BuzzerBeater Forums

what about making teams' TV revenue and merchandising being linked to the NT performances?
i mean, not exclusively, but NT performances having a considerable weight on the TV and merchandising formulas.

It's already the case for the merchandising, a NT player from France (currently 5th) gives more merchandising than a player from Belgium (#20) for example ;)

So it's true that a player from a micronation will have more chance to play in NT than a player from a big country but he will give less money.

You mean that a player which gets minutes playing for his NT gives a certain boost to his team's merchandise.
I meant that the performance of a NT could/should reflect in the merchandise/TV revenue for every team from that nation.

Here I am, I took some time for this, so I hope you will read me calmly.

We are deviating from the focus I wanted to concentrate on, especially the concept of micronations. Let's look at some data:

- Is Finland considered a micronation on BB? There are 177 users, with half of Series III filled with bots. In your opinion, does tanking in this Nation have more or fewer advantages compared to nations with 500+ users?
I want to emphasize that I do not approve of the tanking playstyle, but many teams manage to earn millions this way and then bring it to the market.

- Is Belgium considered a micronation on BB? There are 160 users, with much of Series III filled with bots. As Finland, a skilled user can stay in Division II at the minimum salary and earn a lot of money from arenas and player statistics.

Similar situations exist for Portugal, England, Bulgaria, Sweden, Canada, Romania, and many others.

B3 Topic (current season):

- Out of the 177 Finnish users, only 2 participate in B3, Hupipalloilijat for winning everything (once again) and Riksun koripallot maybe for finishing second in the final (I think?).
- Out of the 160 Belgian users, 4 are participating in B3. Some because they won the championship, some won the cup, but certainly, there are "extra" participations due to rankings and victories in B3.

Doing the same calculation for other Nations, it can be seen that between Belgium, Portugal, England, Finland, Romania, Bulgaria, Sweden, and Canada, we have 20 participants in B3 out of 1176 users, while among Italy, Spain, Poland, and France, we have 13 participants out of 4110.

Now, honestly, do you think this is fair?

We all know how much B3 revenues matter (and I think this can also apply to BBM for various levels), and this seems like something that needs to be addressed in some way.

Perhaps connecting arena revenues and statistics to national team results is not correct (it was just my attempt to fuel a dialogue), but I believe there is something to improve in this regard to allow for a more equitable game.

One idea could be linking B3 participations to the percentage of active users in Series III, for example:

1) +80% active users, those reaching the conference finals have access to B3 + cup winner
2) 50%/79% only finalists will access B3
3) <50% only the league winner
(these percentages are provided as random examples)

The same approach could be taken with merchandise revenues for statistics and arenas.

In short, there are several possibilities if the problem is recognized.

Thank you, and I look forward to some opinions on this.

BR,
Cecio

Hi, I find the debate interesting.

I think the problem is identified, but it seems a mistake to penalize micronation users, it is not their fault that there are not many users in their countries.

We have a tool that could be used for the case, the international ranking.
Since the BBM has been played, it has even made it fairer since we are constantly measuring ourselves against users from all over the world.

It would be credible that a world-renowned team would, for example, have more TV revenue, regardless of the league in which it is located.
Taking it to real life, everyone watches Real Madrid games, but no one watches a Fuenlabrada game.

Even so, it is a delicate issue, since the risk is that the strongest teams become stronger and stronger.

In any case, it seems like a very balanced game to me, if I made any modifications it wouldn't make it very noticeable.

Cheers!

It's already the case for the merchandising, a NT player from France (currently 5th) gives more merchandising than a player from Belgium (#20) for example ;)

If anything should be done to further balance the micro/macro-nation economy (and I'm not saying it should...), it is to somewhat increase this effect. No other drastic measures, please!

Currently the difference from rank 1 to rank 98 is ~5%, which is 10k merch on a 200k salary player. Less than 2k between France and Belgium. Pennies really...

This could almost be doubled (25%->10%, as opposed to 15%->10%) without causing any major disturbances to the global economy, since a very limited number of players/teams will be receiving it each week. It will also, in part, address the issue of players with huge salaries being way too cheap on the market.

Then again, 8 of the last 12 B3s have been won by macro-nation managers and the other 4 by mid-sized nation managers, so is that really necessary?

Last edited by mink0ff at 1/29/2024 2:15:10 PM

- Is Finland considered a micronation on BB? There are 177 users, with half of Series III filled with bots. In your opinion, does tanking in this Nation have more or fewer advantages compared to nations with 500+ users?
I want to emphasize that I do not approve of the tanking playstyle, but many teams manage to earn millions this way and then bring it to the market.

- Is Belgium considered a micronation on BB? There are 160 users, with much of Series III filled with bots. As Finland, a skilled user can stay in Division II at the minimum salary and earn a lot of money from arenas and player statistics.

You are completely wrong !

