BuzzerBeater Forums

I quite agree with Rodolfo.
I don't dispute BB's decisions at all, I have no knowledge of economy and even less of economy of online games to do that.
But it's a fact that a new manager has difficulties to understand how the team economy works. Most new players like to immediately reinforce their teams and to make investments, but in BB is quite difficult to understand how much cash a new manager can actually spend in the first weeks.
In my opinion a simple economic guideline (in the rules or in a help thread) for new teams could reduce the number of players leaving BB after a few weeks.

Btw, I love this game! :)

I have enjoyed reading this little debate, and for awhile there I was going to just sit back and be a voyuer in this discussion but I have seen some things happen that have made me change that decision.

I would honestly say this is a fun game, I have a good time watching my players and team grow through training I have been able to have some success in my league and am managing to do well in the cup.

The problem with the release of these players like a bomb on the market has done a couple things. As a Div IV player, until you find the rhythm and start getting some wins and butts in the seats, if you want to be competitive you need to make moves and progress your team. I trained an individual and was honestly a day or two from putting him on the market so that I could get some buffer cash when I found out he was almost worthless. He had gone from a decently trained player that would have gotten me a decent bit of coin, to an average joe. While I can use him in my lineup it would have made the financial woes a bit easier to deal with. On the other hand right before this release was done I had spent 160k of capital on a player that was decent only to find out if I had waited 3 days there would be better players released with lower costs associated.

On the flip side, teams that had done poorly or were their personell were mismanaged, as long as they had a little extra revenue could now go out and buy players, making teams that were poorly run, contenders due to having a little financial gain from not making moves ie arena advancments, lots of losses to decimate their fan base. If they had not spent any money all of a sudden they are able to purchase a team and make a run at it. This does not seem fair on a competitive level even though I think the NY yankees would now be masterminds of BB.

I have made roster moves to try and stay ahead of those that I have managed to be ahead of, and during those moves have realized something. THese payers that were ok players and werent going to be of interest to NBBA and Div teams, well I have been in bidding wars over several players against D I and DII teams. These players realistically shouldnt be accessible to me however I have seen them and purchased some. But so can my opponents.

This rapid aging of the game seems a bit thoughtless and I dont understand why only the best players could have trickled on to the market where the teams making the top money could have afforded them, leaving the rest of us to train what we have or pick up prospects, that are trainable and if you do well enough with those maybe pick yourself up someone who is a star.

If its worries about players not reaching uber greatness yet, then make the 18yo draft picks start out at a notch up so they can be trained to that level by 20-22 yo. This artificial maturation has made the competiveness at the lower levels a bit lopsided to those who have done nothing mismanaged and lost vs those who have spent time training and trying to win games and make moves.

Just my .02 and they are probably canadian

If its worries about players not reaching uber greatness yet, then make the 18yo draft picks start out at a notch up so they can be trained to that level by 20-22 yo.

One of the changes made will be that younger players will now train much more rapidly, so in effect they will do precisely what you've said.

I think his point was to use the draft and a more limited pool of players rather than the floodgates that got opened.

Only the best players so the top teams could buy them and pay their salaries, not so many that players with a 5k salary can get picked up for 2k because he slips through. Not that it matters, but like vball I've been sitting back and watching how this debate goes and what is wierd to me is how some of the people defending the new changes seem to refuse to acknowledge that the implementation of the additional players may be having an affect on the game that could have been better. Ive seen lots of constant refuting without acknowledgement that some people may have a point.

Me? I like my teams positioning, I have a TV game today so on the economic release I can upgrade my team some more quite likely. My trainees are young as is with one 18 year old and 2 19 year old, players that are kinda perfect for the rule changes. Hoping to get one more and use them all since the ones I have and the ones I picked up all give me good minutes.

With all the nice improvements my team has seen from this change though I can see that it would hurt people, some might have had crippling results from this drastic shift in player talent and value. It would be nice for people to let that creep into their heads and for them to say something to that effect even while squashing all arguements with a "this is all for the best" hammer thesis.

2nd!

i got an idea...

what about a new button on the transfer list page for Retired or Free Agents only..

this way we can skip looking at all the dross on the market and get straight down to the players worth bidding on!!

they are talking about inflation over in HT like no tomorrow...here is the complete opposite.. although ive overpaid for some players i have a small roster and traded some guys previously so i guess one cancels out the other but at this rate you may as well start teams off with 0 players and give them cash to go to the market with.

once they have picked there players then they can field a team! or give new teams access to a free pool of squad players until they have spent their money... I dont even have 1 japanese player on my roster now and if i had my starting roster again I wouldve salvaged no more than 300k total for my whole team...

what a difference 3 weeks makes....

i do sympathise with all... i only signed up cos of the brainwashing banner on HT and this game strikes me as just he who has the money wins.... and we all know that money makes money... training?? do me a favour at the rate your training you are barely covering the downward prices on the market... you may as well buy old dudes for one game then sell them and just repeat...

18yo at 300k with extra skills is going to be worth 300k in 12 months...with maybe 4-5 pops cos he will be a normal player then as he is now... only difference will be that they will be traded lower down (div 4/5) up in the top leagues you will be forced to hold onto players thru fear of not getting their true market worth....

do me a favour at the rate your training you are barely covering the downward prices on the market... you may as well buy old dudes for one game then sell them and just repeat...

What part of "training doubling for the youngest players" do you not understand?

18yo at 300k with extra skills is going to be worth 300k in 12 months...with maybe 4-5 pops cos he will be a normal player then as he is now

if you only pop an 18yo 4-5 times in 12 months your doing something wrong. Why worry so much about selling? Keep the player and use them to help win which is the whole point of the game.

ok so 300 equalling 300 is extreme but that is how a lot of people are feeling now with a ton of 4k plus per week players coming up for general consumption.

does the doubling apply to stamina and free throw as well??

so in a 14 week cycle how many pops would you hope for on an 18yo?

ok so does that therefore not go against other posts written saying you need to have more balanced players??

or am i answering my own question when i say the next year you train him up in 3 other skills??!!

Its good that BB saw the potential problem of Div 1 teams just holding on to their money and its implications down the line. In hindsight, I think it would have been better to just release older players from the botified teams. As it stands now, top teams just gobbled up the 18 year old studs that should set them up for future success and the continued benefit of Div 1 revenue. If we only released players above say 25 years old. They'd still be very good players but not with very great potential for improvement. It would create the talent gap but not make it grow exponentially as each season goes.

Like in any league, there are two approaches, win now (Boston) or go young and play for the future (Seattle). The release of the 18 year old superstars at a time when the top teams had tons of money stashed away is like doing the draft lottery for the teams that made the playoffs and leave the weaker teams fighting for scraps.

Again the intention might have been correct but the side effect has turned off a lot of users. But the cat is out of the bag, what else can we do..