BuzzerBeater Forums

Maybe it's karma.

bbMark wrote in the news:

“We also want to tell you briefly about two things coming for Season 10. […]
Also [second thing], we be making good better use of player nationalities, and domestic players will be slightly (typically 10-20%) better economically than foreign ones. The details of this system are designed to be fair to countries of different sizes.”


I really do not understand why this should be necessary. Me from a small country (and thus supporting Superfly Guy) it would be much more difficult to get an internationally competitive team then teams from large countries. To me this change would penalize teams form small countries a lot.

Furthermore, players of small countries are likely to loose value on the transfermarket, since most teams would have to pay an extra on that player.

The proposed system would definitively discriminate teams from small countries.

Cases like yours or Toroo are very similar: top teams that have trouble finding competition within the national league, mainly because fewer users equals to fewer competition.

From this situation, we all can see that it is much more easy for teams in your position to mantain full attendance and thus making tons of revenue cash. On the other way, sucks a lot not being able to train national players (at least I think).

If this is the issue then the problem should be solved by lowering the responsiveness of fans to losses or wins of their team (alternatively: give more weight to the rank of the team in the league) and not by arbitrary manipulating player’s economic impact, which is bringing new discriminations.

The proposed system would definitively discriminate teams from small countries.

That really depends upon the details, doesn't it?

Then I look forward to the details. Will small countries NTs also benefit from it?

To A it's a trader tax, to B it's a reward for investing in player development through the draft.
If you think about it on a game level, rather than from your position within the game, it's an excellent mechanism to balance the rewards from each approach to the game. I think it's a stroke of brilliance, and will re-emphasize the need for optimal, wage-efficient training. I just love the vision the BBs have for their economy (with some reservations about arenas).
In your particular case, I would love to know how much extra revenue you generate through the lack of consistent, meaningfull opposition compared to a highly competitive league.
You'd have to post some serious figures to convince me it's not just swings and roundabouts and that you are simply bitching to lobby for the traders.

typically a hard pill to swallow now, like my team who dont have a australian player on a australian league.

aside from this is we get to focus more on developing rookies. but i know its a long shot.

i cant really say much ill just wait for the details

you've got two seasons to identify your best domestic prospects and train them. That's fair notice (even if they'll only ever be bench players for elite teams).

wow,

so your saying its ok even to weaken a country's level of play?

The proposed system would definitively discriminate teams from small countries.

That really depends upon the details, doesn't it?

Though I love all other changes, I think this one is really going in the wrong direction. As you say it depends on how it is implemented, but from what is written it sounds, hmmm, scaring.

Having to pay extra for "foreigners" is something that has limited HT for a long time, and it would be sad if BB would introduce the same limitation. The effect it had on Hattrick is that top teams can almost only buy players from their own country for economical reasons. Thus building a team becomes more of who has the most patience for searching the local market for players rather than who is the best at composing and managing a team. This is sad.

Also, by nature, the longer you play the slower your team will develop, something that most people will find moring. This is something that is difficult to counteract, however I feel no need to increase this effect by introducing limitations that mostly affects old teams.

Thus, if I would do something I wopuld introduce a "foreign player fee"that is fixed, i.e. it will be realtively high for bad players and low for good players. This would be good both because it gives something to strive for for new teams ("I want my first foreign player" rather than "I have to get rid of my foreign players") as well as being more realistic I think.

Well, I do believe that finding the players that you want should require more effort than just applying 3-4 filters, that way it's more rewarding when you find it. Now that you can filter on potential, most people would just filter allstar as a minimum. Who really wants to see 6th man and benchwarmers, i've never seen a team consist of low potential players before. MVP and up are too easy to find now. They used to be rare gems when you were browsing through your list of filtered players, now they are just presented as cupcakes.

What happened to the fact that most of the GM's stated, almost as a fact, that filtering by country would never happen. That it would be too easy to find possible NT's this way and kill the meaning of having scouts. Which i also agree with. Now that it has been implemented i hear nothing about it from the GM's. Like it should have been implemented from the start...

It's just too simple. I don't like it when BB wants to hold my hand when other people are too lazy to find the players on their own. And i know one of you is gonna go like: "well if you don't like it, don't use it", well the option is there why not use it. I still believe that it's way too easy to find players now.