look at a country like Spain with 5462 users, 33% of it is 1809 users. League I has 16, II has 64, III has 256, IV has 1024, and V has 4096. So you have all the I,II,III, IV qualify that's 1360 users right there. If you take take all those that made the finals in div V that's 512 in addition to 1360 users that's 1872. You usually will get a number that's more or less than the % indicates, but maybe if you get more technical about it then you can tweak a way to exactly get the best 1809 teams rather than have complaints about some countries have more/less users than the % which I know would happen and become a controversy, but if you come to think about it the inequality is even greater right now with B3 in the current settings.

The smallest country which is Barbados has 3 users, 33% of that is 1 users and that makes it so even in the smallest country of all countries, the uneven issue that B3 currently has won't be a problem in this, Bahamas (no offense sorry if taken) which had lowest rank representative in B3 was 12299 (according to season 14 B3 1st round rank) which fits just fine in the 16834 of best teams as opposed to the 144 teams in B3.

I personally don't think that anything really should be changed except to just add the worldwide competition. That means that if 1/3 of the teams play worldwide competition then yes 1/3 of the teams would have for at least 1 week up to 4 games a week. Thankfully this is lots of lines of computer code and not real life players, so playing many times a week and traveling half way across the world each week isn't an issue. It's more about the demand from real users so you know if you had 7 games a week it would be too demanding. Change in GS minutes can help but it's not that necessary and worth not doing it considering the drastic change it would require to compensate 4 games a week. Keep in mind thou that it's not 4 games a week for 14 weeks, by week 4 or 5, most of the teams would go back to the normal 2+Scr schedule after elimination, at least 3 games. To some 4 games a week might seem too much, or too little, but what's awesome about it, is that if you are the top 33% in the world then you must enjoy BB enough to want 4 games a week, those that don't get involved as much still get the regular current schedule, so it more opportunity for fun.

I do think that national tourneys and B3 should all stay the same, many love their national tournament too much that I can practically guarantee it won't be removed and its current settings in according to schedule relative to country size is fairest from participation and finance. I love that B3 did the new format that all teams play 8 games, it extends for everyone financial gain for 8 weeks to compensate lack of revenue might receive in the alternative of participating in the worldwide competition. I think B3 is great because there needs to be something that stands out that addresses the best play the best to stretch the competition, that's why they exist in the real world so I'm supportive of B3 as it is right now. Overall I'm trying to focus on making only the necessary changes that won't be too unstable modification by BB.

Last edited by Coach_Gil at 1/5/2011 12:15:33 PM

Paper was suggesting elimination the nationl tourneys,

My reason for that is you cannot add more money into the system. Maybe I am reading you wrong, but your suggestion seems to add more money into the BB economy (maybe a lot more?). Given that the current BB philosophy is to stop inflation, I seriously doubt any idea that adds money into the system would be considered.

Also, the BBs need to consider the burden on the end user. Currently there are about 3 competitive games per week for the average user (counting scrimmages). You add another game and that's four per week. Can the average user handle that?

Paper was suggesting elimination the nationl tourneys,

My reason for that is you cannot add more money into the system. Maybe I am reading you wrong, but your suggestion seems to add more money into the BB economy (maybe a lot more?). Given that the current BB philosophy is to stop inflation, I seriously doubt any idea that adds money into the system would be considered.

Also, the BBs need to consider the burden on the end user. Currently there are about 3 competitive games per week for the average user (counting scrimmages). You add another game and that's four per week. Can the average user handle that?

the more money wouldn't be a problem, because it should fix itself through salary, when this system is working. Also when looking at Transfer prices i think we have a deflation instead of a inflation. I don't see that much problems in this direction. the problem could be more a fair contribution of the income.

Last edited by CrazyEye at 1/5/2011 1:50:49 PM

the more money wouldn't be a problem, because it should fix itself through salary, when this system is working. Also when looking at Transfer prices i think we have a deflation instead of a inflation.

I think you are missing the point. The BBs want the market this way. If you follow what they are saying, the market is working exactly as they want it to. That's why the market is still being flooded with FAs.

That's also why: if any money is added to the system, it has to be removed somewhere else.

the problem could be more a fair contribution of the income.

Perhaps, if I can believe your assessment of the market.

something i won't like, because national cups are for me more intresting because it gives me more feedback about my strentgth and more interacting betwen the managers.

You already have a domestic competition. That's what your league games are for.

Don't get me wrong, I would love more games in BB, if feasible. I am just saying that if I had to choose, I would choose an international tournament over a domestic one. You may feel that you get more feedback about your team's strength in the cup. You are in a very competitive country. So when you get a match against a division IV team, you might have something to worry about.

i just say that there isn't a inflation, which should mean that player prices raise ;) For me there are more dropping.

And i said the system, should keep itself stable, so more income would generate higher salarys, which draws the money out of the system and remove it again ;)

lets say, using China as an example (don7t want to pick on Italy all day using them as an example), if the top 1000 teams in China are in a competitoin, then the 1001 best or less teams in their national tourney are not going to really be 'IN' the competition. Sure they might win a few rounds.... but they aren't expecting a crown or anything.

and you believe thats different in international competions, that there aren't favorites? And especilally that they aren't 50% teams who kicked out the first round, with elimination matches ;) Expecting a crown* is also there just for 20-30 teams, or people who are more optimistic then realisitc.

In addition after all the smaller countries invitationals are filled there would still be teams left, and in a very large country they could have a second tourney or 3rd even domestically. With a 9 or 10 round tourney set up you are looking at 500~1000 teams,

As i said this would make it unfair, even in the main attraction the league. Maybe the top 5 teams are in the stronger group most likely flying out of the competion in the first two rounds, where the teams behind them play a tourny with chanches for 6-7 rounds and lot of ties. And you can make the income of the first tourney 4 times higher(especially with the salary approach), so it is double unfair because they got less ties, less competion and in average less money even when they normally should get more(because they are even paying a bit more for their roste).

* especially the crown isn't that meaningful in the end wheen the competion say, i am the best team betwen the 12500 and 13000 best teams in BB, but maybe i am even better then this but i can not play this competion crown.

Last edited by CrazyEye at 1/6/2011 3:59:10 AM