BuzzerBeater Forums

Anyway I agree. Its stupid to divide sports/not sports by heart-rate

geez, if we count sports only based on toughness, endurance and heart rate, then let's keep Hawaiian ultra-triathlon and ban everything else :D

While you guys are discussing random subjects, Silves has already been bought (by an italian team) and put on the market again, with the sole purpose of winning today's cup match.

At this point, paying the player's salary when the player is bought seems like an absolute necessity. Basically the dude that bought him could buy a monster a week right up to the cup final (he and everybody else) and not pay a dime except for the taxes he forfeits when he sells him, since the transfer price is alway more or less the same...1M-1.3M.

In my opinion it would be better to not make just bought players eligible for any games of their new teams except scrimmages (and PL games maybe) until after economic update. In addition seome players (based on numbers of days with their current teams) should not be able to play in a non scrimmage game if they are on TL at the time (cause server issues, lets say if they were on TL 6 or less hours before the game).

Taht seems to be a smotther solution to me, the aim is to not let unpaid players play, this would also prevent last minute additions and it could make a difference whether you pay immediately or normally on Monday. Othetrwise teams with road games (less income) would have disadvantage in comparison to those with home games and wouldn't be able to react cause possible bankruptcy (if double salary is paid if they would keep the player/unable to sell him).

It would be better if players like Silves had wages that allowed people to really want them on a long term basis. This way lots of people would want them, and then they would be sold for 10kk, and not for 1kk, and kept for a long time by the team who bought them. Nevertheless, it seems it won't ever happen.
Making teams pay in advance player's wages won't change anything, it will only undervalue even more those 300k-500k players in order to compensate the extra money spent on wages.
The best solution for B3 would be to freeze rosters. Teams would be allowed to play with the same players that started the competition.


Last edited by LA-Bernspin at 12/9/2010 1:24:48 PM

Team in B3 have different needs outside of B3. Wouldn't work (or it wouldn't be fair).

the best solution would be stopping creating this crappy players... or buy them and fire them

You cannot fire player on NT rosters. And many of those monster will be stuck there for a long time (in many cases till another monster will push them out one day).

I agree, they shouldn't be created at all, but if NT managers are ok with monsters with game shape 5 or 6 due to constatnt switching teams and overpalying, they probably think they are still useful for them, so they won't die out in foreseeable future.

I mean: rosters would be frozen only for B3. If a team bought another player he could be used on the league or cup, but not on B3. Like buying a player during league playoffs (you can keep him but can't play him on playoffs).

I mean: rosters would be frozen only for B3. If a team bought another player he could be used on the league or cup, but not on B3. Like buying a player during league playoffs (you can keep him but can't play him on playoffs).

You either didn't get my point (people don't need to have B3 finals teams at the start of the season except maybe for B3) or you suggest there should be two different rosters, one "real" for league, cup, sc (and PL) and one for B3 and you would pay for that frozen B3 squad only for the real one. Which surely won'tbe implemented for many reasons.

You have to bne able to sell players wheneever you want. I'm not sure what you are suggesting, let jsut say TEAM X from middle size country has monster A on its roster at the start of B3. That team doesn't need him for league games, it can win without him. So
a) Monster A is frozen on roster and team has to pay from him till he is knoicked off B3
b) Monster A is frozen on roster for B3, paid and can be sold meaning he is no longer on that B3 roster (except when re-aqcuired) nor league roster
c) Monster A is frozen on roster for B3, not paid, unless he is still part of that team league roster and when sold he just ceases to be on league roster and is still on B3 roster
d) Monster A is frozen on roster for B3 and acts normally like on league roster till sold, then he is not eligible for B3 nor league roster anymore that season

None of these options is viable. The problem with frozen roster is overpowered teams at the beginning of the season not underpowered. Since domestic competition is not the same for everyone, frozen teams are not fair enough for everyone.