BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Season 6 Changes

Season 6 Changes

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
40617.222 in reply to 40617.221
Date: 8/3/2008 10:19:24 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
If i was a 1 or 2 year old team, I wouldn't be expecting to compete with teams that are 4-5 years old.

Is this a reason for the proposed measures to affect 2-season-old teams more severely than 4-5 season old ones?

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
This Post:
00
40617.223 in reply to 40617.219
Date: 8/3/2008 10:21:54 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
In the example above, the team with the large arena will always be penalized for less than the full amount of the gate receipt tax, while the team with the small arena will eat all of it.


It's a bad example of two extremes. Not every established team over-expanded their arena, and not every new team under-expanded. It doesn't make sense to double your arena in the first season, but it also doesn't make sense to not expand at all when there's so many established examples of where you attendance will go at that level.

Last edited by brian at 8/3/2008 10:25:23 AM

"Well, no ones gonna top that." - http://tinyurl.com/noigttt
This Post:
00
40617.224 in reply to 40617.222
Date: 8/3/2008 10:23:58 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
I'm failing to understand how you're coming to this conclusion.

This affects a 2 season old team in a top division that failed to expand at all slightly more then others, not exactly forward thinking there.

Last edited by brian at 8/3/2008 10:24:47 AM

"Well, no ones gonna top that." - http://tinyurl.com/noigttt
This Post:
00
40617.225 in reply to 40617.221
Date: 8/3/2008 10:29:12 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
196196
If i was a 1 or 2 year old team, I wouldn't be expecting to compete with teams that are 4-5 years old.


Understood - so do you encourage them to hoard cash and then only spend when they can compete?

Getting knocked out in round 1 after shelling out a load of cash would hurt you but the objective wouldnt be to win it.... the objective might be 4 rounds of cash and extra training to get your roster developing faster than your main peers.

Bottom line is that for the forseeable future those that are in Div1 with small stadiums will find it more difficult to aspire to anything other than competing domestically and I think this is a shame.....

Everyone likes to see an underdog get a favourable draw and progress as much as possible - the new taxes have acted as a strong enough deterrent for this to now be impossible.

Last edited by Superfly Guy at 8/3/2008 10:31:43 AM

This Post:
00
40617.226 in reply to 40617.223
Date: 8/3/2008 10:34:17 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
In the example above, the team with the large arena will always be penalized for less than the full amount of the gate receipt tax, while the team with the small arena will eat all of it.


It's a bad example of two extremes. Not every top team over-expanded their arena, and not every new team under-expanded. It doesn't make sense to double your arena in the first season, but it also doesn't make sense to not expand at all when there's so many established examples of where you attendance will go at that level.

I've had my team for 2 full seasons now. At maximum prices, I barely started tipping full attendance of my original arena midway to the season. I have been expanding ever since, and I am maintaining full attendance at maximum prices right now at 5700 seats or thereabout.

How was that bad management? Is it bad management because I should have foreseen that someone will introduce a measure that will strongly impact a small-arena, high-price strategy, and by doing that will deprive me of a substantial part of the cash flow I need to further expand my arena?

Hindsight might be 20/20 right now, but this doesn't help the teams who chose a similar strategy.

Even so, it remains a major issue that the more effective and fair way to deal with excessive cash in the game is to tax teams progressively based on their income source, which in this case is their arena.

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
This Post:
00
40617.228 in reply to 40617.224
Date: 8/3/2008 10:40:49 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
I'm failing to understand how you're coming to this conclusion.

This affects a 2 season old team in a top division that failed to expand at all slightly more then others, not exactly forward thinking there.

Easy. The designed measure tax income a nominal 40%, and plan to compensate by allowing for increased attendance. The problem is that while the nominal tax affects everyone, the attendance boosts affects only teams that have overdevelopped their arena, since teams who have optimal arenas will have no seats to absorb any increases.

