BuzzerBeater Forums

You're taking this personally while we're talking about rules and management of the game processes.

You're basically saying that I'm blaming you, and players from small countries, which is simply false. I'm talking about game mechanisms, not about people.

This topic is about the advantage of teams in small countries, so I could only assume that you think implementing disadvantages for people in small countries will somehow help you.

In other news, game processes are exactly the same (or fairly similar) for teams that are in direct competition with each other -- that is, in the same division level of the same country. I don't want to be rude, but the fact you're having problems there is not a fault of the systemm.

(and yes, as I mentioned before, if you expect to be successful without a careful long-term plan, you're simply playing the wrong game)

Alternatively you can implement a damper enthusiasm in attendance of the stadium is based on the reverse of the number of players in that nation.

Excellent, so that small-country teams can both be weak, and have no money to become better...

BB just implemented fixes in merchandising and TV revenue to somewhat adjust for country size and strength. I don't see anything else that will penalize teams just because they're in a small country.

Fixes for country size is in my opinion completely wrong. Strength of division yes, but size absolutely no. If the competition and random salary of a division in a small country is as high as in a big country, the merchandise, tv-revenue, attendance should be the same for it to be fair. But it is not, alas preventing the salaries to become as high, so we can actually turn the title of this thread around and say that small countries is at a disadvantage to become great teams, preventing them to get the top notch players. Those teams are also the only ones competing with team out of their country, creating an unfair enviroment for small country teams in hard divisions. Yep, you heard me.

As time goes by the level of competition inevitable goes up in small countries as the country ages and the average age of teams goes up allowing them time to build their enterprises. As it is now, it is unfair for small countries because the cap indicates: less inhabitants equals less income, regardless of division strength and total salaries. I will write a letter suggesting to our king that we invade, say.. the Netherlands promptly, so we can have as good BB income as the biggest countries top divisions Now they are prevented to reach the same level. A calibration based heavily on the division strength would be most fair, with minor differences between divisions, mainly taken from TV-revenue and maximum arena prices.

Edit: to everyone, not just you, Kozlodoev.

Last edited by Svett Sleik (U21-Scout Norge) at 1/30/2010 12:18:05 PM

(and yes, as I mentioned before, if you expect to be successful without a careful long-term plan, you're simply playing the wrong game)

You are being rude and you are taking this personally: what you are saying is deliberately false or insulting.

1) I never said that managers in smaller countries are causing my dissatisfaction with game, while you said so;
2) I never said that I want to have a quick success, I just said that I like challenges but not 'missions impossible', but you certainly know me and my intentions much better than me;
3) you are now saying that we (because I'm not alone) want to create 'disadvantages' for managers in smaller countries, which is false: we want to understand if it's correct that as of this moment they have 'advantages';
4) as you know, the TL is global, so anyone of us is not only competing with other managers in the same country and in the same division, but also with other managers from other countries that maybe have a simpler access to economical resources and that, in this way, have an advantage in the markets and alter the common prices of players, but also trainers.

maybe we explained very bad the situation.

i play in a nation with 3 to 100 (or something like that) users, i need less money/good player to win every competion comparison to italy, spain or other nations with 2000 or more users. isn't it a truth?

if i have the same or a bit less income from merchandasing and the same flow to the palace comparison to big nations, but i can win EVERY game in my nation (hence a sold out palace with maximum prices) with lower salaried players comparison to big nations, where they must choise at least one game to lose because of the game shape (and the result is a lower, very lower palace income), do u think i'll have the same economy power, lower or higher?

i'm waiting for a reply, always if u have that


Last edited by ÐΞﮎ@þiﮎA at 1/30/2010 3:33:02 PM

1-3: these points are not really contributing to the issue, as I am sure you will realise when you read it again yourself. except maybe:

it's correct that as of this moment they have 'advantages'

Which the answer is... No. Read the whole thread again, considering every post into your reviewed opinion. There will be differences in buying power, but nothing that concerns you. If you succeed in your country to reach the top division and B3 you have bigger income potential and are actually at an advantage over smaller countries. I understand jealousy against those that get to start in division II-III, but every club in the world have to balance their salary against income*. If your roster salary leads you into negative numbers you are on the wrong path no matter what division you are playing. If this is a problem of a whole country, and the problem every country eventually will end up in, *it is finally the part of realism so many hunger for. Realism is not playing the game at "easy" difficulty. I wish I had a team in a big country, because what I am saying may come of as arrogant, but the point is valid even if we put individual teams out of the equation.

4) as you know, the TL is global, so any one of us is not only competing with other managers in the same country and in the same division, but also with other managers from other countries that maybe have a simpler access to economical resources and that, in this way, have an advantage in the markets and alter the common prices of players, but also trainers.

