BuzzerBeater Forums

I think i understand what you mean, maybe you can type it up as an example just to confirm?

Is this also to help with mid-season sales of trainee's? eg: $4k salary player who has been trained for half the season would have a salary of $10k, but goes to FA market lower than his actual trained salary?

ohhhhhh i get it. So its a multiplier of the user's Trainer salary.
Interesting concept!

Might have some transfer market implications, but as long as the multiplier made the player's sale price a legitmate price, then i dont see a problem.

it might have to be a dynamic multiplier though, to cater for market trends.

I am too lazy to do any of the math right now, but I quite like the concept. I guess most will agree that the FA's should not dilute the market and significantly reduce the advantage that active teams can get by implementing good training plans. On the other hand, some FA activity seems good to balance the market. It's just that many feel the current balance we are seeing is... not that well balanced.

I tend to agree with Coach Regan that the multiplier in the sort of system you propose should be dynamic, perhaps set by the BB's each season (a bit like the salary formula). And of course, the suggestion as such would be difficult to implement very quickly, because it would take time to track the training effort and trainer costs in a meaningful way. Well, as long as the multiplier is dynamic, the BB's could ramp it slowly up.

I'm kind of confused about the goal of this suggestion. What are you trying to do? Raise FA prices? Arent they already high? 10x salary is often more than what they are worth on the market anyway. There is no way anyone is paying 400k for 40k C. The price is more likely half of that. Currently FA prices are higher than user listed players. Sure if my SF would hit the market as FA, 580k would be really low for him, but no worrys, his price would be pushed up by users anyway. There are already players that retire, because their price is too high. So why push the price even highers? Could you explain why this is needed?

i agree with wolph here, through the tons of fas, the prices are really low as you said a 40k center is not worth 400k and you roughly need three season of training for him.

And i believe that pretty much the case, cause the trained player base stays the same while new user replacing the old one which reduce the desire for "advanced"/trained players.

So you just want the prices go up for players, so micronation training divI teams can sell the players they train for a guaranteed profit? Training can never be obsolete. Perhaps training those 18 yo players is not as profitable as before, but training 21-25yo (even older players) is good for your own team.

stockmarket game that has nothing to do with basketball and everythign to do with who can be online when and for how long each day.

Pini much?:) You are aware that there are restrictions to how much you can trade in a span of 14 weeks. If all prices in the market are lowish, then how can you make good profit? The game is still moving towards equilibrium, it's natural that the prices continue to drop as teams are nearing their income cap (less money to spend on TL). Perhaps sometime in the near future, removing FA's will drive the prices upwords, but it will remove a lot of versatility from the TL aswell.
If you don't think training is profitable, don't train. If a lot of people stop training, training becomes more profitable.
NB! You are overly paranoid about those multiaccount training accounts.

I was talking about the older versions of those 40k players, who have retired. I'm pretty sure a 21yo 40k C, will be picked up pretty fast for 400k. We can't start forcing people to start paying that if we have enough talent to go around. If the 40k old C does not sell for 400k anyway and retires, why is there a need to push his starting price to 600k? I don't see the point here...