BuzzerBeater Forums

Mr. Gunner don not shoot me I see that You have nice gun ;) I only point the problem I see.

cheers

I'm having trouble understanding why anyone would be against something that has the potential to bring in money with little impact for most.

I like the idea of two teams however I think it would be a much better idea if the two teams (primary and secondary) operated under a one-line budget for the manager (with supporter of course) and that players could be trained and transferred between the team teams voiding the need to worry about buying and selling. It would, in effect, be like having an A and B team if a manager wanted to our operated as two equally competitive teams. The manager has preference.

I really like this way to go for the second team, maybe because it could be a way to fix the training. It needs some polishing, but I guess its not going to be very successfull idea.

If B3 was to be permitted for secondary teams as well, what would stop managers turning their primary teams into farms and look for championships and B3 glory in an smaller nation, with considerably less competition?

Wouldn't this bring chaotic circimunstances in big nation leagues, where well founded teams that are stuck in division II, even top division, with no hope of winning the title any time soon, suddenly become training teams?

And if we don't care about this aspect of the game anymore, why should there be a native country transfer restriction, for secondary teams? Isn't this restriction meant to be there, in order to avoid secondary teams functioning as farms?

I dont know, but i think we're venturing way off the initial standards, made in BB-Marin's initial post. He used repeatedly the term "secondary" team, instead of just "second".
Hence all the proposed for debate restrictions. But there is a growing pattern here, with many friend users not being satisfied with a "secondary" team, but pretty much wanting a second-very equal to the primary- one.

You know what, I am neutral to this idea. But if I were the management, I would analyze the situation carefully before going to the public.

As far as I get, we are trying to achieve multiple things with this idea, mainly improving game satisfaction primarily for players in smaller countries, while creating some revenue for the game. Hence, before getting everyone's idea on the subject, those country players should be approached, imho. Or their opinions should be taken into consideration more seriously than the others'. If majority of them are OK with it, we can build on it and try to get a more or less mutual consent on one final solution.

For me, I don't know if it would ever appeal to me to have a secondary team. Even though, I spend countless hours in this game, I feel like. I wouldn't care about my secondary team that much if I had one. This possible change wouldn't affect me in my current position, and I know there are a lot of players in a similar position = ), so I don't think community will overreact to some change, unless something awful pops out.

Nevertheless, we will only know how it will be, when they actually implement it.

I bought my 1st supporter couple of weeks ago, with a friend of mine, after spent some seasons in the game. We just wanted to give something back to the people who are working to improve the fun we get from this fine game. We intend to continue to do so.

I don't know what would I do each and every evening, if I wasn't checking my young players' stats, again, and again, and again...
Hahaha


Last edited by sleepflymm at 1/16/2014 2:10:55 PM

I am italian and I don't know if even playng 8 hours a day i'll ever get to play in B3... I wouldn't make that fuss on such a matter

I am 100% for this idea.
One thing I don't like is that the biggest reason against this, is that supporters would be getting way more than non-supporters.
BuzzerBeater is way too good a game to be free. Anyone who doesn't have supporter is getting a bargain. Whereas the supporters paying 40 dollars a year aren't getting that much in return. This change would make buying supporter a lot more plausible without changing the game much, besides making smaller countries more competitive.
Also, I personally like the idea of playing users from other countries competitively, as I may never make the B3. I don't know why anyone would choose Canada to be the country their secondary team plays in,though, considering it's average sized.

I think the *can't-buy-players-from-original-country* is ridiculous. I do agree that you should not be able to purchase players from teams you own.

I agree. I know why they are doing it, but to penalize everyone for the actions of a few, is overkill.

Well, that is how the world works sadly. I'm against owning a gun, but there are some people who are fully capable to own and handle a gun, some others don't, hence a need for restrictions.

Which is an pretty inane analogy. You don't think that the end results of misusing a firearm are just a wee bit different from owning two teams and purchasing players from your original nation?

Another sim game - which has the same two team option in place - allows purchase of home-nation players (just no trading between teams), and has experienced little-to-no problems with the fears you express being realised.