..if the default is that every team should be entitled to buy whatever player they wanted..? I'm not quite catching on. If a random div III/IV team from a big country get outbid by a random div I-III team from a smaller country you find it disturbing? Will not that player either be overestimated value on, or, cause the buying team to have a higher salary expence? That higher salary expence will lead them to having less buying power next time they are on the market, and so on. It will even out, but not straight away. But no matter what there will always be extremes in every end; the most advanced countries struggle with balancing economy, while the youngest and smallest countries struggle to keep up with the biggest countries. Beeing first in a country have always been an advantage, but after the latest adjustment that adresses league strength it is not so dramatic as before. The biggest difference between an old and a new country is that the newest country has what can be referred to as a gold rush, having the intended effect to draw users from that country to join, while an old country relies on great inventiveness and creativity to succeed. The other thing is that although we compete in the same TL, we do not use the players acquired through it in the same surrounding, so the player not affordable by one division does not compete in the same enviroment, making the level of players available to the division lower, but still relatively equal for those teams it concerns.

if the default is that every team should be entitled to buy whatever player they wanted..?

Did I say that?

If a random div III/IV team from a big country get outbid by a random div I-III team from a smaller country you find it disturbing? Will not that player either be overestimated value on, or, cause the buying team to have a higher salary expence?

Are you considering the possibility that the buying team has an economical condition (e.g. less competitive league, less losses, possibility to have a fruitfully larger arena) to sustain that additional salary expense?

My point of view is that this unbalance has a deeper impact on the economy than what you think.

It would be nice to discuss this, without overturning statements, patronizing, doing cheap rhetoric, and making sterile personal attacks.

do u think i'll have the same economy power, lower or higher?

Everyone in your league will be competing under the same conditions, the $200,000 players will win you nothing in B3, and as soon as you start catching up in players, you'll lose your saving ability. And yes, in the process you will have better ability to buy players off the market, which is natural and expected.

Had Torooo been less successful would oueftete and the chasing pack improved as fast to the levels they are at now? Taking that further had Torooo not shown global dominance at the level he had would chasing teams like mine pushed as hard to try and close the gap using whatever means possible?

As a result of this if a small country (Canada with 750+ now I dont consider small!) with leading teams will often deter growth and I think another problem not yet addressed is how to market and get more sign-ups in the small userbase countries.

Signing into a small country can be considered great but if you are in the same division as BB powerhouse then you will get pounded regularly and then as we've seen in Japan this leads to people quitting early or attempting to cheat to try bridge the gap.

I would consider each unique new user that signs up in a small country a very valuable commodity and little things like amending the rules to reflect the changes that have taken place over the seasons and providing these new players with support so they rise to the challenge of the location they have arrived in are far more important.

I bet the small v big country financial advantage doesnt even cross a new managers mind when they enter - they just see who's at the top and can I get there. If no then they will likely not commit to the game in general. This is far more unhealthy in my opinion.

Doesnt anyone else agree that it is important also to address the way the game attracts and retains new managers into the smaller userbase countries. Its one thing to address the balance we are experiencing right now but if the small countries remain as they are whilst the larger countries add another 10,000 managers each then we'll likely be complaining in the future that the money distribution is wrong too and unfair on the Div 8 managers.

2) I never said that I want to have a quick success, I just said that I like challenges but not 'missions impossible', but you certainly know me and my intentions much better than me;

This is what you said:

the typical situation of a IV division in Italy, Spain or Germany teams don't really have the economical conditions to improve unless they make a long term (3-4 seasons) extremely careful plan

This is what I said:

if you expect to be successful without a careful long-term plan, you're simply playing the wrong game

.

And I stand by my statement: people for whom making a careful 3-4 season plan is a problem are indeed playing the wrong game.

4) as you know, the TL is global, so anyone of us is not only competing with other managers in the same country and in the same division, but also with other managers from other countries that maybe have a simpler access to economical resources and that, in this way, have an advantage in the markets and alter the common prices of players, but also trainers.

Right, the TL is global. However, the TL is exactly the same for you and other people in your division. So the fact that a division IV Chinese team has more money to spend than a IV division Italian team does not, in any way, affect anyone's ability to compete in their own league.

Doesnt anyone else agree that it is important also to address the way the game attracts and retains new managers into the smaller userbase countries. Its one thing to address the balance we are experiencing right now but if the small countries remain as they are whilst the larger countries add another 10,000 managers each then we'll likely be complaining in the future that the money distribution is wrong too and unfair on the Div 8 managers.

?¿

And how u wanna attract new users to small countrys if now they are unbalanced?¿ How u wanna make a small community of a small country into a middle one if the level is that high that will be impossible for the new managers to try to do something.
Do you imagine a new manager in Japan in 5-6 seasons having a chance to be a champion? Or in any small country...

But u said it all in your message you said it indrectly you think that in the future the small countrys will remain small and bigger will remain bigger?...



Last edited by Marot at 1/30/2010 7:56:50 PM

But u said it all in your message you said it indrectly you think that in the future the small countrys will remain small and bigger will remain bigger?...

I think its an assumption you can safely make. My point was that new managers to small countries dont consider the implications or advantages they might have over users in large countries. They only compare their situation with domestic rivals.

Also, little things that we take for granted like knowing the rules and how we like to build players, team ratings now rendered pretty much useless. As a new manager you rely on the rules and information like this and unless you spend time sifting through the forums it will take you a while to realise these guides that you have relied on to start building your franchise if taken as gospel may lead you to lose heart when you find out they are no longer accurate. This is just one example... but my concern is keeping new managers in the game and this is not just going to happen by altering the economics.

Last edited by Superfly Guy at 1/30/2010 8:04:42 PM