BuzzerBeater Forums

Such as ?
I'm for it, more stats can be funny at times. Not everyone is interested in it though.

We can start with basic advanced stats that exist in the real world. Some people are stat geeks and look forward to those kind of things. Of course, you could have something even more valuable like the stats coming from Moutlinho's tool or those you could find on the US offsite where you had data on success % in guarding/making various kind of shots etc.

How do you define something that could be interesting and something that isn't ? Especially for people that never subscribed to the forums. The "recent" add of the red number for forums was already a small step in the right direction. If we can do better somehow, let's try.

If your NT manager post a message on a league's forum, I guarantee that 12+ managers will not even notice a message has been posted in their league forum.

I realised that someone posted something on my PL forum a season later than they posted...

That's the point of being Supporters. That would cheapen one of the main attraction of it.

Fine, I'm saying that one game per week only for supporters isn't much. Surely you can get creative with that, providing it won't kill the servers with an overload.

Training has to be a bit challenging.

BB would be a lot more challenging if training were logical and everybody could do it and compete. But competition from thousands of managers is exactly what the few at the top don't want, though, so they like training exactly as it is.

You also, could make up interesting challenges with friends/strangers/stranger-friends.

For example, if you want. I challenge you next season, to whom can train a 6th man prospect to average 30 ppg for a season.

that is a challenge at who play patient against the worst opponent not really interesting

I challenge you to do it in only a princeton offense?

Eh eh? let's make it more interesting.

I believe that everyone at the top would be more then glad if they suddenly could train while being competitive. I can't see how it would be any other way.

Certainly not everyone. Of course some would look at it that way. Some would even look at it for the overall benefit it would bring to the game. But it is undeniable human nature that some would prefer to continue to be big fish in a small pond, and prefer that the pond stay small.

Hi Karl Franks, that class conflict of yours is going well ?

An ordinary user would get a "vacation" from the forums for a post like that, eh?

Yeah but maybe you would not have tanking teams. And why would tankers want this to happen?

Is it possible that you and others commenting on this thread have some vested interest and a personal agenda in this since you're not a stranger to tanking?

Let put it out there so everyone understands what you're saying. You want people to have to tank in order to:
a) train without worries of having to try and win games
b) rake in lots of $$$$$, so that at some point in the future with your loss-trained trainees and top players overpaid on the transfer list you can challenge those who didn't need to do all that.

Sounds petty. Also sounds like catering to the weaker managers in the game due to design flaws...

You know if no economic penalty is introduced on tanking managers, the tax should be applied to training. The more you lose, the less training your players get.

I think the only instance I'd be happy with numbers decline is if all tankers disappeared from this game without a trace. They ruin the game as much as the bots, but they do it on purpose to gain an advantage because they are not able to close the gap in different ways. I'd rather quit myself than ruin the game for everyone else...

Last edited by Lemonshine at 1/22/2016 11:19:09 AM

Sorry to be precise, tankers would not have the usual sorry excuse that they do it "to train", would they?