BuzzerBeater Forums

You can use a crowdfunding platform like kickstarter to fund a mobile app. Just have to make it worth for t he community to contribute.

I don't agree with the draft changes. Draft is good enough as it is, all it takes is the people to realize it.

Players with low potential and 5 ball starting skills can be trained in a few seasons, while it takes ages to create a NT player. Especially in larger nations, as a new team, you don't need potential, you need salary efficient low salary players.

In the USA, if you know what you are doing you can move up from D5 to D3 in a couple seasons. I wouldnt even touch a guy under allstar potential because that trainee becomes worthless if he can't help you when you promote. There are also a ton of salary efficient guys on the TL that make it pointless to train a guy just for the lower divisions.

Thanks so much! I'd seen prior posts where you talked about this, so I'm very glad it's been implemented. Thanks for pushing!

I agree 100% with everything yodabig stated. Especially 1b (don't want to give every new team a windfall of an 18yo HOF worth $1 million), 2, and 3.

Regarding improving the draft, many have said it, but I agree that increasing the median would make the draft much better. Keep the current number of 5-ball potential draftees in each draft. But, maybe add another 1-2 perennial all-star potential draftees, and maybe an additional 4-5 all-star potential draftees. I did a very-low-sample-size study of looking at every player in 5 prior drafts. The results: Each draft had between 6-13 serviceable draftees. I defined a serviceable draftee as one that was 18 or 19yo, all-star or above potential, and >$2200 in starting salary. Teams finishing in 1-4th place should have a better shot at getting a productive trainee. Not a franchise player, but at least someone who can contribute to the team. I know BB is not the NBA, but I believe every single NBA team has some rookies on its roster that get playing time (or at least will get playing time in future years).

I think it's a reasonable idea to restrict new teams from selling their one "franchise" original player for a season. It would also help new teams from making a rash premature decision (especially one coming from peer pressure of NT and U21 managers trying to convince newbies to sell their talent).

While I understand that all draftees with less than star potential aren't very useful, I would personally be okay with leaving low potential players in the draft. Simply because having those excess players in the draft makes a manager have to actively scout (and thus make an economic decision on whether to spend on scout points). But I completely understand that it's frustrating to draft 3 players every year, and maybe, just maybe one of them is useful.

While I think your idea is sound I am worried that all the recent "fixes" just make the game more complex for new players.

Salary floor, minimum time in team, game shape drop on transfers, forfeits affecting draft position, individual player salary cap for next season and especially the GDP for next season are all additional complications for new players which were designed to solve real problems.

The real problems were tanking, the ridiculously low price of high salary players and the dominance of look inside/failure of the 2/3zone.

More elegant and realistic solutions would have been:
* an empty arena for tanking teams.
* higher tax for day traders
* minimum transfer listing price for all players (I will put this one in its own suggestion file)
* making 2/3 zone (or inside box + 1) actually work and shut down a LI/LP offence

Back to the main topic just about everyone agrees one big problem is the players new teams get in their start up and in their first draft. Everyone wants to be like Chicago, OKC or Boston and draft a Rose, Durant or Pierce who can take their team to greatness.

People saying that a $4k benchwarmer is fast to train is not helpful. There should be duds in starting teams and in the draft, and there shouldn't be more level 5 potential players than there are now but the median needs to change so that every new team can get some players that are not worthless. I started with an 18 year allstar. I was able to make him the star of my team for several seasons and even now he is a useful rotation player on a team ranked 209 in the world and number 5 in Australia.

Oliver Ðuričko (11263596)
Shooting Guard
Weekly salary: $ 29 336
Age: 33
Height: 6'3" / 190 cm
Potential: allstar

I think every new team should have 3 trainable players, probably they can't train them all, one may be a tall two guards, one could have a terrible mix of skills like a 7' SG with atrocious OD and ID but at least three that are max 19, minimum allstar potential and minimum $2500 starting salary. Likewise in the draft everyone should be able to draft someone useful.

It reduces the fun of the game. You can EASILY buy for $1 a random perennial allstar after the draft but even spending all your draft points worth $280,000 if you are picking late your chances are very low. How is that fun? Players expect the draft to be good but normally outside the top half dozen players it isn't.

I disagree with a better draft, this has been discussed many times and the fact that everyone gets a better draft would just cheapen better potential nullifying having better players. I also disagree with more money when starting. All that would lead would be more money thrown at bad players many newcomers do not know what a good players is, there would be even more reason to daytrade. My very first advice to any newcomer is "Do not spend your money right now, you'll make mistakes- Gm perpete



I don't see how it voids anything. The draft does not help new managers because again the new player don't know what good player is nor how to build him/them . you admit his your self above^^. What I said is quite simple to understand and exact same thing. The 1st season the system automatic drafts them one good player "a new team" not every team. I cant use the real life nba draft argument to BB because its not realistic to the way BB works. The BB team draft workout are void to help pick a player and what he can do. The nba draft is more in depth the player college games or pre draft workout are not fantasy and voided like bb. We don't know the strength or weakness of the player like Nba draft. Its a guessing game here. Me personally I can not blame them for spending the money atleast they know what they getting and the result somewhat..

Im not saying give every team a prime shaq and a john wall, but some thing good to build. like damon Lillard, a Rudy Gay ,a Sam Cassell. The rare exception are just meant to be rare like kobe and etc.

Im not saying give mass money to spend. I'm saying the system will pick them a good player with that money automatic also explain to them step by step in the process. If they have 10 balls to view a player then that's 2 good players they can get to start a quality young team(all the automatic draft money is gone it on them to continue the draft the second season in the fashion they learn or explained) Thus building stronger new teams.

All in all I don't see how that is cheating.? if your talking transfer market then the BB system has that in place to solve that . Lastly a lot are not complaining to give a hard time. but want z something better within the area,if nothing is wrong , then why does these conversation always occur within new user and older user alike. I m not a advocate of down with Bb staff or anything like that. Nor im a on slander campaign of BB but the draft could be 100thousand time better for everybody . If the staff took in some ideas and built them over time. Thus beingmoore optimistic to ideas of the peers here than being so pessimistic and denial all the time.

Last edited by Mr. Glass at 11/29/2013 9:54:36 PM