BuzzerBeater Forums

Please give your thoughts about our suggestions from Finland's BB Discord!

Top players with high salaries and high TSP are valued too low at the moment -> True. But more of an economy problem, I think.

Training is too expensive, especially for the MVP, HoF and ATG prospects -> Training sounds messy with all the different minutes, depending on age. Although training shouldn't be "easy" as I read somewhere, it should be "natural" (I mean allowing space for error with the minutes, since we have "low" control over them) and "wanted" (having players constantly playing 48 min for better training doesn't seem realistic, fun or even fair in terms of a player career and such but it's how it works).

It takes too much time for newbiees to catch up with more experienced teams -> Tell me about it. The gap is HUGE. Especially on salary floors and financial resources (I've been waiting 3 months+ to change my coach and I can't, since it would kill my season budget, since I'm a semi-newbie. New players can't compete against long term players in open market).

Lower the salaries at the highest salary group -> Not sure. Maybe a higher hard cap would work too? I think the goal is for teams to have (somehow) cap space to have 2/3 top players and a well rounded support cast. Maybe training is coming too fast, maybe not. If there's only a few teams that can afford those players but twice or three times as much are developing them, there will always be too many of them, which will make them overexpensive, not to mention unfitting to budgets. Doesn't seem easy to solve without other changes?

More merchandise revenue -> If salaries are going to be lower and caps bigger (but closer), this shouldn't be really needed, I suppose. But it depends on how things would be adjusted. The problem is really those great players becoming untradable and unfitting to team's budgets.

Increase spectators for lower divisions -> Seems to have potential. Though there's the need to increase the arena first. Maybe the attendance % shouldn't go down as much, to keep attendance figures higher in the lower divisions?

Increase staff supply to the marker -> Yes, please! Millions spent constantly on staff is a huge economy drain. That's money you won't have for players, training and the rest. Maybe SOME staff should be "earmarked" for lower divisions only, in an attempt to "free" them from the richer teams. Maybe not fair but gotta look for improvements somewhere.

Increase TV-Revenue -> Might help but mostly get closer gaps between divisions. I just got a jump from around 110k to 250k from III to II Division, which is something of a slow death, if I demote again not to mention, I'm somehow/very ill prepared for my new division.

Also agree that some changes should be gradual and, eventually, according to the needs that arise.
Thanks for your (group) post and feel free to reply, if you feel the need.

Last edited by Moresbi at 8/9/2022 4:16:02 AM

Thank you for your comments! I have no topics to argue, but maybe one clarification of our suggestion:

Increase spectators for lower divisions -> Seems to have potential. Though there's the need to increase the arena first. Maybe the attendance % shouldn't go down as much, to keep attendance figures higher in the lower divisions?

I think teams have two options to accomplish this: increase amount of spectators or use higher ticket prices. So I suppose that if there's change to increase spectators, it would mean that team with completed arena would get more spectators or have same amount of spectators than currently with higher tickets prices. Same applies with teams that don't have completed arena.

And maybe one addition to my previous post, our goal would be to give small increase to revenues for some type of teams and decrease of costs to other type of teams. But not benefit only particular teams and give less benefits for any other team, as might happen if the Merchandise boost is the only new feature.

So as a example, if a Team A plays in Div3, they get +5k to revenue, but Team B only 2.5k in Div2. Then Team B with 200k salary player gets 5k decrease to salary costs and 5k more profits to merchandise and Team A with 100k salary player only 2.5k decrease to salary costs and 2.5k more profits to merchandise. But because Team A trains his current player, they get trainer for 50k less money and 5k less salary than previously. Team B doesn't train, so there's no improvements for him with trainers, but they can also buy a better doctor with 10k less money and 5k less salary than previously.

These were of course just examples, luckily I don't have to mess with the formulas.

What do you suggest?

That's true. However, I'm not sure if it's good idea to start slowing training or lowering the soft cap to player potentials, which would be the other solution. I think it's easier to justify giving more money or reduce costs to managers than making players worse, especially when all major changes to player training would mean that MVP, HoF and ATG players that are 25-27 yo and already capped (or almost capped) would get a huge advantage for the next 10 seasons. But to be fair, I think that the current economy system is only a bit broken, but not completely, so small changes might be the best way to go.

Not sure if it's the right title but can someone check my merchandise income? why i earn so less?

My fan survey is;


i have 2M$ stadium

Normally i earn 35k in a week. However I built a stadium last season. Now i only earning 46k in a week. Is this a bug? Please help

Last edited by volkanegeu at 9/1/2022 10:06:26 AM

UPPP