BuzzerBeater Forums

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.

If you decide not to merge Austria, I'd like to bail out and move to another nation.

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?

Can we just merge Kansas and Delaware? As a Nebraskan I would be ok with that state going east

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?

Wolph said something similar to this and in my reply I think I said that really any nation less than 1000 users should be considered for merging. Really the aim should be to have somewhat similar sized nations. Simply merging micro countries to make a few still small nations is only a half step towards what would probably be best. Everyone should be playing the same game, though not necessarily in the same way.

As a player in one of the smaller nations (190 of us the last time I looked) I doubt I speak for the other 189 but I wouldn't be that bothered by a merge, though I'd lose my place in the top division. (Boohoo.)

Nor would it bother me to play with people from other countries. I would say to all those who say they don't want to play with people from other nations I assume they've only bought or sold players from or to people in their own country, since buying a player from a foreigner is playing the game with him.

Trainerman(Wolph) and I both outlined different ideas for a full merger here (278372.1). I believe in regions, he believes in language as a priority. Both are mergers for all of BuzzerBeater and not just micros.

Yup, that is what I had in mind. You've got it.

I think you also need to take into account how many people in USA say they will emigrate if *POLITICIAN* is elected president. A mass exodus hasn't happened, and it won't this year either.

Users saying change will end their careers won't all go. Those that go I would guess are largely the same people that don't want an actual challenge and enjoy making money without competition.