BuzzerBeater Forums

Isn't the main purpose to stop people buying for 10k and selling for 300k? Would it really bother anyone if I bought for 100k and sold for 110k? Why not just tax the profit instead of the whole sale

I know, and i like to fight against who does 1k--->300k.

"Skilltrading" (so, with training), Imo has a better value, and not 1-->300k but 1-->20/30k it's enough. Yep, this rule is against also skilltrading, but you should consider that your team isn't a continuative flow of people, but should be a defined team. Except rare cases, real teams doesn't change too much during a single season (instead, between two season it's easily to fond a complete S5 changed)


Better solution, really, is a "fixed price" (like another soccer game i played) where there are:

Defined time for offering (no bidwar).
-auction base offer (you can't send offers less than that value, and this value is an owner decision, but is a value between two defined limits, max and min)

There is also an algorithm that calculates (taking care of teamvalue/role slots/player value/language and some othee things) what team the player agree, and so you can see auction win not by best cash offer but, for example, by a team which has no player in that role

I think is forbidden to speak about "foreign games", i send you a Bb-mail

I still think that there is too much of an effort to force teams to behave in certain ways. One of the ways that I can compete in the IPBL is by buying older players at a discount and then selling them for about the same price or less within a season or so. Maybe I buy for 300k and sell for 200k. The alternative is that I tank for 6 seasons and build up ~25 million and then buy only young players.

One example might be my 200k C who I bought for 500k. The market rate says 500k to 1 mil but he might only sell for 200 - 300k. If I see someone on the market who is better, why should I be discouraged from improving my team? In all likelihood, I'll lose money given the market for 33 year old centers but it's not taking advantage of anyone. There are already enough disadvantages given the drop in game shape.

It seems like they have just set a lower starting point but the sale percentage will revert to 97% in about the same time. If you hold the player for 4-5 weeks you'll probably be about indifferent.

I think double that:

You will receive 87% of the sale price after fees.
- This player has been on your team for 58 days.
- You have sold 9 players in the past 14 weeks

You will receive 67% of the sale price after fees.
- This player has been on your team for 24 days.
- You have sold 9 players in the past 14 weeks.

And my Utopia team
You will receive 73% of the sale price after fees.
- This player has been on your team for 26 days.
- You have sold 3 players in the past 14 weeks.

You will receive 90% of the sale price after fees.
- This player has been on your team for 61 days.
- You have sold 3 players in the past 14 weeks.

Yeah it took about a season to get to 97% in the past if I remember correctly, so it does look you'll get to 97% in about a season even now. As a result, the percentage will go up faster and after several weeks the difference is likely to be only nominal compared to before.

It's too bad we don't have data from before the change to compare.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 10/24/2014 8:00:54 AM

You will receive -2% of the sale price after fees.
- This player has been on your team for 8 days
- You have sold 20 players in the past 14 weeks.

They are big boys, the extra salary is minimal compared to their 820-860k rosters and they'll still make a profit from the trades: I think they can live with this.

Could you change your words?:D

BTW Who invented it? It is completely illogical and unreal. Have somebody ever seen tax bigger than 100%?

Last edited by kozlik4 at 10/24/2014 9:26:46 AM