BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > The Great Micro-nation Debate

The Great Micro-nation Debate

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
278268.511 in reply to 278268.507
Date: 4/18/2016 9:50:30 AM
Lokomotive Coma
Bundesliga
Overall Posts Rated:
314314
Second Team:
Lokomotive Coma Utopia
There's also definitely something to this. One person in this thread pointed out that activity in the Utopian forums is mostly non-existent and they're right. The reason for this is almost certainly the language barrier. Even if national language forums were left alone, the comradery and rivalries built in this game come from the back-and-forth of playing in the same leagues and tournaments as people who share a language with you. Telling a country/language mate about a cup game you have against a team on the other side of the world isn't quite the same as potentially trash talking and having fun with that very same country/language mate.

I agree .... 100% ...... that´s exactly my point!


Last edited by hupfingatsch at 4/18/2016 9:51:59 AM

Ois wiad guat
From: Surpomp

To: RiP
This Post:
00
278268.512 in reply to 278268.509
Date: 4/18/2016 10:08:11 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
9898
And what if we leave the national teams as they are? What if a merge only meant that you'd be playing league and cup games against the managers from other Scandinavian countries for added competition? Do you have a problem with that?

This seems to be the clear choice in the national forum merge threads of Norway and Denmark. Iceland just have a few active teams, with one comment that prefer option 1, but I don't know if they have followed the global discussion with all the small changes and suggestions. Sweden and Finland is currently not included in the suggestion. I propose that you will consider asking their communities if they would like a merge of the Scandinavian/Nordic countries on those premises.

I think it is the best solution, since the point of keeping the NTs are a big factor for many. We would get a league of about 450 teams. A good size that can sustain some loss of teams and also have room for growth.

From: jonte

To: RiP
This Post:
00
278268.514 in reply to 278268.513
Date: 4/18/2016 10:13:04 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
925925
You should soon include the Swiss community in this discussion. The Swiss is a country with 3-4 different languages so I am not sure if they would be 100% supportive of the germanlanguage-merge

This Post:
00
278268.516 in reply to 278268.513
Date: 4/18/2016 12:46:45 PM
Lokomotive Coma
Bundesliga
Overall Posts Rated:
314314
Second Team:
Lokomotive Coma Utopia
I agree .... 100% ...... that´s exactly my point!

So hypothetically speaking, you wouldn't have any problem playing with Swiss or German managers then, right?

I don´t see such a urgent need to merge for Austria with it´s 54 Managers. Nevertheless, a view days ago I wrote about my preferences if BB decide to merge Nations like mine (278268.408)

There are 14 Nations with max. 5 and 31 with max. 10 users. Most of them probably won´t be happy by loosing his country. You can cut some nations and let the users decide where they want to play. (btw: I still don´t know why beginners should not decide where to play ... maybe the problem would be solved by itself ;-)

For me as a German-speaking guy playing in Middle Europe I first would like to merge with DACH- Nations, second with Europe and third with the hole world.

The problem with merging continental could be, that for example South-America will be a Micro Nation compared with Europe .... therfore I would prefer a new BBB (like in Football - Champions League, Euro-League, the European Champion plays against the Champions of North America, South America, Asia a.s.o.) so there will be more competition for more users. Not for everybody, thats right, but for more than just the national winners. And I really don´t think, that there will be more competion in, for example, the VII. Divison in Europe (if there will be a merge)

Last edited by hupfingatsch at 4/18/2016 12:47:24 PM

Ois wiad guat
Message deleted
From: Mike Franks

To: RiP
This Post:
00
278268.518 in reply to 278268.507
Date: 4/18/2016 1:08:48 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
370370
because the best solution by far will be to keep teams together but reshuffle leagues according to world rank and not nationality. You read that right -- leagues consisting of evenly matched teams from all over. A league would look a lot like individual teams do now, with players of all nations playing together as one team. Teams of all nations playing together as one world.

Personally, I wouldn't be against a worldwide merge of sorts if it was done properly, but the likelihood of a change like that happening is incredibly slim if we're being realistic. It's one thing to attempt to breathe life into dying or virtually dead micro-nations and something completely different to shake the foundation of the entire game. For all of the good things that might come from doing something like that, it would also be a massive risk that could lead to established managers leaving by the hundreds. Even if I wanted to do something like that I'm nearly positive that the people with the final call on the matter would have zero interest in it.

Thank you for your thoughts. I actually agree with you entirely. I also believe that an undertaking that would "shake the foundation of the game" is the magnitude required to save the game. Anything short of an undertaking of that magnitude might extend the life of the game a little (or shorten it by a lot) but in the end will turn out to be nothing more than rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic. I haven't seen a single suggestion of a small change that would save BB. Good luck to you if you ever have the chance to tell the powers that be that you would consider "a worldwide merge of sorts if it was done properly."

This Post:
00
278268.519 in reply to 278268.510
Date: 4/18/2016 1:27:28 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
370370
First of all, perpete, thank you for your thoughts. Much appreciated.

Regarding
4) That depends on two things, what do we consider the threshold number to be merged and do we want an half-assed merge. Bigger the new "nation", the more likely they are to be sustainable in the future. If half of a new nation isn't merged with another, that's one part staying as micronation(s) and one "nation" who could have been bigger and better.
It would be a big new world. The new worlds would each be full to start with, and no team gets left behind. You might have missed this (taken from my conversation with BB-Ryan):
(Mike) because the best solution by far will be to keep teams together but reshuffle leagues according to world rank and not nationality. You read that right -- leagues consisting of evenly matched teams from all over. A league would look a lot like individual teams do now, with players of all nations playing together as one team. Teams of all nations playing together as one world.
(BB-Ryan): Personally, I wouldn't be against a worldwide merge of sorts if it was done properly

So you see, there is no more worry about micro- anything. This satisfies your objections to points 5 and 6 as well, because each new world would be of sufficient size.

Re.
2) I disagree as I said in the past that I am in favor of having mostly strong teams in the B3.
I just said that each country could continue in BBB. They would have to earn their spots, though -- no freebies.

Hopefully this clears it up a bit. Thanks again.

From: Knecht

To: RiP
This Post:
00
278268.520 in reply to 278268.509
Date: 4/18/2016 2:31:12 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
16031603
If you decide not to merge Austria, I'd like to bail out and move to another nation.

Größter Knecht aller Zeiten aka His Excellency aka President for Life aka Field Marshal Al Hadji aka Lord of All the Beasts of the Earth and Fishes of the Seas aka aka Conqueror of the Buzzerbeater Empire in Europe in General and Austria in Particular
From: khenry
This Post:
00
278268.521 in reply to 278268.520
Date: 4/18/2016 2:54:24 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
288288
Honestly a merge should include every nation. If the BBs don't want to merge the biggest nations that are already more than self-sustaining, then they need to make a cut-off of say 900 users for those that will/won't be merged. If that were to be the cut-off, 7 nations wouldn't merge with anyone. The other roughly 55% of users would be merged.

Merging nations changes the economy and competition of the whole game. Micro-merging isn't a micro issue only.

I would be interested to know if those micro-nations that have been named as possible mergers would be more open to the idea if macros were also slated to be merged?

I have 1757 players for sale and I'm $25,835,360 in debt. Buy them at outrageous prices, or be selfish and make me go bankrupt. You decide, BB.
Advertisement