BuzzerBeater Forums

But being sold at a higher price, first of all, is not a certainty (and if it is, how higher he is sold is variable), secondly, it only happens when the player is sold, meaning it's a one-time advantage for each manager.
The reward for an eventual injury is a fixed weekly bonus that the manager would have for two, three, or maybe even more seasons. Let's say a manager has two NT players with a combined salary of 80K. If he gets even a 33% bonus, that's 26K a week. That's more than 350K a year. Imagine if the players are called in the NT for 3 or 4 straight seasons. We're talking about a 1-1,5 million dollar bonus for potentially absolutely nothing. And even if the player does get injured with the NT for a couple of weeks, that's still WAY too much money.

But this happens with everything. Right now if you have 2 identical players and 1 is in the NT, the one in the NT will be sold for a higher price than the other because he got 'the flag'.

So a manager with a NT player has already a benefit, plus has a salary reduction 'cause he's part of the NT staff (just a supposition ^^)... not fair at all for a conference rival.

Until the almost-bot-farms will be set up (two seasons at the latest), when one "friend" squad train only one position at week to raise NT players, the wages are sustainable... because if they aren't, we'll see a lot of NT stars in the market ;).

I agree with Spicymchaggis on the reduction topic. I don't think that salary reduction is a good solution at all simply because it helps to increase the gap between the top and the rest of the teams. When you save a lot on salary costs, you naturally become richer and can purchase, more expensive, NT players more easily. This leads again to lower salary costs and so on..

So, like patjebono, I too ask myself: What's wrong with the arcade mode? Of course managers who have NT players on their roster would like to see some reward for training such players (but then you only reward the 1 position training managers). On the other hand managers who do not have these players will want arcade mode (but will change opinion if they do have these players). So who is right? As the incentives for having NT players increase I think that the game itself will suffer from it. Simply because or you reward 1 position training managers or the ones who have the money to buy NT players. In the end reaching the top thus will become (slightly?) more difficult for other managers (because of the cost disadvantage) but also it can only increase the resentful feelings to national teams and their managers. So really what is wrong with arcade?;)

Second, NT manager is an elected position. If the manager decides to use a strategy which weakens the team and profits some of his friends, well, the users in that country should have known better when they were voting.

I don't think this is a solid argument. As it showed in real life (prisoner's dillema) even best friends can betray each other in exchange for personal benefits. Everbody has got a price:P Plus if a manager wants to do this I don't think he will mention it upfront nor will one of his friends.

The system has been implemented in other similar games and it works.

Better check out the hattrick community where those friendclubs rule the world;)

I do agree on your first point: one player is always screwed but friends do can change selection criteria.

manager of the NT (or better yet IS the maneger of the NT) of those players, one will

This is all very interesting but it has nothing to do with the argument at hand. What I am saying is that if two managers have a player with the same skill, but one is friends with the be payed a certain salary by one manager, and the other will be payed much less by the other manager.

I don't quite see the point. First, if there is one spot only available for this type of player, one of them will always be out of the team. Second, NT manager is an elected position. If the manager decides to use a strategy which weakens the team and profits some of his friends, well, the users in that country should have known better when they were voting.

I don't see this as being much of a problem. The system has been implemented in other similar games and it works.

For example? Please don't tell me you are talking about Hattrick...

Unless the rules are changed, there will be a salary reduction - it's already in there.

And for NT managers, it will be a godsend, as many users don't want to cooperate with the NTs since there is little tangible benefit at the moment for having an NT player.

If you like how the NT system works in Hattrick, then I don't really know what to tell you..I guess everyone is entitled to their opinion.

What everyone should consider is that soon, a player will only be on the NT if he has legendary skills. He will have to be trained up to ages like 21 and 22.

That's a huge disadvantage for the teams training them. The reality is that nobody will want to train players for NTs because they will be losing games and money, because of the unefficient training. Not to mention the astronomical salaries they will have to be paying, that they wouldn't have to if they stop training the old guys for the NT and trained new ones.

So if there are no salary reductions the whole idea of the best players on the NTs goes down the drain. It simply won't work. Salary reductions are a necessity.