BuzzerBeater Forums

In my opinion everything should be open, but it was already said that Utopia won't be changed, so the only think we could probably discuss would be a third team option.

Dismantling Utopia would probably hurt the feelings of many users that spent time and dedication to build those teams. So I understand that Utopia cannot be touched now.

As long as something happens soon, I think it can only improve the situation.

We're outside the limits of what BB regard as a candidate for merging

I sure hope you're wrong. I'd like to see than save the game, not just tinker more and more, endlessly, letting it slide into oblivion. Time will tell.

Definitely, but during this whole thread the only responses made by BBs have been with regards to the plans they laid out in the original post. The possibility of a wider merger has not been mentioned so presumably they're not interested in it at all.

Ok gonna make that more brief-
Putting 2nd teams in micros wont stop them from being micros and everyone who wants it wants it not to stop them from being micros but to have another/to have A micro team. People want micros when they ask for 2nd teams in micros.

Quit trying to sell it is a solution to micros. Its the exact opposite- its another attempt to exploit micros even further.

That... doesn't make a whole lot of sense dude. If 2nd teams were allowed to go wherever, and a nation went from 15 users to 100, it wouldn't be a micro any more.

But as Knecht said, this is just talk. They're not touching Utopia.

Exploit is an ugly word. Almost like cheating. Micros are a more carefree way to play the game - which is perfectly fine. It only sucks when a new team joins and has no chance to catch up in a "normal" timeframe.

100 is still pisspoor competition. We see teams in that scenario that promote and can't afford to staff enough salaries to meet the floor. This is happening in nations larger than 100.

Not the argument tho', dude. Fixing micros is.

Anyway, as Knecht said: irrelevant-pipe-dream-discussion! My bad...

lack of competion IS the micro issue

From your perspective, tho' as a NT U21 coach - I'd enjoy more options there! I think the BBs want to create a situation that sustains, or perhaps even encourages growth (and thus $$$).

And we'll have to disagree that:

100 is still pisspoor competition.

Last edited by malice at 5/30/2016 9:24:06 PM

There are several issues with the micronations. I will try to make a short list.

1: Dying community. When you know everyones opinion there is little new input, and you get less involvement.

2a: Small market for players from your nation. Especially good ones.
2b: Those good enough that do get sold are either very old, or overpriced (because everyone thinks all micronation teams have huge bank accounts. Those that do are already in the top with premium player that they only have to exchange when they get to old and not good enough to compete at the top level. No use of buying them, when you have to compete against those same teams.
2c: Bad merchandise because it is hard to build a national roster.

3a: HUGE gap between beginners and the old teams.
3b: You play either against bots, which is boring, or very good established teams that crushes you, which also eventually gets boring.
3c: Beginners need to build arena only for 2-3 seasons in order to survive when the player salary floor kicks in. Those that don't know this goes bankrupt and quits the game.

4: It is hard to recruit managers on these terms... Example: "You have to try out this great basketball simulator, you just have to spend a half year or more building arena before you can start and build your squad and experiment with different tactics. After a few years real time investment you are good to play the game and compete. So, are you in?" I don't think so...

Points 3 and 4 are the crucial ones. With a merge points 3 gets solved, point 4 gets better. Points 2 is possible to live with. Point 1 I don't know. If a few more active players join, it might just work out fine.