BuzzerBeater Forums

1. I don't want to say anything that comes across as self-congratulatory or gives you the impression that I'm speaking out of pride, but someone like me is part of this game's history. A lot of the changes made to the game were introduced to counter the way I manage my finances and to make it harder for me to create players that are extremely difficult to deal with.

The $25M cash reserve cap, and now the reduction of that cap to $15M, are largely a consequence of the way I have played the game. If these restrictions had never been introduced, instead of reaching five B3 finals and winning three championships, I would probably have many more titles by now.

Even last season, when I was paying more than $2M per week in salaries, one of the factors behind that situation was the reduction of the cash reserve limit.

So why don't you object to this reduction? Isn't this also a rule change designed to limit a particular way of playing?

I have also found ways to get results, only to see restrictive rules repeatedly introduced around them. But this kind of approach can reduce the game's appeal for a lot of players.

Changes should be made to diversify the game and create more strategic variety. You cannot accuse me of not understanding the game simply because I have adapted to its mechanics and found ways to succeed within them.

2. At the B3 level, Inside Defense is simply very weak, while Outside Defense combined with extremely strong shot-blocking centers is remarkably complete and powerful.

Here you bring up real-life basketball as an example. But in real basketball, which player plays the point guard position on offense and then suddenly takes on the role of a center on defense?

Guards are generally shorter and don't have the physical ability to block or effectively defend against tall inside players in the same way a center can.

You can't ignore real basketball when it doesn't support your argument and then bring it up when it does. If we're going to use real basketball as a reference, we need to apply that comparison consistently.

3. From my perspective, salaries were never the actual problem. The real problem is the structure of the game engine itself, and unfortunately, it doesn't look like that part is going to change.

For several more seasons, the same strategies and approaches will remain viable without any meaningful changes.

The salary increases applied to my players were roughly comparable to the increases applied to inside players with high Shot Blocking. So the same strategies are still completely effective.

In other words, the salary change hasn't actually addressed the underlying issue. It has simply made certain players more expensive while leaving the fundamental mechanics that make those strategies effective largely untouched.

4. BuzzerBeater is ultimately a game, and if the goal is to make it more engaging and increase the impact of the person actually playing it, the game should move toward a system where correctly identifying how your opponent is playing gives you a greater chance of winning.

I can identify that my opponent is playing Outside Defense. But none of the offensive tactics can actually function as a meaningful counter to Outside Defense.

So what exactly am I supposed to do? Applaud the game engine for this major weakness and encourage the developers to keep writing code that preserves it?

If I can correctly read my opponent's defensive strategy but the game gives me no meaningful offensive tool to exploit that information, then where exactly is the strategic depth?

Hello,

I dont agree with anything they have recently done. I don't agree with making guys like yourself pay that kind of fine, its uncalled and ruin the spirit of the game.

My point was how the game came to be, the changes throughout. To what it became to be today.The. Engine may not been able to handle what it came to be today, But Do the tactics work, Yes.

We as a community never have got to create the right (correct)builds to make them work or the build is so potential hardcoded and expensive none can create 5-6 player to play the tactic. 125k-225k+ a player .

This was my point the community created hybrids( lean cost but very effective, efficient), so we could get past the cost ,, and to get these tactic to work ,they were working but not any more !!

My. Whole point a lot need to stop screaming loophole when managers like yourself, know the in and out of the game> it not loop hole your player are better than mines and you’ve won more . You didnt use any exploit., That was my points



Does the game has issues, ( yes), ,could it be better (, yes), but. Do i agree with they have done with these updates, (No i dont) my point oint was not towards systemic but gamesmanship.. this what lead to these changes. Bad gamesmanship.


For an example, A manager seeing you have success with better players they cant build and then scream to admin exploit. /loophole .It bad gamesmanship.

1. I don't want to say anything that comes across as self-congratulatory or gives you the impression that I'm speaking out of pride, but someone like me is part of this game's history. A lot of the changes made to the game were introduced to counter the way I manage my finances and to make it harder for me to create players that are extremely difficult to deal with.

The $25M cash reserve cap, and now the reduction of that cap to $15M, are largely a consequence of the way I have played the game. If these restrictions had never been introduced, instead of reaching five B3 finals and winning three championships, I would probably have many more titles by now.

Absolutely, fully right. Big nations generally have many who hoarded a lot of cash because they're either very experienced or older accounts, but still it's very difficult to hoard a lot of cash compared to (no disrespect) nations like Iran where there's barely any competition and you can realistically save more than 150k/week easily while still winning titles and competing in the B3.

With this measure teams like yours will actually be 'forced' to compete properly instead of just saving so much money that you can afford to run a 2M/week salary squad that isn't even with players from your own country or that you trained!

