BuzzerBeater Forums

this would be a good solution, and slow down low league starters a bit without hurting they chanches to be a big program

The only problem would be that the dominant teams werent slow down in their time, so this makes the disbalance even bigger inside the little countries, between one who recently starts and has to share the division with a dominating team.

hehe thats also a poitn.

The "monsters" that has been created by this economic unbalance were created also in all the countries at the beginning of BB, but in medium/big countries the inherent competiviness has allowed other teams to catch up.
In small countries these managers have a huge advantage right now compared to new teams. But these new teams with a slower economy will have just the same disadvantage as a new team starting in Spain or Italy compared with a first division team, with the advantage of being already in the first division.
And for sure that some small countries will remain small for very long time, since they don´t have a particular interest on basketball, so this is not a situation that may be solved after certain amount of time.

The situation of the very few teams which have amassed a huge advantage in their countries could be discussed elsewhere, but of course is a very minor point. I don´t support a drastic action against these teams (although a good number of german teams for example have already suffered a drastic change in their long-term economic plans because of the new attendance formula). I have the feeling that most of these users are not native from these small countries, so they could move to bigger leagues or adapt to a new harder economic situation.

For those who think that the economy situation is fair:

Look at me as an example: My team salary is $ 317 310 and the staff salary $ 83 074 -> Totally: $ 400 384, and leading my league (a spanish II) my incomes this week have been Attendance: $ 235 030, Merchandising: $ 53 389, TV: $ 110 203 = $ 398 622. Every week I am losing money or winning 10-15k.
I only have 8 competitive players (with not very high salary each of them) because I can't afford any more, and I need them to be competitive in my league (I had to trow the cup in the initial rounds because with my actual roster I coudn't compete in it and in my league at the same time). If I want to increase my arena, bid for a player or change a member of my staff I must sell 1 or 2 of my players and compete in the bids with many teams which are leading their leagues easily, spending less in salaries and winning much money than me. That makes me loser in the 95% of the bids or increases the price of the players I get. Moreover, if I put players in the TL my fans punish me decreasing my incomes...
I started in season 3 and my transfer balance History is $ 2 934 006, my cash is near to 150k, so in 7 seasons I have lose near to 3 millions while in other small country I could have earn 3 millions in 2 seasons.

Is this fair for you?

Regards

Player Salaries: $ 283 878 Attendance: $ 533 350
Staff Salaries: $ 42 974 Merchandise: $ 113 199
Scouting: $ 10 000 TV Contract: $ 108 086
Total: $ 336 852 Total: $ 754 635
Typical Weekly Net Income: $ 417 783

The best team in CBBA has around 100k salaries more than me.(i am 3rd, but 4-5 teams are like 10k max away) To be able to catch that team i need to spend money on the market. My net income is 151k more than you, but you have 279k more salaries than me. As you can see you have more income than me 45k per week. To be able to have a team close to yours i will need an other 3-4 seasons, but i will never be on a position to spend as much as you because in 3-4 seasons you will have 1.5-2M more than me. By the time that i will buying better players my profit will be even lower.

I think that you have 1 less team to worry about...

At this point, is it possible that a BB sums the different appreciations they have of the issues we've been talking about?

-Economic

-Competitions and incentives for big community/smaller community teams

-Are we really playing a different game because of the structure of BB+external factors (where your team is from)?

-How different and mainly, how does it (negatively) affect both approximations to Buzzerbeater when they face each other? e.g. effort/success, both in the court or also market stuff.

We are talking about it since season 3 or 4 and finally it seems to me that BBs realised that there was something wrong so they decided to introduced different TV revenue and different merchandising but once again it seems to me that the situation didn't change a lot. I don't care about BBB you can see the economic power when you want to buy a great player on the market, that's the point.

You make more than 400k of active per week, while a Div. I of Italy or USA or Spain make something like 200k less than you.

The point is that for having that rosters in the major division most of players have had to play for seasons, while you'll receive something like 5M of revenue in a single season and you (a general you, I'm talking bout your case but I could talk of several others) with that type of income, won't take so long, if you have a good knowledge of the game and of the GE, to reach first the top of your I division and than to partecipate to B3. For a spanish, italian, ... user that is unthinkable and it's kinda dream.

Me and thousands of other users of the most "BBpopulated countries" started from IV or V div. and we have been playing for seasons, maybe (or surely) more than you, but "unfortunately" we borned in a big country and for us it is harder than it is for you to reach the top, that's because you make +420k/week while for example in my II division the league average income is of +40k/week.
How could I only have the illusion to think I'll win the Championship or partecipate to the B3 in only few seasons? As I've already said it would be only an illusion, but for you it is something so close to the reality, cause you play in a small country.

I surely think that is much more exciting to play to play in a big country rather than a small one, but I think that is wrong that there's such a wide "disparity in treatment".