BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > Contracts instead of Transfers

Contracts instead of Transfers

Set priority
Show messages by
From: Kukoc

This Post:
00
219996.29 in reply to 219996.28
Date: 6/14/2012 3:47:46 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
13361336
One more thing we disagree on. You think the FA is bad and the starting price for FA's is too low. Here is an example of a player who just retired (10952856). I would have bought this guy. I like many divI teams in big countrys (Estonia is nr13-th in size, so I consider us a big country) just do not have enough money lieing around (yes I said it, I have less than 1mil free funds). There are plenty of similar retirement. This actually shows, the FA system is working. Managers have stuffed their salary caps -> less free funds -> more FA retirements.

From: Axis123

This Post:
00
219996.30 in reply to 219996.28
Date: 6/14/2012 3:48:24 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
299299
A massive extension to how I was thinking about it, but I really like it. I reckon it'd add a more natural state to the economy. But... Who knows what troubles it might bring?

From: Pewu

This Post:
00
219996.32 in reply to 219996.31
Date: 6/15/2012 9:24:53 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
914914
Well, I see another negative aspect of this idea. If each player has contract, it means there won't be any transfer market during season, because managers will buy/contract players in season break. What does it result? You should be able to stay online 24h to contract your whole roster on that time. Nobody will break the contract of their superstar. I don't see any positive effect of doing this. Former employer have no interest doing that (currently it's about 80-97% of transfer price).

From: Axis123

This Post:
00
219996.34 in reply to 219996.33
Date: 6/15/2012 10:39:57 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
299299
One key aspect of contract negotiations is monoskilled would be paid less and versatile would be paid more...balancing out a bit the realism . still some player would be overhyped/overpaid but this would be the failure of the manager who negotiated the contract, not a autoset system to pidgeon hole every manager in the game to pay players weekly on the same bogus criteria.

Hit the nail on the head!

From: Kukoc

This Post:
00
219996.35 in reply to 219996.33
Date: 6/15/2012 5:04:16 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
13361336
One key aspect of contract negotiations is monoskilled would be paid less and versatile would be paid more
But then there is no downside if you train a monoskill monster. Currently it's a lot harder to train multiskill, trading off wins to play out of position etc.
I think the proposed contract system is messy, has too many variables/negotiables. Is not an upgrade to the current system.
Edit: correction, thanks Wolph

Last edited by Kukoc at 6/16/2012 2:54:46 AM

From: Axis123

This Post:
00
219996.36 in reply to 219996.35
Date: 6/15/2012 7:41:31 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
299299
I think the proposed contract system is messy, has too many variables/negotiables. Is not an upgrade to the current system.
It would seem exactly the same if we were using a contract system and considering the system we have now.

From: Axis123

This Post:
00
219996.38 in reply to 219996.37
Date: 6/16/2012 12:37:02 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
299299
In a contract system, I agree, you have to resign the player at end of training at whatever market is, so maybe not as much reward for proper training versus lazy training. There should be an advantage to being the current holder of contract, such that like I said you get an extra 24 hours after everyone else to match the best offer. I was thinking beat it, but maybe an option to just match. So whatever anyone else bid you have the option to just match it (this is how works in some real leagues too, depending on contract type) hence the idea to have restricted free agents....
There are a few minor problems with this, but it's an awesome idea!

Advertisement