BuzzerBeater Forums

I don't understand the rest of your post

Lol no it's probably my English which failed there.

My point is that in the past anyone could buy titles and since making money was a lot easier, it was also absolutely much easier to catch up. Maybe it was not sustainable in the long run but you could compete. I completely reject your idea that it's easier to catch up now. My point, albeit poorly stated, is that in the past it was easier for everyone to make a lot of money one way or another (now you can't daytrade, you got penalties of all kinds to income) , it was easier to keep that money (now you have a cap) and you didn't need much of that money to compete anyway.

Misagh is the perfect example of how you save, save, save and then compete. Only, instead of doing it at the national level he did it in the B3 a few times, but if he could do it at the B3 level anyone could have done it in its own national league. You are wrong thinking that for them it's harder now because of high prices. It's not the prices which make it harder for everyone to replicate that model, but all sorts of taxes and penalties, which, incidentally are also one of the causes of the high prices.

You can't use him as an exemple since he doesn't train, he day-trades. He must spend his life on TL.

So who do you want to use as an example? They killed buying titles ages ago, the hampered and then killed daytrading. I point at one manager who has been at the top of one of the hardest, if not the hardest, national league in BB for 15 seasons or so and you tell me no, you can't use him as an example? Who do you wanna use as an example? A lifetime D3 manager?

You said people have to rebuild. I pointed out that people with high value rosters don't need to do that if they keep the roster updated. Clearly, if you keep someone like Marshall until he's 34 for sentimental reasons it doesn't work. But if you roll sub 32yo players you can keep your roster at a similar level over time because they don't lose that much value. In an environment where talent is going down, you can stay on top even with a progressively worse roster, obviously. You are confusing your position of an old and ageing team with what I call a high value roster, filled with tier 1 relatively young talent. In fact if you say that your roster wasn't worth that much because the players were old, then you are a perfect example of how you could compete with a relatively low cost in the past.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 12/19/2016 6:44:45 AM

Something isn't right here. If training started being attractive when prices went up now you'd see the players coming trough. How do you and Joemaverick explain that 26-32 players are a lot worse today than 15 seasons ago when you say nobody was training and people were leaving because of it? Who created the players who won BB in s20-s32 who were superior to today's players in top teams, by the look of ratings in the B3 and NTs?

The main question for me at the moment is: will those who see no problem in today's game and training system explain how those players were created if only a tiny minority of users were training? Will it ever happen? I doubt it.

I extend to you the challenge I offered Joemaverick who thoroughly ducked it. Anybody who think the training system today is fine should build a competitive (close to playoffs) D1 homegrown team from in a medium sized nation. Prove it, don't just go around spouting nonsense about people not training 10-15 seasons ago and still not training now. By my experience and scouting, most people in the leagues I've been, with the exception of Utopia at the beginning, do train and nobody will convince me of the contrary. Good luck if you take the challenge.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 12/19/2016 3:02:46 PM

Who is saying that the players are worse? If you judge by ratings you miss the point. There has been, since it was suggested to do so, an higher focus on secondary skills, that's why the salary reform being done so flatly has pissed so many people off. Finding a big man with 10+ OD was a rarity back in the day and so on. The top players you find nowadays are way better and this happened even though training has been slowed down.

You haven't got the faintest clue mate. Ask Joemaverick how many players with 148 skills, like the one he trained, he's seen recently on the TL. How many with 150+ TSP. I'll give you a hint: these players were there 6-10 seasons ago. When they gave us the TSP count in the TL page, there were multiple players with 150+ TSP. Who trained those? The people who didn't train you spoke of? If you don't want to use ratings to see the declining level in the game, which is perfectly fine evidence to me since it can be checked by everyone, then prove me that you are right with some evidence of your own. Prove right here that the average player teams have is not worse than it was 10 seasons ago. Remember: not opinions, facts and evidence.

Unfortunately for you I already went to Div I with 5 homegrown in Italy, highest users number in the game, and even won a game in Div I with only 5 homegrown player. This happened even though I was kind of a noob back in the day and the first generation was trained poorly and the second could have benefit of a slightly higher potential.

I mean an ENTIRE homegrown team not 2-3 starters and 2-3 backups or scrubs. I meant the whole team and it wasn't that difficult to understand since there is a thread about homegrown teams and that is the requirement.

You won against a team that was tanking or even worse than you, congratulations. So you have nothing to worry: you should be able to easily fight for the playoffs with a homegrown team, so please show us. After all if you think it was that easy when your players were bad and you were a noob, then it should be easier than ever for someone like you.

I asked you two this because it is the key problem nobody wants to admit exists. You can't train an entire D1 team from scratch even today that D1 teams are a lot shittier than in the past. In fact you can't train 8-10 players on your own and be competitive before they start declining, which means if everyone wants trained players past a certain level it would be not enough if those people were training at full speed every week.

Message me when you understand this. You will be a step closer to understand a lot of the problems in this game and we can have a meaningful discussion not based on personal opinions.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 12/20/2016 4:15:09 AM

I've checked my history and on 2015/04/17, 6.5 seasons ago the market was still low.

No please. There were people complaining about inflation on forums when utopia cam out and that was s27. Check the forums, that's when it started. Of course, it got worse over time, but when Utopia came out prices went up considerably in one go.

You seem to think that when the number of trained players has decreased, the number of good players on the TL has immediately decreased. No. Now we have the consequences of the decreasing of the number of trained players, at least 10 seasons later

See first reply. It IS already 10 seasons since prices started to go up and you even claimed here above you don't need that long to cap sub MVP potential players as you capped a 7 potential U21 guys within for seasons, so...10 seasons is plenty to cap an MVP player and even a HoF at 28 should be almost done. See how the 28yo compare to the 34yo to understand that the talent is going off a cliff NOW, 10 seasons after prices started to go up.

Please go on the TL and point out to me a 30yo player who is as good as Marshall was at that age. Remember you trained Marshall in a period when according to you there was no incentive to train and nobody trained...

why are you so obsessed by an entire homegrown team? Why is it so important for you? Since when should that be the standard for everybody? You think BB has failed but BB has never been made for that.

It's obvious. Because if there is no free agency you can only create as many players as users as a whole can train. Therefore this game has been created in such a way that there will always be a shortage of fully trained players. This is the default setting which was implemented when they moved away from the standard potential setting. Nobody understood this underlying flaw because the game had peaked already and with free agency and numbers dropping the supply of trained players outweighed the demand.

Now numbers are stable, free agency was stopped for a while and the problem is obvious as demand far outweighs the supply. And the supply could never hope to catch up to demand in this conditions because of the underlying fact that you simply can't create that many players with the current system. THIS is the problem with the economy right now.

So the choices are: 1) improve the training system (directly and not indirectly with economic measures because the issue is not in the incentives it's in the capability of the system itself) and let people create more players. 2) accept that we are going back to a situation where D1 teams look more like mid-level D2 teams used to look 10 seasons ago, D2 look like mid D3 teams and so on.

I don't know a lot of IRL competitive teams only made by homegrown players, certainly not in NBA. An usual european irl roster is made by some homegrown players, some domestic players and some foreigners. BB prevents to train a full homegrown teams, that would too easy, everybody would do that.

This is wrong on so many levels. The NBA is completely self sustaining and because they can choose from 33,000 college players every year they are able to maintain the level of the league as a whole. This game can't because you can't create a full roster of trained players from the draft unless they are low potential.