BuzzerBeater Forums

I *DO* think that a lot of smaller-nation-users will bail if forced into this. It does appear the BBs are interested in trying to make this as positive as possible - I've never seen this level of discussion about a proposed change... but then I don't think there's ever been a change this large tabled before.

There's a possibility though that new starters from those small nations might be more inclined to stay under the new paradigm. I think its impossible to know for sure whether its a plus or minus but I do know that if I'd signed up to a country with less than one full league, I wouldn't still be here now.

Hmmm... I think the key thing for new users is to encourage them to have successes (wins, good trainees, ease of arena development), over competition. In many micro nations it was 'competition' (playing against superior opponents immediately) that scares 'em off.
(the idea of arena development is something I've pushed before - without any success. I think you should be able to demolish seating, at a cost of course, and rebuild in a different fashion).

I think once that happens, once we go the world Utopian route, then it's all becoming a bit too cookie cutter, too vanilla. I believe that the existence of many different world experiences is one of the things that makes BB... well... BB.

I obviously don't want to say the merger MUST happen, but I feel there's a difference between a world Utopia, and around 20-30 regions, nations or whatever, and a one world league option. I also think retaining separate NTs balances some of the move towards a vanilla world. Frankly you've terrified me with the idea of a vanilla world, like you I wouldn't find that as interesting.

The world as a whole group of Utopias would bore me no end. I keep playing my Ute team, but it's more out of habit than any sense of commitment. Part of the selling point (for me, at the very beginning at least) was the representative aspect - a concept of 'nation' (regardless of that community being made largely of foreign expats - as trainerman points out!). And apparently that's something that some here seek. I think that would very quickly become bland.

Last edited by malice at 4/24/2016 6:40:04 AM

really you worry for micro nation's users competition ??? :D

the macro nation's users are concern about our income ... with this way the income in our league will decrease and tanking will be harder ... in addition we dont merge with another country ...

are you sure all off your users are active ??? :D your good users are playing at Div 1 and 2 . with this way , Iran will has 2 good Divs ...

and about competition , I say yes ... it will increase ... be cause you can't tank easily and must fight for staying in high Div ...

That is what I proposed in the beginning of this discussion, but I proposed to do both merging and league restructure as a best possible solution.

League restructuring as you described would be great, but wouldn't completely mitigate the micro-nation effects. Both merging and league restructuring though, would create an even ground for everyone, and more challenge for micro managers.

Unfortunately, I don't have the time to read the whole discussion. And as I'm not really active as a user, I didn't find out about this thread until Perpete sent me a link.

Just a couple of thoughts on the topic.

I don't have a lot of time to manage my team so I wouldn't be against keeping the things as they are (it's quite easy to set up a lineup for every game on the season in advance if you play against bots in 20 of the 22 games). And training minutes are also very easy to manage. But competition is another aspect. Right now I'm not trying to win the championship (even though I'll end up in the finals but without a chance against the other team that has been around a bit longer and has probably some more money hoarded than I do). So I chose to train some high potential korean players in order to help improve our NT (and in the future, get some more merchandise revenue and hopefully challenge the other team in a couple of seasons).

I do not (absolutely not!) like the first option. Losing the flags will take away the joy of training players for the korean NT. They won't have a lot of chance to play on a "merged" NT because they have been already to old when I acquired them and might not reach their full potential even though I'll try.

So either option 2 (which is quite interesting because I'd like to have some more competiveness that I'll definitely won't get with only 3 team (including mine) in korea). So merging leagues and the cup (or just the cup) would be ok if we keep our national identities.

Or option 3, leave it as it is right now. Which wouldn't improve the situation (especially about competitiveness) but wouldn't make it worse either.

But if option 1 is chosen, I'm pretty sure that I won't be sticking around that much longer...

In addition to the relegation issues that other people have brought up, your proposal would still have a top league where managers from different countries would have to compete with each other. There have already been a couple of managers from these countries stating that this is unacceptable. How do you solve this?

Clearly there are always going to be objections. However, I would not believe that most managers would rather play bots than human players, even from a different country.

The cutoff should be 80 users. Averaged over multiple years. Even as pro-merge, it would be unfair to fold countries that actually fill 5 leagues