BuzzerBeater Forums

"luxury tax"

We have practically the same mechanism in BB. But it is implemented in salary formula, not as extra tax. So we don't need it.
If You want to have player who is better by one level in all primary skills, then typically his salary increases to ~150% of previous wage. Very simple and effective.

It's more or less a collusion between 2 worlds that I would illustrate with 2 soccer clubs: Manchester United and Manchester City. The first one is a soccer institution that has a great formation center to back up an awesome team. The second one has nothing but a rich president who will buy superstars and try to buy his titles. These are different ways of thinking and both can work.

Very very very very bad example. MU had more money than MC in many previous seasons and it was unfair too.
In BB we have Financial Fair Play. Every team gains money in the same way, in BB we don't have rich sponsor who selects few managers and gives him undeserved cash. Real competition is completly different because some clubs have extra money from outside which is independent of results. So I prefer financial structure in BB than in real life. And of course mechanism like in NBA will be stupid in BB, because only 30 clubs which were created at beginning have chance to fight for title, 31st, 32nd, and next have no chances.

I believe the only way to really make things fair financially is salary cap of some sort. Otherwise VS situations will continue to happen. It would only really effect the top 1% of players in this game. That being said, I don't think it can be done anytime soon.

I believe the only way to really make things fair financially is salary cap of some sort. Otherwise VS situations will continue to happen. It would only really effect the top 1% of players in this game. That being said, I don't think it can be done anytime soon.

vs could still buy more salary efficient players, cause he had the money to afford him. Maybe he can pay the loans longer then, but he will be still the faovorite.

The advantage is maybe that training elite multiskilled played get more lucrative.

The 14 games deadline would not work just because of new rookies coming from draft. If you buy a trainee, you should not be forced to play him in league games. Usually it's the cup game that nets those 48 minutes. I think there should be a trade deadline for cup. This should be set at the time when the neutral ground games start. I don't know how easy it is to create 2 separate deadlines. How many bugs will come out of it (I'm already thinking about players unable to play league games or scrimmages because of that deadline etc.). 14 games is obviously too harsh (even 5 games is quarter of a season). Also so many different restrictions would make the game complicated to follow and would be additional load for the servers (tracking every transfers restrictions etc). Trade deadline is easier imo.

What about the second year 19 year old? If he has played only in cup and scrimmage games, he still has 0 league games under his belt. Now even if you make all games for teamxxx count, what if he get's injured. There are 14 weeks in a season. Not playing one week, will force you to play him atleast 2 times one of those weeks. It just seems so silly you have to play him in certain games in order to be able to use him in cup the next season. When suggesting something always try your suggestion out with a few simple schenarios, that are widely used.
Perhaps he can play after certain amount of days (similar to retransfering) as paperwork takes some time. Still deadline would be the better option. Transfers between clubs nowdays (when the agreement has happened) is pretty quick. The new player might even play the next day, after beeing acquired. Knowing the teams offence combinations and fitting in, is another story alltogether. But that's beside the point atm.

Last edited by Kukoc at 10/10/2011 5:19:54 AM

It must be something stong, because I myself can't understand why I thought you said 14 games. Go figure... 2 weeks could be ok, with rookie exception.

Putting a transfer deadline on the cup though is difficult I think.- My suggestion in simplifying it so taht it can work in all nations with such different cup lengths etc. Is make it like specific to each game not each round. In order to play in a cup game a player must be with a team 14 days. So on the player page in your roster etc. it would give you like a read message 'this player has only been on your team 13 days and can not play in your cup games yet. In order to play in the cup for your team this player must be on your team for atleast 14 days'

That's a simple, straightforward and reasonable suggestion that cuts right to the heart of the problem. +1 from me!

If teams have money, excluding those who have cheated, they've earned it and should be able to use it to improve the team. I think the bigger issue is when players are treated as commodities to be bought and played and sold with no thought for team cohesiveness. This would at least be a step away from that.