BuzzerBeater Forums

Well I read almost all posts and there is great diversity of opinion, are those who support it and those who say NO outright. I honestly do not see the problem of this proposal, if you are supporter has the choice not to create or second team, not an obligation.

Personally I agree with this proposal, I would be very happy to see new people in my country and who is willing to train the players on my team, whether young or old. It really would be more competitive in our league and that would force us improve our equipment and move forward. If people want to get to Colombia and are willing to train our players are welcome.

Colombia awaits your arrival.

I would like to point out, wouldn't second teams eventually mean more bot teams? Because if a supporter package runs out, the team will become a bot, or if the Manager forgets about the second team, then it becomes a bot. I think we will just end up with extra teams, that aren't even managed' and I don't see the point of that.

I would like to point out, wouldn't second teams eventually mean more bot teams? Because if a supporter package runs out, the team will become a bot, or if the Manager forgets about the second team, then it becomes a bot. I think we will just end up with extra teams, that aren't even managed' and I don't see the point of that.

If not for this rule, those teams would be bots. It's quite impressive indeed for some bots turning back into bots to be a negative against this proposal.

Nice long piece of nonsense
Not at all what I responded to which was this:

Fix the trainning and I (and others) could be a supporter.
Or supporters having more ways to trainning more players.

SEE, it's not about this at all.
he could be a supporter if he got whatever
you took my words and his and made them something they're not
but a beautiful rant for nothing

Where does that merit this?

Why something that is in line with the game's main philosophy and is appreciated by many who can't even afford to become "supporters", should be considered and accused of being selfish?
Whoever plays this game and is not a "supporter", shouldn't disagree with a proposed change? Only the "supporters" opinions should be valid and deserve a ..."thank you for everything"?

Last edited by Headless T Gunner at 1/13/2014 4:35:40 PM

you could cap the BB Nations/Utopia at three levels deep making for 80+(16x16) teams in each BB Nation.
Then create BB Nation B rather than go to tier IV.

At least then players from the smaller countries could appreciate genuine competition and players in Italy/Spain/USA could appreciate a quicker route to the top.



Last edited by Elmacca at 1/13/2014 4:38:04 PM

- second teams play in BB Nation/Utopia, all starting together at the lowest required level. Say, Level III.

Just a comment about an Utopia country. I think it's not very interesting for managers from a big country. Of course when this Utopia country would be launched, it will be nice for everyone to start at the same level, and a good opportunity for managers from low divisions to reach the top quickly. But in 10-15 seasons, playing in this Utopia country will be exactly like playing in a big country like Poland, Spain or USA. It will just be interesting for users from small nations, but they are the minority.

So I think it's important that the way how the second team would be added remains a nice feature for everyone, even in 10 seasons

not for you, but it's not first time someone forgot Italy as one of the bigger countries in BB.

I told that in my first post in this topic: Play in another big country for being with both my teams for 12 seasons in the same league.... naaah. Senseless.

:? Lets keep in mind the main idea: all new features should help BB administration attract new money by purchasing supporter to keep the game alive.

The discussion about options for second team (in real country or Utopia, men or women) in fact does not mean much in view of that main idea. It has meaning only for option itself, but not for attracting new sources. The administration will decided potential income and expenses first of all, and this would be wise.

As for me, I do not really see any economical sense in adding the right for owning the second team.

The major number of managers who buy supporter regularly will not buy supporter for secondary team, just because it is more likely for fun or something. From the other hand, there is no need in this global function to stimulate such managers to update their primary supporter. They will do it anyway, like me. Once I bought it, I will buy it unless I stop playing even without secondary team available.

For managers without supporters, adding the secondary team availability is not something that will make them buy their first supporter, is it? I would prefer to have it just to add my team logo. The secondary team option is the last reason why they will buy supporter.

Also, I wouldn't pay much attention to poll results, because I think the majority of those voting YES are supporters just cheering new function and those voting NO are non-supporters who would like to have everything for free.

Lots of non supporters have voted yes.. The ones that didnt are frustrated because they want a second team but cant get supporter- I for one voted yes. BB needs this.