BuzzerBeater Forums

No, it does not. That's not the debate.

The debate is, show me your time is worthier than mine, and then small countries could fairly be in the nowadays situation.

Since very few liked my idea of cancelling the B3 and melding all the countries into one (big surprise), here is another possibility:

-instead of the B3, have many parallel international tournaments running at the same time
-seed teams based not if they won their league/cup, but their world record and how they did in the international tournament last season
-home court is based on the seed, or have the matches played at a neutral site
-the higher your seed, the higher level tournament you participate in (ie: highest seeds play in B3, next highest play in 2nd tournament, etc. A few teams do not qualify for a tournament)
-make them all attendance based (split the money 50-50)
-higher attendance for the higher level tournaments (for example, B3 gets x2 the revenue of the next tournament, etc)
-this model would make it so a team that goes out in the 1st round of the B3 would not get the same revenue as a team that goes a few rounds in the 2nd tournament. However, that team would (most likely) play in the 2nd tournament the next season. But, if you went really far in the B3, you would really cash in.

Since this would inject more revenue into BB, reduce the amount of revenue in league games and/or increase salaries to compensate.

So what? I have lost bids to teams from Italy and Spain and the USA. Give me a break. I hate the fact that 90% of the players I would like to buy have auctions that end at 3am my time, but I am not going to blame geography. Maybe you ought to go for a player who costs 1.5 million so that you can engage in a bidding war if need be. Or at least know that if you are bidding your whole wad there is a good chance you will be outbid.

And, Jonidas, maybe you ought to build a few more courtside and box seats. You have sold them out for about 10 games in a row. One of the first things I read in the rules back in season three was that when you start selling out your seats, it's time to add more. And, while putting players on the TL might lower one part of your fan survey it raises another ( " doing everything he can..." ) so that argument is not only ridiculous, it is wrong.

And if the Spanish and Italian cups are more prestigious than B3 (which I completely agree they are) why even begin to bring "making the B3" into the discussion at all?

Certainly one of the best parts of this game is the community aspect. My community has NO activity at all. None. No trash talk, no tactical or management discussion, no NT concern, nothing. No matter what your team can accomplish (which, if you are competing against similar quality teams should be statisfying enough ), managers in large countries have active and entertaining and helpful communities, which I imagine (really have no idea since I don't have that experience) is arewarding part of your online management simulation experience.

Last edited by somdetsfinest at 1/28/2010 8:31:20 AM

So what? I have lost bids to teams from Italy and Spain and the USA. Give me a break. I hate the fact that 90% of the players I would like to buy have auctions that end at 3am my time, but I am not going to blame geography. Maybe you ought to go for a player who costs 1.5 million so that you can engage in a bidding war if need be. Or at least know that if you are bidding your whole wad there is a good chance you will be outbid.

So what??
Aye, I'll repeat it again.
You do know those bids you lose with teams from a major community is because the money they would have come as a result of macro-competition, right?

And again. Now, the "so-what-case" I have. The money I have comes also from the major competition against my major community. And I tried to give an example of what always happen. I decide to make a market movement (selecting objetives). If I'm lucky, I would have signed this (overpaid) player for 2,6. If your "market movement" goes wrong (now, I would have to select other player, not the ideal one) I may have to say goodbye to my aspirations.
What I try to let you know is how different one team gets the money through time or by geography.

(129389.79) That is the best solution I have seen in all the Big Country/Small Country discussions I have seen, preserving the concerns of both sides. It limits the possibility to earn massive amounts by having a small team salary while keeping the door open for smallcountry teams to reach the top. The curve on how fast you can reach the top (domesticly) will be steeper with less users no matter what, but with this solution it is on roughly even terms when it comes to the level that the competition goes global, and limits income that will be spent "carelessly" on the TL. In my country the rat race of having a competitive team are escalating and during the last 2-3 seasons, the former Joe Bigfish is losing his age advantage. Our level of competition is not the at the highest level, but in time I think and hope it will be. If the BB's intend to make a change I opt for JosefKa's solution, or something along those lines, since capping the possibility to become the best worldwide would be extremely unrewarding and not a good incentive to get new users to join. In most countries BB imitates real life, but in Norway (possibly others) they raise and revitalizes the interest in the sport. That is a remarkable achievement for any game. A group of friends in Fredrikstad have started their own buzzerbeater basketball team, others have been inspired to find a basketballteam in their vicinity and asked if they can train with them, and others yet have discovered the lack of norwegian coverage of norwegian basketball and basketball in general. So the interest is bigger than the supply/options. TV coverage of games is non-excistent, only Eurosport shows Eurobasket a seldom time. Lots of gym teachers throughout the country don't know how to teach basketball, focusing on soccer and handball to cover their incompetence. But this is a diversion.

I started in season 5 and have spent MASSIVE amounts of time (2-8 hours a day). Still I don't consider myself a bad manager or stupid not to have won division 1, the tournament and gone far in B3. It has just not been my main focus. I have tried to understand the GE, game dynamics, my own team and my own goals, my competitors priorities and mapping their players (skills from when they get bought and their weak tendencies). I have maintained a low salary, spending weeks and months monitoring the TL before buying a player because I have some strange and strict criterias of what I want in a player (always choosing multiskilled players with ST,FT and at least some RB not matter what position) and training players that I intend to keep. My point? JosefKa's suggestion is based purely on salary, which does not benefit my team at all, but I see it as the best solution for the community.

