BuzzerBeater Forums

The issue of some here complaining about not having advance notice is valid. It's hard that you decided to go one route and then rules suddenly changed in a whim.

Personal example based on experience. The season the overextention tax came to play was the season I decided to sell of all the players I trained and tried to buy expensive players even if I was going to have a negative balance all season long. I trashed my team before the beginning of the season and redid my entire roster but when the season updates were posted suddenly the overextention tax was announced. I'm not complaining about that feature because I'm the type who likes to train players but a simple heads up in advance would have been nice.

The overextension tax was hinted at in an official post. Nobody knew exactly how it was going to be implemented, but they did say they were going to do something.

Obviously some advance notice would have been nice in this case too, but the problem isn't widespread...except for Poland where the top 3 teams have about 50 players on the TL they bought last week. They bought last week because they trade in young players. Young players don't have a very high cost of carry since their salaries are low. They are big boys, the extra salary is minimal compared to their 820-860k rosters and they'll still make a profit from the trades: I think they can live with this.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 10/23/2014 9:07:19 PM

Something to keep in mind of course is how few players I have sold
that keeps the Pct up as we all know
This stat is also key for this pct:
- You have sold 5 players in the past 14 weeks

If I had sold 20 players, the numbers would look a lot different

Isn't the main purpose to stop people buying for 10k and selling for 300k? Would it really bother anyone if I bought for 100k and sold for 110k? Why not just tax the profit instead of the whole sale

I know, and i like to fight against who does 1k--->300k.

"Skilltrading" (so, with training), Imo has a better value, and not 1-->300k but 1-->20/30k it's enough. Yep, this rule is against also skilltrading, but you should consider that your team isn't a continuative flow of people, but should be a defined team. Except rare cases, real teams doesn't change too much during a single season (instead, between two season it's easily to fond a complete S5 changed)


Better solution, really, is a "fixed price" (like another soccer game i played) where there are:

Defined time for offering (no bidwar).
-auction base offer (you can't send offers less than that value, and this value is an owner decision, but is a value between two defined limits, max and min)

There is also an algorithm that calculates (taking care of teamvalue/role slots/player value/language and some othee things) what team the player agree, and so you can see auction win not by best cash offer but, for example, by a team which has no player in that role

I think is forbidden to speak about "foreign games", i send you a Bb-mail

I still think that there is too much of an effort to force teams to behave in certain ways. One of the ways that I can compete in the IPBL is by buying older players at a discount and then selling them for about the same price or less within a season or so. Maybe I buy for 300k and sell for 200k. The alternative is that I tank for 6 seasons and build up ~25 million and then buy only young players.

One example might be my 200k C who I bought for 500k. The market rate says 500k to 1 mil but he might only sell for 200 - 300k. If I see someone on the market who is better, why should I be discouraged from improving my team? In all likelihood, I'll lose money given the market for 33 year old centers but it's not taking advantage of anyone. There are already enough disadvantages given the drop in game shape.

It seems like they have just set a lower starting point but the sale percentage will revert to 97% in about the same time. If you hold the player for 4-5 weeks you'll probably be about indifferent.