BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > In What Area should the next BB changes should happen?

In What Area should the next BB changes should happen?

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
244618.69 in reply to 244618.67
Date: 8/23/2013 12:58:26 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
952952
games are always boring and predictable, almost no surprise winnings, and of course the domination of Look Inside.


I agree LI domination is boring, but predictability of games is a good thing. If I play against much worse team, I expect to win no matter what offense and defense he puts on the field. But then again, that's why we have TIE and CT...

This Post:
00
244618.71 in reply to 244618.70
Date: 8/23/2013 7:43:40 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
952952
Well I don't know what exactly you want to see...surprise is one thing, but if anyone else in this year's B3 except Gadi wins against VS, it's a bug. Take a 1M team and construct it any way you want; you will never be able to beat 1.8M payroll.

This Post:
11
244618.72 in reply to 244618.68
Date: 8/23/2013 5:17:29 PM
Neverwinter
CGBBL
Overall Posts Rated:
621621
Great story! I would like to train a player like that in the future. Things like that are the reason this game has soul :) I'm playing some football(soccer) manager on facebook, it's quite fun, but you have to change players every month or two. There is no continuity whatsoever, no long term projects to keep you interested.

Also, what I like about this game, it's not a pay-to-win, a lot of games online have options to buy player skills or recover from injuries or just buy game money..

Message deleted
This Post:
00
244618.75 in reply to 244618.74
Date: 8/28/2013 10:36:36 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
774774
How could this ever work?

Do you how many times something like this situation happens:

Team A has $1,500,000 in the bank and a weekly econ revenue of $60,000. Doing OK.
Team A wants to buy a great SF and gets one for $1,460,000. Whew, just enough to get him by outbidding 1 other manager. The SF's salary is $90,000.
Team A cash now equals just $40,000 and weekly econ revenue is now -$30,000.
Team A can only afford his salary for 1 week, so in your system Team A cannot bid for him.
Even if Team A was ready to sell a crappier SF who costs $50,000 and would put the weekly econ revenue back up to $20,000 after one update.

It probably happens a lot.

We all don't have bank accounts of $10,000,000.

If you remember me, then I don't care if everyone else forgets.
From: GM-hrudey

This Post:
00
244618.77 in reply to 244618.74
Date: 8/29/2013 7:25:20 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
Pay 4 weeks of salary UP FRONT when buying a player? Coding would be a nightmare, so BBs will never do it, but well, it would prevent someone who can't afford a player from buying him and put an end to renting for sure (unless its a 1 month rental and someone is willing to dump the cash)...


The cricket sim battrick I think had the right approach with this - when you purchased a player, you basically were guaranteeing his contract for seven weeks, so you couldn't sell (or I think even fire) the player until that time had elapsed. Seven may be a bit much here, but something like that for four weeks? I think that's certainly doable.

This Post:
00
244618.78 in reply to 244618.77
Date: 8/29/2013 7:52:41 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
455455
If you implemented something like that you couldn't go so before putting a cap on the types of salaries that lower divisions could purchase. Right now there's a fairly steady stream of new users that create economic problems by purchasing high priced but poorly built salary monsters on the transfer wire. If you forced those teams to live with their economic mistakes for an even longer period then bankruptcies would skyrocket.

Personally, I don't think this is a big enough problem that it needs a solution. The 7 day rule for owning a player is now in place after you buy a player and the gameshape hit is in place too.

Advertisement