BuzzerBeater Forums

I'm not a fan of Lemonshire propositions, nor I was agreeing with him in his way to discuss with hrudey, but if we look at the real facts, he did play 3 seasons in D3. In season 23, he joined the game and received his team for the last two scrimmages of the season. He didn't even play an official game, the play-down were before he signed up.

Thank you for the clarification, Perpete. For the record, I stand corrected.

I love all the changes introduced this season. I'm still having my doubts about the Stamina and Game Shape thing (if I understand it, Stamina has been enhanced in detriment of Game Shape). I actually loved bad game shape ruining the high K players of one-minded bullying teams. I like more the Spurs or Chicago teams type of play than, say, the Lakers or the Sixers of Iverson's days (although, I love AI).

Fellows will complain about anything. They think they are entitled to it, and bring a conservative me-me-me customer attitude. And althoug partially right, since some pay, and since this is too business for the BB-Marin (I guess), in my case I take it as a challenge and with a strategic point of view, rather than cry foul for EVERY little thing that supposedly goes wrong or "miss the mark", or whatever.

And for all the cry babies, they want realism and stuff, but they don't tell you what type of realism they are talking about. They want porntube-type realism where they can say "Please me, please me", not actual BASKETBALL MANAGEMENT realism, with strategy and analysis. Please, take a hard look at the NBA and perhaps consult the two or three Trade Machines at sports network's (like ESPN), or actually read the entire NBA's Collectibe Bargaining Agreement (CBA), and perhaps you can take a look at the REAL world of baskeball management: those are some strategically challenging set of rules you have there. Ey, people actually take PhDs on that CBA. I bet you would not last a day as a real GM.

So let's just take this game as it is, a strategic management masterpiece that simulates Xs and Os are basketball players. I like the narrative. I welcome more changes in the future, and some glitches (I would still like to see Starters names in Bold on the Game reports, just to mention a small example, to visually make it easy to check, track, compare and analyze stuff).

But for the most part, I think things are going good. Yeah, you have less users. I, as player, I prefer 20k good long-standing users, than 40k whining human bots that included, perhaps, 5k farms, or so.

Anyway, keep it up!

Good post :)

"Please me, please me", not actual BASKETBALL MANAGEMENT realism, with strategy and analysis. Please, take a hard look at the NBA

Your idea of this game looks eerily similar to Wolph/Trainerman's.

read the entire NBA's Collectibe Bargaining Agreement (CBA), and perhaps you can take a look at the REAL world of baskeball management: those are some strategically challenging set of rules you have there. Ey, people actually take PhDs on that CBA.

The CBA is a set of rules on trades, cap, salaries. You'll find 0 rules on the game of basketball there. Besides, in BB we have no trades, no cap, no roster limit, no max contract, MLE, veteran minimum, no non guaranteed contracts. So yeah, NBA GMs and BB GMs do not have much in common at all.

But for the most part, I think things are going good. Yeah, you have less users. I, as player, I prefer 20k good long-standing users, than 40k whining human bots that included, perhaps, 5k farms, or so.

You are ok with low numbers of committed managers and so am I (especially because England is a reasonably sized nation). What if the majority of the current users don't share our opinion? Also, dwindling numbers aren't just a concern for how enjoyable the game is: why would a developer spend time on a game with a small userbase?

Coming back to daytrading, also known as the topic of this thread, the real reason why the transfer market isn't working properly and there are so many opportunities to exploit in BB is mostly due to lack of users. If you had 4-5 times the number of users, the market would have sufficient liquidity on its own that you wouldn't have to introduce rules preventing people from taking advantage.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 11/11/2014 4:59:20 AM

First off, I apologize for not announcing the tax changes upfront. That was a bad call. The good aspect of the immediate move was that we prevented daytrading sooner, rather than later. More about that later on.

I have a feeling this thread grew unnecessarily wide, tackling things like autobids and personal attacks and such which clearly don't belong here. I feel it's my duty as a BB to point fingers and I point mine at trainerman. While some of his ideas are not bad, his headstrong crusade to force us into making changes he is pushing is annoying and time consuming.

On the other hand, I loved the concise and to-the-point comments from the likes of Mike Franks and some others. Keep it up.

On the whole, I think the discussion was a productive one. We need feedback and will keep monitoring how the new tax numbers work and what you, our users, think of them.

It's still early, but so far, we are satisfied with the effect of the new numbers. We think they have reduced daytrading and kept the rest of the users' profits. So, if they are indeed doing what we intended, there is no need for further changes. We will keep watching though.