BuzzerBeater Forums

So what if there's a disadvantage to new teams? There should be! They're brand new!

I love that BB doesn't hand everything to new teams on a silver platter like Hattrick did - that's why I left the game. Everyone in this thread is doing a lot of complaining, but no one is figuring out a solution or a way around it, it's all "woe is me."

If BB makes the playing field level for all teams, there will be no drive to advance or satisfaction upon doing so. I don't know about the rest of you, but I relish the challenge of advancing through the ranks with a (slight or substantial) disadvantage because I have enough faith in myself as a manager that I'll be successful. If you don't, maybe you should go play Hattrick instead.

Seriously... we are not saying there shouldn't be a disadvantage to the new teams. I'm not gonna explain again what we are actually discussing. All of the post we've made should sum it all up. And we are not complaining, at least I'm not.

I'd appreciate if you didn't explain it again - I had to wade through enough of your illogical posts in the beginning to get to some people who were making sense.

Then give me a proper counter argument why it's illogical. You can't just say it's illogical without backing it up.

You've been given many very eloquent and well-explained counter arguments from the BBs, so I'm pasting below the ones I believe most debunk your arguments.

These current steps are intended to bring the economy into a state of equilibrium and lower the prices for the quite frankly awful players on the transfer market. We all have awful teams, so the quality of what you can buy isn't up too much notches - when the really decent players start coming through, the current prices will be seen for what they are - vastly exaggerated.

We think the model we have is a better long term solution than in other games, but
for it to function properly, it also needs to have a certain level of maturity in many respects - which is something that is currently not the case. If the situation is left to continue then the gap between the levels will just increase as the top teams have more resources to outbid anyone and everyone. As players on the market are much the same at the moment, the net effect is that poorer teams can only afford players that are pretty awful and not much better ( if at all ) than those they have, and the richer teams will buy anything that's trainable or less crappy than the absolute minimum offers on the market.

Recycling the better players gives the teams with more money something to spend their mountains of cash on and leaves the rest of the average players for the poorer teams to actually be able to afford.

These measures are designed to give new and poorer teams more of a chance in the game, helping them to be able to afford things that they currently can't. Additionally closing the gap between the league levels that is currently growing.[/

After this well-thought out post from Oxidus, you responding that the problems "weren't happening yet, but that they might happen," which is a good back of a step back from your original post, not to mention the thread title. You didn't really address any of these points, other than to say "it could happen," which doesn't hold much logic either.

Oxidus went to say (the part I really like is in bold):

With the recycling system, the money spent by the rich teams on recycled players has left the system. It's gone, never to be seen again. The rich team has something of value but that's as far as it goes. That asset also has a higher maintenance cost in terms of wages. It also means that the rich team isn't driving the price of the lower quality players on the market, as their focus is now on the better assets. The newer and poorer teams have the power to set the prices on the lower quality players which the bigger teams are selling, ultimately causing them to fall to a level that isn't as ridiculously high as it currently is.

I think this is the best case that's been made so far why this system is a great thing for the game, not to mention the numerous other posts from the BBs that say they are keeping a very close eye on things, AND the fact that they have consulted economic experts in this matter.

I'm no economic expert, and I'm assuming you aren't either, so I'm inclined to trust someone's judgement when they know more than me about a topic, and I think you should too.

I know how it gets when you are defending a side, sometimes you end up just arguing for the sake of arguing and not seeing the other person's side, but I think if you really take a few minutes to read the above posts, you'll have a lot less dislike for the system than you currently do.

Edited by nickfox45 (11/28/2007 8:29:57 PM CET)

Last edited by nickfox45 at 11/28/2007 8:29:57 PM

What I think it comes down to is how quickly the game reaches maturity. The idea is that, unlike hattrick, there is a substantial advantage to promoting to a higher division. Eventually the game will move to a point whrere the top teams are significantly better than the lower ones, this is inevitable.

Right now some of the lower division teams that have been well managed can compete with the top teams and any push toward the natural heirarchy is going to put them at a disadvantage. The argument appears to be that this should develop more slowly to allow the better managed teams to rise to the top before the divide becomes too great.

Personally as a Div III manager I think the faster the game reaches a mature state the better it will be for the majority of players.

Restated without emotion:

In my opinion, BB teams are handed MORE of a silver platter and with the influx of players, they are given a silver spoon at a lower cost.

Hattrick should stop being compared to BB. But tons or HT's are coming to BB because it is new and they have a chance to be like the Tombstone Titans or the Kansas City Wizards. Stogey23 had a nice run here (and some mired success in HT), but the masses want to kick the top dog off the mountain. Don't hate the player and don't hate their motives.

It a randomly generated game. While I agree with the maturity of the game is best, I disagree with the speed. There are other aspect of the game that can be addressed instead of this because the user base hasn't matured. Once that happens - any change that comes with it isn't met with such resistance.

Edited by Manhantan Beach (11/28/2007 8:54:33 PM CET)

Last edited by Manhantan Beach at 11/28/2007 8:54:33 PM

If you are referring to the title name. It's a Statement for a debate. What other title can you give?

And

We think the model we have is a better long term solution than in other games, but
for it to function properly, it also needs to have a certain level of maturity in many respects - which is something that is currently not the case. If the situation is left to continue then the gap between the levels will just increase as the top teams have more resources to outbid anyone and everyone. As players on the market are much the same at the moment, the net effect is that poorer teams can only afford players that are pretty awful and not much better ( if at all ) than those they have, and the richer teams will buy anything that's trainable or less crappy than the absolute minimum offers on the market.

Means that they are aware that the problem might exist., that i described, more or less.

It's true that the money of the top teams are gone forever, but what does it really matter to them? According to some of the NBBA teams they make between 400k-700k a week. He could earn that money within weeks... money that the smaller teams have to sell their players for in order to have a chance at that bot player. Maybe wait a couple of tv games.

Quoting valid counter arguments is one thing. (They are indeed good arguments. ) Proving that i was typing gibberish is another thing though.
As i see, more or less, are finding this a bad feature. Some find it a wonderful feature, mostly the high division players.

[edit] look at manhattan beach and jproch posts.



Edited by Riceball (11/28/2007 8:50:18 PM CET)

Last edited by Legen...Riceball...Dary! at 11/28/2007 8:50:18 PM