BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Muted players, purchased to win a CUP/avoid relegation

Muted players, purchased to win a CUP/avoid relegation

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
178639.55 in reply to 178639.54
Date: 3/31/2011 5:33:22 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
8989
That then has the downside of shrinking the pool of available NT players to only the number of coaches that are specifically training a player for that purpose. I can't think there would be many people willing to set aside 200-300K of their team salary for a few seasons to train one up in the *hopes* that that player will be good enough to be taken off their hands. Remember, there are quite a few economically unfeasible but NT worthy guards and SFs out there as well and all that salary comes out of training.

From: Marot

This Post:
11
178639.56 in reply to 178639.50
Date: 3/31/2011 8:58:31 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
916916
600k center in average ... is still probably better than 100k proficient...


I guess the 100k would be better in that case ;)

This Post:
00
178639.57 in reply to 178639.55
Date: 4/1/2011 5:11:18 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
387387
Not necessarily, that can be controlled by the number of central contracts made available. Also anything upto 300k for a franchise player is economically feasible for top league teams; there are few non big men who earn more than that.

There are quite a few 'farm' teams who do make training an NT player their main purpose, unfortunately. They have a limited shelf life (they all run out of money eventually) and the playes they've created bounce around the TL. With a central contract system, they'd have a different ending. Or at least, the numbers of these players on the TL would be greatly reduced.

From: korsarz

This Post:
00
178639.58 in reply to 178639.57
Date: 4/1/2011 6:43:17 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
202202
to be honest I don't see much in common between the topic discussed in this thread and latest posts... I see that NT-mutant-idea as a separate suggestion, much more difficult to implement, I'd prefer if it wouldn't get in the way of the discussion started here (another words, I suggest you to open another thread for it)

From: Toddday
This Post:
00
178639.59 in reply to 178639.58
Date: 4/1/2011 12:46:01 PM
HellasVerona
III.12
Overall Posts Rated:
00
players should be on the transfer list for 7 days instead of 3.

and maybe, we need to implement the idea of franchise players...

From: korsarz

This Post:
00
178639.60 in reply to 178639.59
Date: 4/1/2011 2:30:56 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
202202
players should be on the transfer list for 7 days instead of 3.

3 days is a standard in many on-line manager games, there are many reasons behind that and I don't see why it should be changed.... also I see nothing related to the topic in your post

This Post:
22
178639.61 in reply to 178639.60
Date: 4/1/2011 5:32:50 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
88
I have read every single post here. The only thing that made the most sense to me is having to pay the salary for 4 weeks no matter what and pushing the deadline back two more weeks for players eligible for playoffs.

This Post:
00
178639.62 in reply to 178639.61
Date: 4/1/2011 6:03:22 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
202202
I have read every single post here. The only thing that made the most sense to me is having to pay the salary for 4 weeks no matter what and pushing the deadline back two more weeks for players eligible for playoffs.

glad to hear that, those are the two suggestions that seem the best to me too

This Post:
00
178639.63 in reply to 178639.60
Date: 4/1/2011 6:29:03 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
4040
I can see how longer TL period can make stronger interest. Normally it is like that manager want to sell 1-2 players per month if he is really active, so it shouldnt be a problem.

This Post:
00
178639.64 in reply to 178639.61
Date: 4/1/2011 6:33:22 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
4040
I have read every single post here. The only thing that made the most sense to me is having to pay the salary for 4 weeks no matter what and pushing the deadline back two more weeks for players eligible for playoffs.


Pay for services which werent done? Why?

This means only one thing, if I will buy player with high salary (according to the usuall average in my club), I have to keep him very long time, to have any payback. So every high-costed player have to be settled in the club no matter what. So why this should be only about money? Does it have to be like that if I buy center, he has to be here for some seasons everytime?

This Post:
11
178639.65 in reply to 178639.64
Date: 4/1/2011 6:45:55 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
88
NO, what it means is that people will only purchase a player for their team if actually makes sense for the team talent wise and economically. This would be for every and any player. Not just high price ones. It will also bring down the amount of day trading. Yes, everyone can day trade. However, not everyone can sit on this game while at work etc. It will make day trading a lot less valuable if they have to pay a salary for that person for 4 weeks. These changes would make the game overall much more competitive and make player better because training would be your best bet.

Does it have to be like that if I buy center, he has to be here for some seasons everytime?
\

We are only saying 4 weeks. Which is about 1/4 of a season.

Advertisement