BuzzerBeater Forums

Everybody can do it;)

OK, agreed, right/wrong incorrect.

Not financially sound.

What´s wrong about a running system? I am working that way for years and years and i am in 2nd division. Not bankrupt not anything. But right now i am punished for not acting the way you suggested (bigger gym,...)

One of the largest complaints about the game is how many people feel the idea of tanking, building up a large cash reserve, and then running excessive salaries is too strong a strategy. That training is commonly thought of as a waste of time or money. That it's too easy to run with a low salary and squeak into a relegation series and then load up on high salary players to maintain a spot in the series. This change helps address that directly - you can still freely choose to have salaries that are not in line with your team's earnings, but it'll cost more now to do so and hopefully adjust the tendencies so people will actually focus on building a basketball team rather than a balance sheet.

What´s wrong about a running system? I am working that way for years and years and i am in 2nd division. Not bankrupt not anything. But right now i am punished for not acting the way you suggested (bigger gym,...)

One of the largest complaints about the game is how many people feel the idea of tanking, building up a large cash reserve, and then running excessive salaries is too strong a strategy. That training is commonly thought of as a waste of time or money. That it's too easy to run with a low salary and squeak into a relegation series and then load up on high salary players to maintain a spot in the series. This change helps address that directly - you can still freely choose to have salaries that are not in line with your team's earnings, but it'll cost more now to do so and hopefully adjust the tendencies so people will actually focus on building a basketball team rather than a balance sheet.

This tax doesn't prevent tanking. You just have to tank longer before you start to attack.

To end tanking is easy: no one likes to see a team lose intentionally. So no one would attend these games anymore. If a team loses more than 2 or 3 games by a large margin (-75) then there would only be 300-400 people watching the game and paying for it. No income through the crowd, no sense in tanking except for draft picks.

Some questions concerning this new tax:

- If I trained a player from 5k to 80k, sold him, bought him back seasons later: will he count to my training exemption?
- If I trained a player from 5k to 80k, keep him till he's 33. He's got some skilldrops. At 34 his salary is 60k: what will count as my training exemption?

1- No skill drops don't count, your confusion comes from BBs not being precise enough. check [message=252784.69 ]

2- No, in this case you can safely rely on BBs statements and derive conclusions.

I'm not sure on this, but if I'm guessing their thoughts well, here is how it goes:

When you purchase a player, his salary at that time counts towards the new tax.
Even if you set your player for sale, and you purchase him by yourself, his salary in that moment counts towards this tax.

My logic: it works that way with sale percentages. For example, you set your long time player for sale, you get 97% of the transfer. If you re-buy him, and then try to sell him again, you get standard 80% and a GS drop. And merch drop and fan survey change. Therefore, I conclude that the new tax works the same way.

Also, how about BBs start giving non-controversial facts in the future, so we don't have to read their minds LOL

i think you have the wrong thought process about this in general [not speaking about rebuying previously owned players], and that's why you get confused and think BBs are "contradictory" and, acording to your words, basically dumb. so here's the thing:

salaries of players only count to calculate how much tax TRAINING EXEMPTION you have. all this talk about abilities dropping or what it was the salary when i bought a player goes to calculating that, NOTHING ELSE. so, to put it simple: if your economic flow is POSITIVE, the drops of skill don't count for nothing, just like it is today. for example, you don't find "confusing" that when you buy TODAY a 50k salary 38-y-old player now, at end of season he will have dropped several levels but will still collect his 50k salary, right? you don't say "oh, this skill dropping for the same salary is confusing".

now, if your economic flow is NEGATIVE, all the game engine does is this: it asks how much salary YOU added through training. period. and that number will be exempted from the tax. so, to take again the 50k 38-y-o player example: at the end of season, and let's say he dropped skills enough to have a salary of 20k at that point: so what? you didn't add any training to this guy. so i don't see the "confusion" about it. if the number of salary added through training is zero, then zero is the exemption, and everything else goes to 50% tax.

Last edited by petrosian at 12/28/2013 5:59:01 PM

"The training exemption is the difference between the current overall salaries and the combined overall salaries of all players when they were acquired"

This is how they define the training exemption.

Now what you said:

"all the game engine does is this: it asks how much salary YOU added through training. period. and that number will be exempted from the tax."

You couldn't possibly derive this conclusion from their definition. You derived it by common sense: because it's called training exemption, it must calculate how much salary you added though training. By reading BBs definition, you can easily conclude that vets salary drops affect your training exemption negatively.

And that's why other posters asked about it.