Additionally, this means that small arena teams will have less disposable income to invest in increasing their arenas, which means that you hamstring their development them for no good reason, since they contribute in no way for the excess cash in the game.

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
This Post:
00
40617.229 in reply to 40617.225
Date: 8/3/2008 10:41:25 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
It's best to think long term for any team in any division, IMO. If shelling out money to win a few rounds in an extremely competitive tournament doesn't provide a good return on that money, then I wouldn't do it.

I'd have liked to sacrificed everything to go for it in the B3 (selling off trainees, ignoring league/cup games, etc), but I knew the US cup and league games were the "bread and butter" for my team in the long run.

It's too early to tell how these economic changes will effect everyone and the managers that adapt will do better.

"Well, no ones gonna top that." - http://tinyurl.com/noigttt
This Post:
00
40617.230 in reply to 40617.226
Date: 8/3/2008 10:50:45 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
I've had my team for 2 full seasons now. At maximum prices, I barely started tipping full attendance of my original arena midway to the season. I have been expanding ever since, and I am maintaining full attendance at maximum prices right now at 5700 seats or thereabout.


Apples to oranges, you've in lower divisions, and we're comparing teams in top divisions of new countries correct? STH growth at lower divisions isn't comparable to STH in top divisions, unless I'm vastly overestimating the growth of STH's for teams that start in new countries at the top level.

I just don't understand some of the dire end-of-the-world comments coming out here, and so far, there's little evidence that it's nothing more then hyperbole.

This is a big change, and fairly or not, some manager will be hit harder then others. I don't expect the BB's to refund portions transfer fees to managers that recently paid large sums for players at market rate, while the market rate is now set to take a steep decline due to these changes. Also, without good evidence of completely unlevel playing fields or economic environments that are impossible, I don't expect the BB's to make different rules for different countries.

"Well, no ones gonna top that." - http://tinyurl.com/noigttt
This Post:
00
40617.231 in reply to 40617.230
Date: 8/3/2008 11:02:25 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
225225
I've had my team for 2 full seasons now. At maximum prices, I barely started tipping full attendance of my original arena midway to the season. I have been expanding ever since, and I am maintaining full attendance at maximum prices right now at 5700 seats or thereabout.


Apples to oranges, you've in lower divisions, and we're comparing teams in top divisions of new countries correct? STH growth at lower divisions isn't comparable to STH in top divisions, unless I'm vastly overestimating the growth of STH's for teams that start in new countries at the top level.

I just don't understand some of the dire end-of-the-world comments coming out here, and so far, there's little evidence that it's nothing more then hyperbole.

This is a big change, and fairly or not, some manager will be hit harder then others. I don't expect the BB's to refund portions transfer fees to managers that recently paid large sums for players at market rate, while the market rate is now set to take a steep decline due to these changes. Also, without good evidence of completely unlevel playing fields or economic environments that are impossible, I don't expect the BB's to make different rules for different countries.

I am in DII, which is one of the levels that is being taxed. I have a realistic chance to promote to DI too.

Of course some teams will be more affected than others. I thought the goal was to affect the largest arenas the most, since they pump the largest portion of excess funds into the game.

I am not suggesting different rules for different countries, since this is not necessary at all. Just implement the tax as maintenance per seat. This way you give the chance of small teams to catch up without taxing them for excess income they don't have. This way you're really taxing the source of the income and not taxing teams simply for being in a higher division.

You'd excuse me if I feel strongly about someone trying to do brain surgery with a pickaxe.

"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."
This Post:
00
40617.232 in reply to 40617.229
Date: 8/3/2008 11:02:39 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
196196
well i guess if we knew further in advance the touranment / potential prize money we could all design a plan.... if they have settled on the money for each round why can they just not release this information... they shot out the blocks with the 40% 25%... they couldve easily said - we will start applying a tax on gate receipts... why be specific with what they are taking but not with what they are giving?

from my perspective i am glad i invested in arena... but did i make a great management decision or was I lucky? I think a bit of both.....

Advertisement