We don't have to put an accurate formula behind it, we can leave it to the experts as it has been going on for years.
I agree if what you mean is that there has to be some randomness or "x-factor" around (but surely there has to be a part that is based on accurate formulas and so on).
There's need to be a certain balance so new users can figure out the game and enjoy it, instead of quitting because the game is too complicated.
This is absolutely true but unfortunately overly common. I think part of the problem is that, in the early going, the game might not be intuitive enough and people either don't have enough fun (because they have a huge gap to fill to even get "competitive") or simply are not willing to invest the required time in the game to be successful (which seems ok that it takes time to get there).
Who are the users who enjoy calculating salaries? how many there are?
Do we need BB to be very comlicated regard player's salaries? instead for example, having this "free time" saved, to understand how the GE works.
I'm just raising some points to discuss.
Good questions but definitely essential part of the game, for sure. The economy part of the game is harsh and with caps, taxes, bankrupcies and such, you better have an eye/plan on the $ part of the game, if you want to get anywhere. That part is definitely challenging as some things are unbalanced, IMO. Right now, coaches are over-expensive (in my case, I would (almost) have to "forfeit" an entire season just to change my coach), awesome players are worthless (since they're too expensive for the "new", more balanced teams), etc, etc. So there's some fine-tuning to do there, I think.
Also in the stats/data registered/shown. IMO, I think there's a lot that could be better in that part too. For example, on the "player history", I wonder if it wouldn't be easier to have the "current week" on it's own and, separately, the rest of the games gathered by type/competition, with their own total stats each.
Hopefully, this might get the discussion going
