BuzzerBeater Forums

Just to know... Do you take care about the tons of posts or you've already taken the decision for Utopia?
Otherwise guys follow me:

I am quite busy at work and on the verge of quitting this game for good, that why I did not participate in the discussion so far.

All those great steps the game has taken in the last few months have not turned the trend, which is still negative. I pointed out flaws in many parts of this game and sooner or later those were fixed or adjusted - so don't pretend all my input has been useless or pure negative critizisim.

Fact is, we need to strenghten the small nations, many users have ties to other countries and would like to start a team there. As english has become a global language the objections regarding foreigners flooding other countries (how many Japanese are playing in Japan anyway), is obsolete and utter nonsense.

You had no problems adding features in the past without asking the users (and you are selling those as huge success stories). So why not take resposibility, acknowledge the issues connected to second teams in real countries, and still do it the way it should be done.

First, I'm ridiculously excited that there will be a second team feature!

If it is implemented as a Utopia, 99th country, I really hope all teams enter at DIV or DV (depending on number of teams in the new country). Otherwise, if some teams enter in DI, some in DII, others in DIII, it'll be unfair to those starting in the lower divisions. I think it's okay that there are 100% bot teams in DI until human teams promote into DI. One nice feature of this Utopia is that it's a 'reset', and it'll be cool competing against experienced managers, all starting from scratch.

A few people has already said that 2nd team is not a very good idea to solve micronations problem. Probably BB should consider implementing option for new managers to join micronations but only for those micronation which have bot teams in top division, so Pakistan for example would need 15 new mangers, on the other hand, Macau would need only 1. In that case, at least top division would be filled with real mangers.

people, welcome to the democracy!

knetch, you loved the implementation of democracy, but now you mad because your option lost? and you threaten to abandon the game? let's rephrase that last eufemism and state it as it actually is: you're trying to hijack the BBs in front of all the BB community and trying to make their administration of the game a hostage of your threat to leave in the public BB forum. I think the BBs are strong enough and have been running this game long enough to handle this hijacking of yours, and sincerily, I don't think you're the first one to try this. Do you think this solves the problem? How about WAITING to see the specifics and the results of this new idea of second teams? Uh?

now, to users like knetch: the game and the BBs CANNOT, I repeat, CANNOT please everybody. you my friend might think your rationale behind the argument of invading small nations with second teams is better. But there are many other, MANY OTHERS, that don't. And I wouldn't call the initial 40%-Nays-poll against second teams "a landslide victory". So let's please all stop talking like if our rationale was the most obvious, self-evident truth in the world, and the guy arguing agains't our rationale is basically an idiot that doesn't know anything.

Use democracy to express your stand in this matter, but abuse it to your own detriment.

So take it easy, my friend. LET'S WAIT to see what the package really is instead of barking nonsense.

Last edited by petrosian at 2/16/2014 3:23:36 PM

I kind of misunderstood the purpose of voting, I thought you proposed clearly and definitely (I belive this can be deduced from the original post) the idea of having a second team for supporters in the country other than the primary team's, and the voting was organized as a kind of a referendum to see whether this idea should be implemented and how. At the end, howewer, you dropped the original idea and substituted it with one of the ideas that originated during the debate, but nevertheless you used the results of the voting cast on the topic of the original idea to legitimize that new idea, although in fact that voting shows the attitude of the community just on the original idea, not on the new one. This fact, that you basically used the voting just as rough guidelines on the users' sentiments and not as the modality of decision making, somehow stripped you of your original purpose, of involving community in decision-making process, since you reached the decision on your own and not by following the voting results. I am not saying this is bad, especially bearing in mind this Utopia project is of no concern for any user not involved directly with it, but I believe in future you should state more clearly what is the true purpose of voting.

i think the BB was very clear. here, let's take a look:

"Here are some POSIBBLE specifications of the secondary team idea, in the form of some restrictions and rules. In all aspects other than the ones mentioned bellow, the secondary team would behave as a completely new team. Also, the link between the primary and secondary team would be clearly and publicly visible. If you have any objections or possible better solutions, we welcome your replies."

and the question to vote was this:

"Should BB develop the second team for Supporters feature (EVEN IF I DON'T AGREE WITH ALL THE SPECIFICATIONS STATED IN THIS POST)?"

So... I think it was clear that this was not cooked from the beginning. You can't tell now that you didn't know what you were voting. You were voting second team or not, not the logistic of it.