BuzzerBeater Forums

To part two: Such issues also occur regularly in much larger scale games. An example of a completely different game might be the current league of legends moba. They created a queue system more welcome to groups of players to move up the ranks together rather than allowing just solo players or 2 man players to move up the system. Players said please no 4 man groups (out of 5), and allow solo players to queue up for the game normally. What happened? they allowed all types of queues, and told the players "we know whats best for the future, and we know what players really want" and now have 17-18% of the users refusing to buy pieces of the game. What i saw happen there is similar to what i felt when we had an honest discussion about the financial issues surrounding hoarding of 40-50 million dollars. The design many felt was flawed from a financial front with regards to certain teams having less to compete for, and it allowed them to save 4x the cash of major nations. In the end, the result was fairly close to the initial plan, and for me until i see a difference, it's hard not to build an assumption.

to part 1: I said i wouldn't commit much time to honest solutions, but i can't help it to some degree. TV revenue changes would improve the situation, but it would be a bandaid while you found other solutions. I think in the end, you have a few people pretty vocal about being against what you or someone within the inner-workings of the BB crew proposed, and some in favor. If it were my game to buy and run, i'd spend most of my initial investment on improving the flow of the first page a new user would see, improve SEO to outperform most of the rival games, and create a formula based on users per country that reduced TV Revenues and increased volatility of fair-weather fans to make winning and being the best team more profitable than tanking as the primary game change. I'd then sit on my hands, and see where that got me, and decide whether or not i should make Cup games different. For the u21/NT, i would create a two tier system where teams under a certain threshold of users competed against similarly sized nations. The best of the top tier of national teams would compete, if you wanted to make it similar to club play you could make the worst of the larger nations relegate down to the micro-nation tournament or something, and then you would give micro nations more to play for and more to be proud of. Better than trying to strip the few who are worried about national pride of it.

But except 2-3 nations rest others are in favour of change with option 4.

trainerman, i was responding to someone else's comments addressed to me, specifically BB-ryan's. I would appreciate it if you refrained from belittling me, as it takes away from the importance of not only my response, but your quest to get what you want out of this thread as well. Thanks.

How to fix the financial problem:


The largests countries have 4 divisions full (more or less) with "active players"

The division 4th has an income of X ---> set X as the income floor

So put the income based on the lower divisions

If a country has 2 divisions full, the 2nd should have the same incoming as the 4th of the bigger ones

What we should do with a division half-full ? ---> establish it as the floor and raise the income of the others


This is a small change, with a very little impact, since the majoritty of money is made by incoming attendance, but you cut some injection on the market

Now some fools in large nations who have NO IDEA what it is like for us, and are all just FANTASY about what it means to be a micro-nation user are trying to force or create solutions. NO THANK YOU. You want ot take our money away, and leave us with nothing- no money, no competition, no fun, no nothing.

Portraying the matter as an "us versus them" is false, and does nothing to elevate the conversation.

Minus one basketball for that.

I am not sure what you are trying to accomplish, but i'll just say you win and then maybe we can actually talk about proposals involving something regarding micro-nations again?

you win.

Going to 'attempt' to try and get this back into the right frame of mind so that it gets somewhere tomorrow.

I don't think that advertising/marketing means necessarily advertisements. I would suggest that if you go to a public computer, you will not see much in the way of buzzerbeater within the first few search options if you search basketball sim league. Some web traffic will be bots, but some will be people that play another game similar to this, and are looking for other viable options to help them pass the time. Then they have the first view of the game, and it's the webpage we've seen for quite some time. I think that you might not see any decrease in the spread between micronations and macronations, but you might at least get some micro leagues into two tiers of leagues, which would benefit the game the most i feel as it creates more healthy competitions for micro's.

If there are groups for the u21/nt purpose, my warning would simply be that forcing groups like this wont make someone who didn't want to develop for the u21/nt pride before suddenly want to. Some people play it for the clubs.

I would think the cup would actually be the ideal test run, but if people are clamoring for more challange in the league, then it probably would reduce the ease of reaching the finals in the smallest of micro's, which would improve finances just as much as a drop in T.V. revenue or other financial restrictions, so it could improve the health of the game.

Last edited by FurY at 4/13/2016 4:51:47 AM