Regarding the teams that have started early, it is a dead issue and I think it's best that teams that have been supporting BB (as paying supporters or in spirit) for such a long time does not get punished. They have contributed to adjustments and suggestions on how to improve BB, and also had to adjust to a lot of changes. I think they deserve a rest from the accusations. (although keep the cheating reports coming. On those type of accusations we are all equals).

This is by the way the healthiest discussion on the matter that has taken place in my BB-history ;) Lovely to see that we disagree without trying to strangle eachother. That goes especially to manager:... no, just kidding ;)

Try to make a cricket simulator succesful in Spain...

...or in ANY country?

And, Jonidas, maybe you ought to build a few more courtside and box seats. You have sold them out for about 10 games in a row. One of the first things I read in the rules back in season three was that when you start selling out your seats, it's time to add more. And, while putting players on the TL might lower one part of your fan survey it raises another ( " doing everything he can..." ) so that argument is not only ridiculous, it is wrong.

It's easy to say this when you have more money than you need for beeing competitive in your league (you have an amazing -$21 000 000 in transfer history) . Jonidas is a great manager (he is now playing for his 4th promotion, so he knows who this works). If you are in a league with hard competition, if you want to upgrade your arena you have to sell a big player and then you won't be competitive.

You do know those bids you lose with teams from a major community is because the money they would have come as a result of macro-competition, right?

Or being in the game since season 1 or skillful ( or rampant) daytrading, or saving for a long time. And, ummm, I call bogus on you claiming that it always happens based on the 69 players you have bought on the TL.

Last edited by somdetsfinest at 1/28/2010 8:53:48 AM

And, Jonidas, maybe you ought to build a few more courtside and box seats. You have sold them out for about 10 games in a row. One of the first things I read in the rules back in season three was that when you start selling out your seats, it's time to add more.

How can I build more seats without any cash, next week, with the allstar I won't have a home game and I will go to bankrupt. That's a problem in many teams of my league, and many others, we have to save our cash according to the schedule to avoid going to bankrupt. And that's the big difference betwen people playing in large and small communities, that we can't generate the same incomes as you, even if our outcomes have to be much bigger to be able to compete.

And, while putting players on the TL might lower one part of your fan survey it raises another ( " doing everything he can..." ) so that argument is not only ridiculous, it is wrong.

Yes, the other ones raises, but if the first of them decreases to 0,5-1 balls and the other goes to 4,5-5 the average is lower than if both of them would maintain in 4.

Last edited by Jonidas at 1/28/2010 9:00:40 AM

Or being in the game since season 1 or skillful ( or rampant) daytrading, or saving for a long time.

Yap, too, and I'm pretty sure most of the teams from smaller countries that compete with me in the market have not been as skilled (day or nighttrading) neither saving. You now seem to get it.

And, ummm, I call bogus on you claiming that it always happens based on the 69 players you have bought on the TL.

Sorry, what are you saying about 69 players I've bought on the TL, "transfer list"? What's the problem with this? I don't get it.

Edit: I re-read you and now I know. But still don't know how does it affect (me, buying 69 players) with the point I stated. Actually, many of those 69 were "rampant" daytrading in order to compete with market stuff (staff and players) caused in a good part by the unbalanced situation we've been talking about :)

Last edited by Pappa Flaah at 1/28/2010 9:21:55 AM

If you think small countries is not a problem, this morning I was going for this player.
Tiro: 11 Alcance de tiro: 3
Def. exterior: 7 Manejo: 4
Penetración: 6 Pases: 7
Tiro interior: 18 Def. interior: 8
Rebotes: 5 Tapones: 7
Resistencia: 4 Tiros libres: 3

bet 2,6, all I have, and a Asian team got him for 2,7, and would surely have gone to 3,5 or even more. It's a matter about effort time dedicated to the game with different/unfair success in a same market/court.

All your partners of your league are in the same position. In this moment you have to deal with them

Last edited by GM-Gonza8 at 1/28/2010 9:19:10 AM

I am not arguing whether or not Jonidas is a great manager. He currently has two players on the market, is in 1st place in his division, and has sold out or close to sold out his courtside and box seats for 12 weeks, while charging nowhere near max prices. That's a mistake by him. He has made 16 transfers in that time. It is not anywhere close to a stretch to conclude that he could have increased his seats some. He is currently adding 12 seats to his courtside, which is a great move. He should do that every time a construction finishes. Bit by bit, getting up to the max.

I would say that my transfer history is anything but amazing. Losing 21 million is not a very good record. But when I buy a good player, I keep him until I want to upgrade then generally sell them at a loss to ensure a sale so I can afford a better player with my savings and transfer money. The balance is not so important as the spending, though. I have spent 52 million in 8 seasons, while Jonidas has spent 39 in 8 seasons. WOW! A whopping 1.5 million more per season, or less than 100k per week.