1) there is no way to earn millions when a D3 is half filled with bot teams… I already tried that… and since more active teams are in the same lower divisions with less bots you have to spend more to compete against the other active teams. No way that you’ll make millions if you lose many games..

2) This is my first season in D2 with paying minimum salary.. and im struggling, its not easy to stay in D2 after this season, so I have 2 choices.. spend money on players -> less money again. or degrade to a lower division and selling more players because keeping them will cost to much because of a lower income..

The most money I’ve ever got was 4,2 milions wich took me 4-5 seasons to reach that and buy the 4milion arena.. getting back to 1mil is easy but after getting 1 million it goes really slow… the only way to make a lot of money is having luck with selling “good” players. I see players getting sold for rough money.. and believe me when I try to sell a trained player close to those “expansive” players TSP If i can sell a player for 500k - 1m I need to be really lucky, our transfermarket is so unpredictable.

If you think im wrong, please send me a DM explaining me how to make millions in a lower division or staying as a skilled manager in D2 with a team salary around the salary floor, because im trying so many seasons to build a strong economy for having better players and staff.

In a small country strong and older teams are mixed up with new and younger teams, the younger teams has to risk a bankrupt to compete against more skilled managers with a balanced economy

And before i forget to tell this the most money that im losing is paying on trainer staff.. those salary’s are rediculous… when training a player halfway (if its for NT) or after a training (if its for U21) there salary is so high that I need to spend milions again to hire a new good trainer.. no way to make money that easy or i must do it completely wrong

Last edited by GioDeb at 2/5/2024 1:07:57 AM

Your amateurish mathematical/probability approach really hurt my eyes, this is such a funny arguement.

If you are going to use mathematics, please do it right.

Buzzerbeater and B3 is about economy first, income and expenses over time, and in smaller countries like 200 users and below IT IS far more easier to tank, to develop and to beat 5 new casual users.

In a country with 200 users in 3 division u have to compete against 2-6 mediocre managers and 10-14 bots

In a country with 400+ users u have to compete with 3-4 mediocre managers, 3-4 good managers , 3-4 really good managers and the rest are some newbies who can still inflict damage. Especially if the country is a basketball country like spain,italy,greece,france and all the balkan territory


People who are saying the system is fine, are either delusional or are having a very good profit from the current situation.

That is totally understandable , Ιf I was from a small country with few users I wouldnt like such a change myself but this does not mean the current situation is fair.

Cheers.

Last edited by Cobra Kai at 2/4/2024 8:15:51 AM

Well I was not talking about how easy it is to tank, I reacted to the post calculating probability of being in B3 final just as I did, but the person did so with wrong numbers (only used a limited amount of smaller nations).

Also, it's not true that you have 10-14 bots in 3 division, due to the consolation all leagues have around 12 managed teams and 4 bots.

If it was as easy to tank as you all claim, maybe we would see more teams dominating the international or economical scenes from these ''smaller countries''? Once again, no evidence provided, regarding actual results, even then, this is a game, so what's your point? This is more than fair right now if there's no abuse being done. The only abuse I see is that bigger nations DOMINATE B3 and BBM. Is it not unfair to us smaller nations? Teams from Portugal have NO chance to compete in B3, our biggest goal is not to get obliterated and we get happy if we can even qualify a team for the next phase. So don't give me this ''unfairness'' crap.

If you actually backed up your talk with evidence and actual solutions I think it would contribute more to this discussion than passive agressiveness.

Also ''smaller'' countries also face their own difficulties did you know that? Just because it's ''not as hard'' as the bigger countries, does not mean there's not a myriad of issues that we are facing over here, and apparently the users from ''bigger'' nations, so far have only focused on their part of the problem. Now you have the evidence from another user from Belgium, who shows you that the situation is not as linear as you think.


I stand by what I said, all of us are facing our own difficulties, my difficulties being different from yours does not make yours more deserving than mine. Punto. I am tired of reading this unsustained gibberish from users from nations with more users, where it's actually much more pleaserful and exciting to play the game, complain about leagues that they are not part of.

Proposed solutions that I think will make everyone happy.

1. Merge smaller nations and micronations : 50-60 users or less
2. Increase % of merchandise for NT players, depending on rank

I remember teams from micronations not being happy at all when the merge took place.

I don't think adding more teams would help that... And not talking about how to replace those new teams on the current nations; how many div 1 teams would lose their division? That's not a good idea at all.

Because then it truly was easy access to money and to the highest divisions, of course many teams will not be satisfied, but that always happens. There are some div's hanging around 20-30 users, where being in II. is guaranteed, and achieving promotion to I. is guaranteed as well. In that regard I agree that's not fair at all because these teams receive free promotion bonuses without even having to try. Either way a merge with these nations, and for example increasing nations of europe to 200 or 300 teams would immensely increase the enjoyment and competition of the league, and it would probably revive nations of europe and create a very competitive 1st division. It all depends on BB's will (no pun intended)