BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > Minor Suggestions 4

Minor Suggestions 4 (thread closed)

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
309376.996 in reply to 309376.995
Date: 6/29/2025 4:02:50 PM
Classics
III.8
Overall Posts Rated:
2121
Kindly ,I think you mis read. My point of view.

In my context it meant they are not doing anything positive for the team beyond buy expensive players.. i.e. build arena. Train youth . Do the draft

28 week of no salary floor penalty .. you can buy a player up 350k . 65k a week. Just mortgaging players.

Once this period ends, teams are forced to allocate significant resources toward player salaries, which can be unsustainable if they haven't built up sufficient economic infrastructure. It's crucial for teams to balance short-term gains with long-term financial planning to avoid financial pitfalls.

In this context, buying expensive players within the cap can provide temporary advantages, but teams need to prioritize sustainable financial management to achieve consistent success.

This Post:
00
309376.997 in reply to 309376.996
Date: 6/29/2025 4:09:02 PM
Mos Eisley Imperials
NBBA
Overall Posts Rated:
213213
So removing that exemption makes them go bankrupt faster? Or are you advocating for removing the salary floor? Becuase the latter won't (and shouldn't) happen, as the salary floor is a key component to reducing the effectiveness of established teams deliberately tanking down the division ladder to build up a large war chest.

This Post:
11
309376.998 in reply to 309376.996
Date: 6/29/2025 4:15:59 PM
Glasgow Blue Jays
II.2
Overall Posts Rated:
2828
Second Team:
Colorado Rattlers
What you are saying makes no sense. How would removing the salary cap exemption for 2 seasons stop the above? I don't think you understand what the salary floor exemption is. It is not a penalty. You are talking about teams not building up a sustainable infrastructure which defeats your argument. The salary floor exemption is there for new teams to allow them to do that by keeping salaries very low and tank to build a strong base. If a team chooses not to do that then you can't help them and they are in no worse of a position than if there was no exemption for new teams.

What you are describing where someone buys a high salary player would happen more if there was no exemption as you might as well get a decent player if you are paying the salary anyway.

This Post:
11
309376.999 in reply to 309376.997
Date: 6/29/2025 5:07:35 PM
Classics
III.8
Overall Posts Rated:
2121
I’m asking to shorten it in time frame only.(14 weeks)

But some have expressed small nation and etc. It’s something buzzerbeater admin will have to figure out in systematics.

This Post:
00
309376.1000 in reply to 309376.994
Date: 6/30/2025 3:46:14 AM
QQguest
I.1
Overall Posts Rated:
330330
I can't understand why,
When a team is subject to a lengthy salary floor protection period, it can lead to a situation where they're forced to allocate a significant portion of their resources towards player salaries, even if it's not sustainable for their current financial situation.
Or do you mean you're not referring to regular teams here, but rather those teams that bought a lot of high-salary players before the playoffs?

I agree that a 28-week salary floor protection period encourages teams to keep their player salaries low and then buy a lot of high-salary players right before the playoffs.
But I guess (though I might be wrong) that most new managers usually don’t use this kind of high-risk strategy.
This kind of strategy is more common among returning experienced managers or new managers who were taught to do it this way.
So we might need to be careful not to teach new managers with this kind of experienced-player mindset, or it might ruin their gaming experience.