BuzzerBeater Forums

Also the idea with the GS drop is a nice one since it doesn't affect economy. But.. it will affect on National Teams. WHich is a serious problem. There will be lots of intentional buyings or sellings in order to damage NTs.

I don't see problem for NT. It would force NT communities to have players mainly in domestic teams and not moving from team to team around the world.

Also the idea with the GS drop is a nice one since it doesn't affect economy. But.. it will affect on National Teams. WHich is a serious problem. There will be lots of intentional buyings or sellings in order to damage NTs.

I don't see problem for NT. It would force NT communities to have players mainly in domestic teams and not moving from team to team around the world.

I agree that it would make NT's more fun when we get rid of salary-inefficient players.

But while it is realistic that a traded player gets a GS drop (lack of chemistry with new team, jet lag..) it is not realistic that it affects him for the NT, because he was already in the NT and he has chemistry with the NT coach and NT teammates.

So a hidden(or not hidden) chemistry attribute could work as it would tend towards full after 1 season with a team, but drop after a trade.
Add a similar (but separate) hidden/not hidden NT-chemistry attribute.

But if it's just GS drops, I'm not going to cry because some monsters become unusable for NT.

I think I said all I have to say.

even though I am not 100% sure a solution is needed. I did give some solutions, or at least partly solutions to the things that where brought up.


The one last thing I want to say here is: it is easy to critisize, and easy to demand for solutions.
This is not how it works. If anyone wants a solution, they should propose one, and not just anything, but a solution that most players will like.

So far I have seen many just demanding a solution. The few that did give possible solutions, didn't give one that I like yet. And it looks like the things I proposed are not satisfying.

So with the info we have now, I'm in favor of not changing anything.

Last edited by Lord of Doom at 4/6/2011 2:09:38 PM

I think I said all I have to say.

even though I am not 100% sure a solution is needed. I did give some solutions, or at least partly solutions to the things that where brought up.


The one last thing I want to say here is: it is easy to critisize, and easy to demand for solutions.
This is not how it works. If anyone wants a solution, they should propose one, and not just anything, but a solution that most players will like.

So far I have seen many just demanding a solution. The few that did give possible solutions, didn't give one that I like yet. And it looks like the things I proposed are not satisfying.

So with the info we have now, I'm in favor of not changing anything.

now I really don't understand your attitude... there were at least 4 suggestions in this thread that are well thought over and discussed not only in this thread but on mational and league forums:
1. moving the deadline back for POs
2. paying 4 week salary as a fee if a player is sold/fired before 4 weeks from the purchase
3. GS drop
4. Team attitude

each of them has potential, but has to be analyzed by BBs, not by managers on the forum... the only thing we can do is to describe the problem, give suggestions and turn somebody's attention towards the issue, this is exactly what is happening in this thread

you don't understand my attitude, yet you explained you do in the text you write.
let me clarify:

I wrote:

The few that did give possible solutions, didn't give one that I like yet. And it looks like the things I proposed are not satisfying.

So with the info we have now, I'm in favor of not changing anything.

I call 4 solutions a few, especially based on the number of posts. I believe there where e few more then 4 in total, but still few...
didn't give 1 that I liked:

1. moving the deadline back for POs
2. paying 4 week salary as a fee if a player is sold/fired before 4 weeks from the purchase
3. GS drop
4. Team attitude

1: I gave that one myself as well, but got the reaction it wouldn't solve cup games, so wouldn't be a solution. (at least that was the reaction I got)
2: I don't like that one. We should not be giving penalties when players are not breaking rules. Moreover, this could mean a team goes bankrupt, and that's not what we would want at all!
3 and 4: I don't like this either. It's a personal thing. But there will be a problem with drawing the line for which players this will happen and when, and to solve this, we would need to have the same thing happening for every possible buy at any time in the season, and this doesn't feel right by terms of good management (or in other words, it might hold back good management decisions all the time, just to prevent occasional happenings)

so that explains the part didn't give one that I like yet.

which brings me to my conclusion: So with the info we have now, I'm in favor of not changing anything. Which is my personal opinion, and as I see it, is part of the discussion.

Hope this clarifies abit.

I know Hattrick, this method solved problem in HT.

how? when? in what way?
I'd be delighted to see a simple solution like this solving a serious issue... but really, in HT it didn't help in any way.

In HT the max wage is 300.000(only one/two) players have it, but here it can be even 680.000(O.o).
In HT the max. money you can get from full 200.000 stadium is about 600.000-800.000.I don't know the max. here, but i know it can't be over 600.000

Cheers
Oh, and i am scout in 3 different countries in HT

^
This is the answer. Every team is affected in exactly the same way.

if you buy a player for 900,000 and he has a 40,000 salary as a long term purchase the extra 40,000 (bonus) is a small percentage of the total and manageable. This won't effect anything in a dramatic fashion.

if you buy a player for 400,000 or more and he has a 300,00 salary as a short term divine transaction the extra 600,000 is a larger percentage of the total and will be more painful. This will effect divine purchases in a dramatic fashion I think.

just to avoid repeating myself again and again... (178639.11)

I understand what you are saying, for those determined to use this tactic it will actually make it easier to perform the divine trick as the player value drops. I would imagine that any tactic designed to discourage this "trick" will also, in effect, drive the purchase price of these types of players down. I still think that adding a 1 week salary plus signing salary will, overall, discourage more managers than it will encourage in the long term.

Well, for most problems the solution is simple...salary cap...which should be tied to week revenue...

Or in numbers...this week my total revenue is 424k, and my player salaries are 261k, so with salary cap of 424k i can buy player only up to 163k salary...
We cold put staff salaries also in the equation...and those are 59k plus 261k from players which comes to 320k total and that leaves me with 104k space for purchasing new player...

So then no one would buy players that they cant afford...