It levels the field for everyone actually, and it also allows newer users to grow up their teams and reach higher levels way faster. Not only that but it will push managers to train more, and the transfer market to become more active which is a win-win for everyone involved in the game, since there's a lot of users just being inactive and they'll be brought back to the game with this measure.

I have also found ways to get results, only to see restrictive rules repeatedly introduced around them. But this kind of approach can reduce the game's appeal for a lot of players.

Changes should be made to diversify the game and create more strategic variety. You cannot accuse me of not understanding the game simply because I have adapted to its mechanics and found ways to succeed within them.

The fan boycott and the 25M limit were already introduced to reduce tanking teams which was a big issue at the time, you didn't find a way to get results, you found a way to still exploit the loophole that is your league giving you way more money than users from countries with more users, and you exploited that in your B3 run as well by sustaining the insanity of 2M salaries a week. Since a lot of seasons ago developers warned that they condone such strategies and they want to reduce them, now they were prompted once again to act because of how many teams were abusing it recently.

In other words, the salary change hasn't actually addressed the underlying issue. It has simply made certain players more expensive while leaving the fundamental mechanics that make those strategies effective largely untouched.

Based on what Marin wrote it looks there's more changes to come so let's see what happens

Is Iran the only country with a small number of users? This ridiculous argument of attributing all my results to the number of users has been made over and over again.
The question is, among all these countries with small user bases, why have Iranian teams reached the later stages of B3 again and again, while teams from other small-user countries haven't even come close to reaching this stage?
In Season 50, when I won B3, three of my players had been trained by me personally. Even in my current team, three players have been trained by me since they were 18 years old.
And I've already predicted my next training strategy based on the upcoming changes.
Ten seasons from now, when I've once again reached the later stages of B3 with relative ease, you'll just come up with a new excuse for your failures and keep complaining.
If I brought up the broader issue, it was because with the 25M budget limit, after 15 seasons of planning and training, you can realistically compete at the top B3 level for one season at most.
Spending five years of real life just to have one season and one chance to compete for the B3 title takes a lot of the enjoyment out of the game.
My entire point was simply that the changes being implemented so far have done nothing to improve the game and haven't brought about any fundamental change to the way the game is played or to its overall gameplay.

Is Iran the only country with a small number of users? This ridiculous argument of attributing all my results to the number of users has been made over and over again.

Read it again, did I attribute your success due to your league having low number of users?

No. I clearly referred to your last season's expenditure of 2M weekly in salaries compared to the majority of your competition being between 1.1M and 1.6M weekly salaries.

Do you think it's fun, and fair for everyone else who also planned for many seasons their B3 runs, to face a team who's having an absolutely absurd disproportional salary expenditure just because they saved a lot of money and want to burn it in one season? And this paragraph is not directed only at your team, but at everyone else who's employed this strategy too.

Spending five years of real life just to have one season and one chance to compete for the B3 title takes a lot of the enjoyment out of the game.

Sounds like a lot of fun to play this way...

My entire point was simply that the changes being implemented so far have done nothing to improve the game and haven't brought about any fundamental change to the way the game is played or to its overall gameplay.

The changes were just implemented, and it looks like there are more to come in order to create a more enjoyable gameplay and to involve more users, give it a few seasons and I'm sure you'll start to notice the effect of the changes

It’s probably worth mentioning that you’re aware Iran was involved in a war a few months ago. The internet was completely shut down for three months. I only managed to regain access to my team during the very last week of Season 71, so I had no choice but to buy several players from whoever was available on the market, and I had to do it as quickly as possible. It had taken me many years to complete my team’s training, and there was a real possibility that internet access could be cut off again.
If I had had more time and the opportunity to properly evaluate the market and buy players, I probably would have looked for players with lower salaries and more optimized skills as well. I certainly wouldn’t have wanted to destroy all the money I had accumulated over an entire season.
The fact that I was paying more than 2 million in salaries last season was because I had bought players whose transfer prices were extremely low. Everyone saw the result, and despite having a team with that level of payroll, I didn’t even make it to the semifinals.
With the new changes, over the next few seasons it will no longer be possible to win B3 with just seven high-level players. If you look at the purchases made by other teams, you’ll see that several teams had multiple players who cost around 5 million each.
At best, you can train three players at B3 level. You then need another four top-level players, each of whom costs somewhere between 3 and 5 million to buy. That means even a 15-million cash cap isn’t enough to buy seven players and pay 1.5 million in salaries for two seasons.
Personally, I welcome changes that push the game toward having at least 10 quality players, including both starters and bench players. However, as a first step, the changes should have been implemented without introducing additional financial restrictions, and only after seeing their actual impact should the cash reserve cap have been reduced.
Reducing the cap at this point will only lead to even more confusion among users, while making championship runs at the higher levels increasingly dependent on luck.