BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > BuzzerBeater Arenas

BuzzerBeater Arenas

Set priority
Show messages by
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.

This Post:
00
56772.119 in reply to 56772.116
Date: 2/23/2009 11:52:42 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
196196
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.


the only variable i see that can get us back on track is the transfer market and that is fuelled by the training speeds of players as well as money...

Training speeds are too slow (IMO) and accumalation of money for small teams is too.... results rarely carry a shock now if the tactics are correct....

Without an improvement from this it will continue to be a slow laborious rise to the summit for those that are patient enough.. but as Brian says those trying to catch will just be arriving at the spot others are now and they in turn wouldve moved on.

This Post:
00
56772.120 in reply to 56772.118
Date: 2/23/2009 11:54:12 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
9191
How many courtside seats will fit around 1 BB court? All the courts are the same dimension, so do the courtside seats stack on top off each other?

This Post:
00
56772.121 in reply to 56772.119
Date: 2/23/2009 11:57:41 AM
Freccia Azzurra
IV.18
Overall Posts Rated:
823823
Second Team:
Slaytanic
I don't want to go OT but imho of course, training speed is ok, have a look to this guy:

Weekly salary: $ 8 760
DMI: 170900
Age: 19
Height: 6'0" / 183 cm
Potential: allstar
Game Shape: proficient

Jump Shot: prolific Jump Range: strong
Outside Def.: prolific Handling: respectable
Driving: awful Passing: awful
Inside Shot: atrocious Inside Def.: strong
Rebounding: mediocre Shot Blocking: respectable
Stamina: average Free Throw: mediocre

Experience: atrocious

I've bought him at 18yo and at the end of next season he will be a good player ;)

1990-2022 Stalinorgel - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pV-Xppl6h8Et
Advertisement