BuzzerBeater Forums

It does not matter how your team looks compared to mine, we are not competing with eachother. I have my own goals and Estonian managers might have different strategies than Lithuanian managers. I have always been in the lower part of salarys while making the most money. I am preparing myself for divI, whenever I go for the push and succeed I make sure I stay in divI. When I promote I might fail to stay up because of some unknown error in my calculation, but my goal still remains the same. Eventually I want to win Estonian divI. That's perhaps what you should also concentrate on the Lithuanian leagues (instead of trying to compete with Estonian leagues). Oh if you want to test your strenght against other Baltic country teams, get supporter and join BBBL.

Yeah, my point was, that no one speak about III or lower leagues, which are very different from each other. One III league is near II league, other III league is near IV league strength, but their money incomes are pretty same.

Yeah, my point was, that no one speak about III or lower leagues, which are very different from each other. One III league is near II league, other III league is near IV league strength, but their money incomes are pretty same.

There is no way for this to be true, given that leagues/teams with better player will have higher merchandising and TV contracts.

After a month break from forums I enjoy to be back to speak about the economy where there are thinks that should be changed.

-First someone said it before, staff salaries. The transfer list of the coachs is totally out of control, I did some mathematics calculations about for how much people is hiring new coachs(its the most affected) of a medium level(4-5) and people is paying high amounts of money with negative expectations. The fact is that now managers are changing their coach to dont lose more money, but its impossible to hire a new coach without losing money on short-medium-long term.

So i dont really think its good for teams of lower divisions to make such a big invest on coachs to dont lose more money, if they have to sell 1 player for buying a new coach.

It should be changed the staff system, for me i dont really cared about the new draft system(havent looked yet), when the staff system is on that low shape.

- About transfer list, what we can say... It has been bad managed and it will be bad managed unless someone with good perspective of the game decides to change it(BB staff), but i can understand that knowing Macroeconomy is hard.



Last edited by Marot at 7/20/2010 10:16:54 PM

Wow, reading this thread feels like I just read all five volumes of War and Peace!

Same story line too: everyone disagrees with each other, and the one with the biggest economy wins.

Keep the volumes coming, it's rather entertaining reading :-)

1. Why are you so against daytrading?

2. Why do you find it necessary to continually call people names? Putting a smiley-face after an insult doesn't mean that it isn't an insult. If you are an adult, you should stop insulting people you do not know.

Selling players is a key component of this game. There is no question about that. The market is undoubtedly global and Italians in the third division who are trying to improve their teams are at a disadvantage against Thai managers in the first division who are trying to improve their teams. That much is also obvious. The fact that all Italian third division are in roughly the same boat is a valid point, but only in a narrow view of the game itself. If team cannot improve do to cash flow inconsistencies on a global scale, ti makes it more difficult should they promote, and promotion is one of the main goals of the game.The merchandising and tv contract "fix" was an excellent idea, but personally I feel the amounts are too small to actually make a difference. Well, they were the last two seasons. With the fall of prices on the transfer list, perhaps these amounts are becoming more meaningful. To me it does not matter if the top players (and by top I do not mean highest salaried) sell for 4 million or 12 million, as long as the costs are proportionate to the money in the game. I think the BB's are doing a good job of working towards this.

1. Because I believe it's not part of basketball and people who get abused by daytrading are the ones who do not have good general knowledge of the game or have just started playing. Thus daytraders are deliberately abusers. I dislike that and will never daytrade because of that.
2. If you look at my responces I refrain from insulting before anyone calls me stupid or is being rude by telling me to shut up. It's all fair game after that. The smiley's are there because the sentences I create make me laugh and convince me that I am superior to him!:) <- see like this...
I agree that BB's are doing their best. It all comes down to, which game do you prefer. Would you like to play in Japan with 39 users and yawn season after season, or do you want competition like Italy. I know I would like to be in the top 16 of 5000 userbase country. Being top 16 in a 39 user country is not exactly the same, now is it?

Last edited by Kukoc at 7/21/2010 2:16:02 AM

I would like to play BB with a userbase same as ht - 1M users, and thats why Im raising the issue. They had the same problem with prices. It is not fair if from 2-3 games income you can buy a solid player. It should be had to buy a good player and thats why everyone trains players. Prices drop more, and maybe we switch towards general.

