BuzzerBeater Forums

WRONG!

if you get a coach, noone else could get him? That mean if someone will be a first, second one is just unlucky?

big salary? Train coach?


everything wrong, Zyzla, please

it`s just a suggestion... that means I suggesting that it would be staff market... no more same staff like now is...

interesting suggestion by the way, but it is not that easy and we have to look at some aspects of that solution

I must put here that I feel sorry for my slightly unassertive attitude above, I came home totally drunk last night:)

So at the point -

If there will be any market with a free agents, only barrier to catch/not catch them would be a level of salary.

That's not good, because we would have here by the time agents, which would have 40k-90k wage and only way to get those will be to be with your club at top of the league table or on the highest league and noone will put you down, because noone will have so good staffers...

That means we miss here any aditional aspect which will makes for us any other dilema to take/not take best trainer or there is missed an aspect which will (not) make it possible to get a best one...

Because if there will be any market, the interest will come from many clubs and is wrong to think that the fastest club could get him or richest and fastest one:)

Normally in real world it works according to a club's reputation. If you want to get a best free staff, you will pay him - but it is even upon to him if he want to be hired by you - according to your progress. BTW it works even by this way that you will offer a contract to staff which is already hired by the other club - if you pay to this club any penalty (if it is on the contract).

...but I'm sure that this would be for a many users very complicated, staff management isn't for everyone

So for the point - If there will be any staff market with a free agents - we need at least 1 more aspect in advance to get them - not only a salary or how fast you are..

what do you think?

my suggestion is just a primary one which need to be fully developed, and that`s why you all are here (=

I would like to see a staff transfer market (similar to players) with a salary cap on combined player and staff salaries... this way you have to again balance the economic side of the game.. do you go for a grade A coaching set up (with less money available for roster or pack your roster for tactical flexibility but have less staff?

Everything is relative and to not implement a system you know would be good fun because the top teams would be able to keep their dominance is silly. So to prevent this from happening - impose a salary cap to ensure that everyone can work off a simlar playing field.

I dont really care how complex or different each coach is and what they can or cant do.. i am more for faster training and slower training at a cost and then each of us has to work out how best to budget for each cost in the game and the trade off in training speed that has on your players.

salary cap would be exactly what we need, well done!

I tried to think about PR manager and his preferences, you all feel free to add here something or correct me:

Stadium attractivenes (hiring better cheerleaders, beer and popcorn flow - in overall taking care during a match - increase ticket holders)

Merchandising (fee from that)

TV Revenue (how he negoliate contracts from TV companies, you'll get better money from TV matches)

Attendeance (overall)

...

I think that every staff should have preferences like ambicious level, loyalty, profesionalism - which will affect overall of above preferences while your team lose many matches or win these... you know - if your team falls down, not everybody works for a 100 percent and on the contrary - could be better during many losings, because of his "hero" soul

..but I'm not really sure about this

Last edited by Iordanou at 4/28/2008 10:25:46 AM

I was thinking about making the PR manager more like manager of non-basketball operations. So you could have:

Travel manager - your team has less hassles on road trips, so they play better.

Contract negotiation - Players sign for less. Or perhaps player promotion, so that both the player and team get a fee from sponsors who want him to do ads, interviews, etc.

Beer sales - those in the bleachers won't remember your 7 point 4th quarter where you blew a 20 point lead and will show up the next game since they had such a good time, Meanwhile VIP sales are hurt because of the drunk who puked on their suit after the game.

interresting

unfortunately I think that Doctor can cure or prevent from injuries only, so we will have no fine preferences for him :/

Just a thougt:

As I've seen, multiple users want several skills for the trainer.
Why not give every user x skillpoints to divide over his trainer.
(these skills can be the ones or similar mentioned in earlier posts)

An example:
7 skills, 20 skill points, max 5 skillpoints for each skill

Player 1:

skill1:xxx
skill2:-
skill3:xxxx
skill4:xxx
skill5:xxxxx
skill6:xx
skill7:xxx

Player 2:

skill1: xxxxx
skill2: xx
skill3:x
skill4:xxx
skill5:x
skill6:xxxxx
skill7:xxx

Player 3:

skill1:xxx
skill2:xxx
skill3:xxx
skill4:xxx
skill5:xxx
skill6:xxx
skill7:xx

In this example, all 3 players will have a different outcome of coaching qualities, with the same total "value".

Wages:
option1: spending less than the total skill points could lower the wage
option2: The more extreme you divide your skills, the more wage you spend.

In this system there is no benefit for being a longtime player of BB. Everyone has the same maximum of skillpoints to spend.

Addition: change of skillpoints only possible once a week/month/(half-)season

Last edited by LA-Kantine at 4/30/2008 10:05:28 AM

Just a thougt:

As I've seen, multiple users want several skills for the trainer.
Why not give every user x skillpoints to divide over his trainer.
(these skills can be the ones or similar mentioned in earlier posts)

An example:
7 skills, 20 skill points, max 5 skillpoints for each skill

Player 1:

skill1:xxx
skill2:-
skill3:xxxx
skill4:xxx
skill5:xxxxx
skill6:xx
skill7:xxx

Wages:
option1: spending less than the total skill points could lower the wage
option2: The more extreme you divide your skills, the more wage you spend.

In this system there is no benefit for being a longtime player of BB. Everyone has the same maximum of skillpoints to spend.

Addition: change of skillpoints only possible once a week/month/(half-)season

Or perhaps the cost for a change in the middle of the season is much more expensive, since most staff of the particular skills you seek are already under contract. Maybe there could be a "hiring window" for a few weeks at the start of the season, and then salaries begin to ramp up. Maybe a special window at the ASG, and then continue to increase slowly for the end of the season.

The salary could also be based on demand. Let's say that the collective demand for skill7 is 3.5, but for skill 6 is 2.5, then skill7 would cost more for the same number of points (this is similar to the idea that you would probably pay more for a player with a prominent JS than one with prominent stamina or prominent FT.

Last edited by jimrtex at 4/30/2008 10:32:34 AM

I would like to see a staff transfer market (similar to players) with a salary cap on combined player and staff salaries... this way you have to again balance the economic side of the game.. do you go for a grade A coaching set up (with less money available for roster or pack your roster for tactical flexibility but have less staff?

I think that will kill player over 20 years, because everyone is forced to get a young team which is near the SalaryCap, and then to train then over the SC. Or did you supoose that you "fire" your players in a half season rhythm? and after a while it was nearly impossibel to change their rooster without loosing quality.

Everything is relative and to not implement a system you know would be good fun because the top teams would be able to keep their dominance is silly. So to prevent this from happening - impose a salary cap to ensure that everyone can work off a simlar playing field.

But this could also be bad, when it was showen that 3-5 ways of building the rooster was more succesfull, because some strategies are to expensive in salary. And because of the importance of building a young strong rooster, i think the top teams would stay in front because the other teams can't afford the necessary rooster to start up - but maybe we got then in 10 season a rebuild in the top leagues and very weak roosters their.