BuzzerBeater Forums

Also those top managers who bought 20 players apiece just last week will be pleased by this :)

I think they look at the number of people negatively affected by a change and the number of people that are positively affected. If without change, 100 people leave the game because they can't stand those GS training teams, it might be better to change that GS training and have 20 people leave because of the change (if leaving players is your way to determine the desirability of a change).

Well, to me it seems like you will never be satisfied. We add features that address some problems you (and others) obsessed about, and what do you do? You poke holes in it and just move on to other things you don't like and then obsess about them. Can we please have a little bit less drama? Threatening to leave every time you want something done doesn't make us do it, just annoys us. Also, it shifts the forum general alignment more towards whining and hating, snowballing the negative comments. Because of that, I must admit I miss the period you took a break.
I read your comments, and they are 90% complaining and outright hate, 10% constructive criticism. I know you can do better. I've seen you do better and I dare you to do better. I love user feedback, but not like this. Please, try to do better.

I don't Like automatic bids.
I think that Marin is 100% correct.

I hope this % drops radically after a few weeks.

There are plenty of teams who have bought in the region of 20 players at 40k or less just last week. We could ask them how fast the percentage reverts to the 97% maximum value!

This is just another attempt at a band-aid fix for an issue that can easily be stopped, if the BB Gods wanted to.

All players should sign one-year contracts when they join a new team.

Grandfather all players currently on a roster until the next season. Any player on a roster when the new season begins, now has a one-year contract.

Teams have one season to determine what to do with their three draftees. They would be free to list them on the player market or keep them. When the next season begins, last year's draftees have a one-year contract.

Any player bought on the player market would be on your roster for 14 weeks plus the number of days until the next Monday, at which time you would be able to fire or sell him.

This would end day-trading immediately.

Also, it would add a little more realism to a "simulation" that has become more of a "Tycoon" game, which someone else called it in another forum, so I can't take credit for that comment :).

This would end day-trading immediately.

But there is no will and no need to stop day-trading. This change makes it only less profitable. Fair enough.

There were steps undertaken to make rosters more stable:
- reducing GS after transfer,
- less tickets sold when you attempt to sell half of your team permanently,
- giving bonus to trainees in overspending luxury-tax,
- now it is tax risen when selling new players.

All the changes made moved the game in good direction (I believe).

Would you be willing to be forced to keep a player for one year just after having to buy him because of 4-week injuries to both your starting bigs? Now it's the way - you can do it, but you have to pay for it and calculate.

This is just another attempt at a band-aid fix for an issue that can easily be stopped, if the BB Gods wanted to.

All players should sign one-year contracts when they join a new team.

Grandfather all players currently on a roster until the next season. Any player on a roster when the new season begins, now has a one-year contract.

Teams have one season to determine what to do with their three draftees. They would be free to list them on the player market or keep them. When the next season begins, last year's draftees have a one-year contract.

Any player bought on the player market would be on your roster for 14 weeks plus the number of days until the next Monday, at which time you would be able to fire or sell him.

This would end day-trading immediately.

Also, it would add a little more realism to a "simulation" that has become more of a "Tycoon" game, which someone else called it in another forum, so I can't take credit for that comment.

I like the idea in theory, but the new player who gets a couple of "bargain" 60k salary players when they first sign up is completely hamstrung. And a full season is too long regardless. The cricket sim battrick had a seven-week contract on signing a player, but I don't remember if you could fire a player during that time or if you were just prevented from re-listing him until that time had passed.

I do think an interesting angle would be to incorporate Hattrick's rule about only being able to list a player you've bought the number of games he's played for your team - though it would need to be tweaked here to be based on the number of minutes played. If that rule were in effect, for example, a team would have to play these players regularly in order to keep listing them at their inflated prices and hoping someone bites.

Of course, the way I'd personally go about it is to just restrict the starting bid amount for newly purchased players, so that if you've only had the player a few weeks, you can list him at $1000, and you wouldn't be able to list a player above what you bought him for until a season or more had passed. That way, a manager who gets a legit bargain can still make a fair profit by selling a player, but the whole "list a player absurdly high" strategy wouldn't be possible or would, at minimum, require holding on to the players for 14 weeks.