BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > BuzzerBeater Arenas

BuzzerBeater Arenas

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
56772.108 in reply to 56772.105
Date: 2/23/2009 11:14:11 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
In my opinion there are a few good managers who are there from the start and made choices to develop their team within the line of the rules. No reason for any form of punishment at present.


Stated several times that I'm not advocating for a punishment on the teams that, again, made wise long term choices.

(56772.101)

"Well, no ones gonna top that." - http://tinyurl.com/noigttt
This Post:
00
56772.109 in reply to 56772.105
Date: 2/23/2009 11:14:12 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
3838
Good points, I agree.

This advantage for the early teams would be leveled if you play long enough, as players age and reach their skill caps. So beeing true to the game WILL give you an advantage, yes, but it's a good thing for everyone who loves BB ;) Still, in time you CAN catch up, if you have the patience for it.
But until a team reaches that level I think everyone should focus on comparing themselves to relevant teams, not the ones 3-4 div above. Afterall, a bunch of friends just starting up a team for fun can't in common sense complain that Boston Celtics has a better team and that it is unfair. A global rank would be a nice feature to measure and track your own progress.

Last edited by Svett Sleik (U21-Scout Norge) at 2/23/2009 11:14:49 AM

From: CrazyEye

This Post:
00
56772.110 in reply to 56772.106
Date: 2/23/2009 11:29:06 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
but in my view you're making the same mistake here that many late-starting users make when they're complaining that they can't catch up with the top teams in the game. Of course they can't nor should they.Everybody has to be competitive only with the people in his league and maybe have a chance to catch the people in the next higher league.


True, but the concern I'm trying to raise is that as teams promote into the top level they will not be able to compete, or that the amount of time needed to build a team that can be reasonably competitive will be so long it won't be worth playing.


so say why it was impossible what flying munchkins made, he invest in arena and rooster and got a big arena + strong rooster in a short time ;)

The top team will equilibrate their income with high salary players to stay competive, this balance isn't fund yet but when you look at the masses of high salary center who will be spread the next 2-3 season you will know that even a much higher income then the one from the bulls can spend easily(21yo with 150-180k salary will be there next season, and they still improve fast)

And you could make money in low leagues with a nice arena, to get the investment back and build an infrastrukture. At the end you will reach the point where you could pay those money in a nearly simililiar time, but maybe you wasn't starting that quick and succesfull.

If you look forward for high competive leagues, in this case the big difference betwenn league income must be deleted and you will have those differents also with smaller arena due higher prices ... So the relativ gap will be the same.

This Post:
00
56772.111 in reply to 56772.109
Date: 2/23/2009 11:29:46 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
9191
There has to be a way to solve this issue. Coudnt there be a luxury tax on oversized arenas? For example if the biggest arena right now is 45k capacity, couldnt we say that if an arena holds over 50k you are taxed on anything over 50k? That way no one now would be punished unless they choose to go over 50k, then it isnt punishment, it is a choice to build above the cap no one has reached yet?

Just throwing ideas out there.

This Post:
00
56772.112 in reply to 56772.109
Date: 2/23/2009 11:31:25 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
404404
A global rank would be a nice feature to measure and track your own progress.

yeah,but it is useless to the game.We're talking about economic questions.The problem is that,with 40k arenas,we still don't see the limits of attendence formula,and we are seeing that in TL there are troubles about teams of different countries

This Post:
00
56772.113 in reply to 56772.111
Date: 2/23/2009 11:36:17 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
the problems is that you can demolates your seats, even when you know you are going over the cap, you can not test it for a short time if it was good, or you don't play that succesfull anymore ...

I posted that in another thread:
But you won't have infinite arena even in future:

(26226) = income 39.425 without taxes using 83 seats
me = 32.240 using 47 seats

difference 36 seats cost 576.000$, turning point are around 80-85 games*. Now compare that with building vip places, from 10 to 15 in premier diviision, there you gt nearly instantly your money back, and have a bigger advantage against your opponent for a small price. f i play in PO becuase i could invest my money on rooster, one home games negletas the advantage of >4 games, and one away games of >2, so the actual length is probadly a bit longer then 5 season which is the average with one game per week more around 6 to 7.


I don't have those 10/15 comparision in high league, but i could tell you that the turning point for building this 5 vip was around 2 seasons, which ich nearly 1/3-/14 of the time you need for the expension in the high rate + the relative different is much higher so that the 10 to 15 step makes more different in competivity.

This Post:
00
56772.114 in reply to 56772.106
Date: 2/23/2009 11:41:03 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
196196
but in my view you're making the same mistake here that many late-starting users make when they're complaining that they can't catch up with the top teams in the game. Of course they can't nor should they.Everybody has to be competitive only with the people in his league and maybe have a chance to catch the people in the next higher league.


True, but the concern I'm trying to raise is that as teams promote into the top level they will not be able to compete, or that the amount of time needed to build a team that can be reasonably competitive will be so long it won't be worth playing.


(74364.1)

Just started this thread and I think the reason we debate so fiercely topics like arena, potential, transfer prices is because sadly they are the only variables that teams can make different decisions on and try to pull away from their rivals.

Maybe i am asking too much but in order for teams to close the gaps on others (which I agree is not going to happen as we currently stand) we should not be trying to soften the advantages others have forged using the limited choices at their disposal.

I feel we need to add more radical variables so that risk takers can be rewarded and so front runners still need to make the best choices in order to remain at the top of the pile.

This Post:
00
56772.115 in reply to 56772.113
Date: 2/23/2009 11:42:01 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
9191
Sorry CrazyEye, not trying to be rude, I just couldnt understand that.

If BB is going to try and control massive arenas, as many threads are dovoted to just this, then it must be soon in order to not anger people and create balance. The last posting of biggest arenas on this thread was the Bulls at just under 40k. If we make the arena luxury tax above this, no one now is affected, and a soft cieling has been established where no one got screwed. Who would lose with this suggestion?

From: Newton07

This Post:
00
56772.116 in reply to 56772.108
Date: 2/23/2009 11:42:32 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
3535
I fully agree with everything you have stated in this thread.
It was much easier to expand the arena a few seasons ago than it is now. And this is a fact.
As I stated in other threads, the economy for teams starting now in low divisions is probably a bit too tough and not much fun.

This Post:
00
56772.117 in reply to 56772.115
Date: 2/23/2009 11:45:25 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
i just say that a taxis ridiculous if you don't get out of it?

Then it better to say, that there are max. 40k bleachers 110 VIplounges etc., and make it impossible to build more.

But if the BB want to have low prices, you need big arenas or much less people who watch that game, so that you could fill 10k arena with prices of 5$ and don't have to ask for 20$ instead.

Edit: and you still have something like a tax, because the extra earning of extra seats become lower the more you have. As seen above.

Last edited by CrazyEye at 2/23/2009 11:50:02 AM

This Post:
00
56772.118 in reply to 56772.117
Date: 2/23/2009 11:51:26 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
9191
i just say that a taxis ridiculous if you don't get out of it?


Sorry, again a bit confusing. The idea is to stop arenas from expanding to rediculous unrealistic size, and to not upset anyone who has allready built. As GM Brianjames pointed out, the problem only gets worse in the future. If the cap were 50k like I said (just a #) then new players in season 20 wont look at the arenas of Div I being 150k capacity and say 'whats the use?"

Top teams can still charge more per seat and will still make more money than lower division teams, it will still be difficult to gain ground on them, but not exponentially more difficult as time passes.

Advertisement