BuzzerBeater Forums

I think you didn't understand my suggestion. It was about ballancing currect fan survey calculation and its effects on attendance.
So it would mean making much more lower attendance with 1 ball or .5 ball of total happiness. Nobody talked about linear effect.

Last edited by rwystyrk at 3/31/2011 9:19:22 AM

maybe he meant my salary suggestion, as i said my solution is far away from perfect but i like to see this problems discussed.

And points like yours seems to be working better in my eyes :)

People have to use this strategy because the difference in income between Div's is to much. In most competitive country's where div's 2 and div's 3 are heavily populated with real managers not bot teams it is pretty much impossible to get to Div 1 and stay there, because the Div 1 teams are way to powerful for a newly promoted team. Most teams that promote to Div 1 get relegated the next season.

Why are they tanking in the first place. They are tanking for a shitload of extra money. When Div 1 teams have 500k+ salaries and Div 2 teams promote with 300k salaries, how else are you supposed to make up 200k salaries to be able to compete with the div 1 team's?

In the Australian div 1 (ABBL) there are about 10 teams that are untouchable to anyone that promotes from div 2.

Close the gap in incomes between the Div's and it will not be as rewarding to do this strategy. The only people that are complaining are people in div 1, they don't want the people in the lower div's to be able to be competitive in Div 1 and want to remain untouchable.

i'm not sure if it's linear now ... but it can't be linear after the change and the change can affect just very low rating of total (or particular) happiness ... behaviour of new formula could be the same as current formula for ratings over 1 ball and rapidly drop comparing to current formula for 1 ball and lower ratings

It's not unrealistic real teams tank in real life if it benefits the club, Teams tank for draft picks all the time.

And my suggestion is, close the income gap between the Div's so tanking is less rewarding. Once the income gap is closed up then make teams that tank get slightly less income than teams that are not tanking, remember teams that tank get relegated and the next season they get a big drop in income.

the important point is how to detect if a team is tanking or not..

Exactly, and I think salaries must be one tool in detecting that. What should be considered is some sort of past average total salary of the team vs. current total salary of the team. I haven't spent a second thinking about a robust solution to the problem, but as long as it is about total salaries (spending) vs. total income (basically crowd + merchandise), the salaries are really the key here. Combine whatever metric that is derived from the salaries with some sort of sanity check based on in-game performance and no one should be punished undeservingly.

It's not unrealistic real teams tank in real life if it benefits the club, Teams tank for draft picks all the time.

but far away from these extrems, and what i have seen from the NBA they don't forfeit their game even now when the Po are unreachable for most.

And at least in our top divison most of the team who try stay into the devision, and i don't want to make team who get demoted run economical bad. But in your example, with the low transfer sumd you get the salry from 300 to 400 k, and still make 200k each week. Which is more sympathic for me then, promote and reduce the salary to 30k and make 550k each week.

but far away from these extrems, and what i have seen from the NBA they don't forfeit their game even now when the Po are unreachable for most.

So what about in real life when a team cant make the PO and they send there players to get surgery to heal injury's so there player is 100% for the next season, Should they be punished for doing whats best for the team in the long run?

And at least in our top divison most of the team who try stay into the devision, and i don't want to make team who get demoted run economical bad. But in your example, with the low transfer sumd you get the salry from 300 to 400 k, and still make 200k each week. Which is more sympathic for me then, promote and reduce the salary to 30k and make 550k each week.

That's why Good sport's have salary cap's, it's to stop the rich teams buying all the best players. If we had a salary cap income would be less important and training will become more important. witch is what this game need's.

The last time i checked this was a basketball manager game not the stock market. We need to get away from who has the most money can buy a championship to who can train better and smarter. And to who can do better than others in there div with the same salary cap.

And before you say the game sort of has a salary cap with the arena capped at 20k that is not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about when a team promotes from a lower div that the salary cap is closed enough so that the new team can be competitive straight away.