More money,means that the market cicle can restart again,and all the teams can chose their strategies with calm,without being forced by too restrictive economic situations,or trying to guess market trends to have advantages

But not all the teams are in the same situation,there are teams with a lot of money because they have few expenses to stay in a league related to the incomes they have,and if you give them a new free cash flow,they easily will try to spend it quickly,causing a phase of inflaction that will not improve the situation of anyone

So you need to give money,but not indiscriminately...the only fair criterium to give money to the various teams,is rewarding the competivity of a league,and of the various teams in a league
If you look at the Tv contracts of the first divisions all around the world,you can see they are going all towards a certain level,this is a sign that potentially no one would be penalized from a new system based on competitivity,beacuase you don't need an enormous number of teams to reach an high level in a country
But the differences are greater in the lower division,when often a II division of a country has the level comparable to the low III/high IV division of a more competitive country,with the related expenses,but with much more higher incomes,and more possibilities to play a role in the market,a GLOBAL MARKET where all the teams can buy players....but if there are teams penalized on the market,they would be unable to reach the top level,and less money would be available to EVERYONE on the market,because it is GLOBAL and if someone doesn't have money to spend,potentially anyone user in the world will miss it

The differences will exist forever,and forever there will be someone who won and many other who lost,but if everyone had the possibilities,the differences will come out from the ability to train the players and from the strategical choices made by a team,not from the different possibilities given to a team(and yet there's the draft that insert a element that creates new balances in the various leagues)

I think that reward economically in a greater way the competitivty of the various leagues,would be the right way to give everyone his possibilities,and discover really who are the best users and deserve to win

There are parts in this that I dont understand and if anyone could explain it to me I would appreciate it.

The way I read this, it say that Italian div II is so competitive (they use all their income on salary) so they cant gather money to buy players from the market. And to solve this we need to give them more money?
The thing I dont get is, If they get more money, will they stop being competitive then and save money? To me it sounds more likely they will spend that on even higher salary's. But maybe we should give 10 milion in start of season to spend on player transfers? I just dont get it.

I play in a country with a small userbase (compared to Italy, germany etc.) and can only explain my own situation. I finaly got some money together last season, to add two great playes and with that promote to the first league. Here I have a low salary compared to most and making great money +300k/week. This is great, but I would rather be a more competitive team the thing is that I dont have the money to get the players to increase my salary. After this season and with the promoting bonus, I will be able to afford a new player.

So I think most teams want to be competitive, but lack the resources for it. So the solution would be rather to inject more money into the countries with less competitive leagues and in that way creating competitive leagues all over.

1. But it is a part of Buzzerbeater. Taking It Easy is also not part of basketball, nor is a weekly training game during a season. Do you refuse to take part in those parts of BB as well? It is not just daytraders that sell players for inflated prices. It is the choice of the buyerwhether or not to bid for a player. If a manager makes a bad purchase, hopefully he learns. If you don't like it, that's fine. I don't like it either. The fact is that it is not illegal and villifying people who like to "play the TL" is misplaced energy and unnecessary.

2. Two wrongs do not make a right. I am assuming you are an adult. I wouldn't accept your reason from my 4 year old daughter.

People do not have a choice which country they are part of. You make the best of what you are given. IF you happen to be from a country with 39 users and make it to the top flight, good for you. Same goes for the guy from a country with 5000 users. I would like to know how many teams form d.III have made it to the Italian d.1. And how many since, say, season 7. Anybody have numbers?

You are making +300k/week now,right?With this balance,in a season you will have 4,2 M of free cash to spend(and I have not included the cup incomes in these money,the sum could be higher)
With these money,you can improve your team buying strong players,and beyond this,I hope you are training well your young trainees.
So,in only a season,you can improve a lot your team with the training of your young players and the 4,2 M to spend in the market;a team in your economic situation has all the possibilities to became competitive in very few seasons,if the manager is able to train his young players and make right purchases
And your situation is common to the situation of the countries with less competitive leagues

Inject more money in the countries with less competitive leagues,doesn't change the possibilities of these teams to became soon competitive,since you yet has these possibilities;indeed,maybe you would be disadvantaged by a new phase of inflation made by all these teams with a great amount of money to spend


In a completely different situation,are the teams who has to be close to 0 in the balance to stay with a decent team(not to fight for the promotion)in a mediumdivision of the competitive countries(II-III-some IV).They can improve only with the training,having low incomes for their expenses,thay are forced to sell periodically at good price their best players to buy new young trainees to try to improve their weak points,but became less competitive while the new trainees reach the level of the old players,losing competitivity,games and consequentely money in this period

While you can stay with your best players,and improve continuously your team till reach the top

So,what you are talking about?