BuzzerBeater Forums

Help - English > release FA

release FA

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
268259.70 in reply to 268259.58
Date: 3/18/2015 2:41:05 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
Personally speaking though, training is what I enjoy, so I would train regardless of how profitable it may or may not be.
The same applies to me. However I recognise that if you want to optimise you'll have to go with the most efficient way. In any case you can make that kind of money only with reasonably high potential trainees who require a higher initial investment. In order to make lower potential training profitable and more palatable to managers the fixed costs associated with training (the trainer) should be lowered some.


I think it's similar to potential, in fact - in both cases anything below about the midpoint of the range is written off as not worth using. I wonder if adding a second dimension to coaching skills that reflects a potential level might work. Something like "Level 5 trainer / all-star proficiency", where the proficiency would indicate what player potential they'd get the most out of (whether as a bonus or a penalty, etc). I would imagine that the proficiency would adjust the salaries of the trainers as well, with massive discounts for levels up to maybe all-star, maybe up to a small discount at superstar, and then increased at MVP+.

This Post:
11
268259.71 in reply to 268259.65
Date: 3/18/2015 2:42:32 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
14901490
Again I agree with what you say, Steve. It would be easier to adjust the staff cost, however let's say they use part of the taxes that are currently being levied on the seller instead? The amounts really are quite small (especially because I held on to all my best trainees), but I usually get pleasure from seeing how my kids are progressing and getting traded in the football game.

This Post:
00
268259.72 in reply to 268259.70
Date: 3/18/2015 2:45:13 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
14901490
I think it's similar to potential, in fact - in both cases anything below about the midpoint of the range is written off as not worth using.
That's exactly right. And contrary to some people opinion, managers came to this conclusion based on rational economic reasoning.

This Post:
00
268259.74 in reply to 268259.73
Date: 3/18/2015 2:51:28 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
14901490
It can be increased, but that would still only concern the financial side of a club, not tactical.

I'm all for team chemistry impacting club performance, but I'm not the one who decide.
Got it. I agree.

This Post:
00
268259.75 in reply to 268259.67
Date: 3/18/2015 2:53:42 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
The fact is a lot dont know what they are looking at on the market. They Ohh that player is such "crap" big man with almost no reb, all the jr / js. vast ft and to much pa.. No IS very very little id.. oh what a waste of a player..!! Im not going to pay 250k$ for that.. its 25k or forget it. This what they do in the market.


I have to say that I've been searching for quite a while for non-geriatric big men on the TL for my Utopia team with handling/passing/FT at like 5 or more and decent (9+) ID and RB, with no concern at all for IS. I finally got one, and ended up just giving up and building more lower tier seats and luxury boxes that I won't fill for seasons or more because the prices have been pretty high. If you see those guys failing to go for less than 250k, please let me know and I'll save money for a few weeks. I just glanced at the TL with my filter and, well, I'm not seeing what you see.

This Post:
00
268259.77 in reply to 268259.72
Date: 3/18/2015 4:52:00 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
I think it's similar to potential, in fact - in both cases anything below about the midpoint of the range is written off as not worth using.
That's exactly right. And contrary to some people opinion, managers came to this conclusion based on rational economic reasoning.


True, rational economic reasoning can show that. And it can also be wrong.

Let's say you have an 18 year old, star potential player that you drafted (or even paid up to a couple hundred thousand for). You spend four or five seasons with a level 4 trainer two position training four or five other guys with him to get a guy built the way you want, say factor in another three hundred thousand for that (seventy weeks at roughly 20k/week, divided among five players). 500k for a player built the way you want, who can play meaningful minutes at any level in the game, for fifteen seasons, with the fan survey and merchandise benefits that accrue? I don't know how to value that on the ledger, but I do know not having to go out and buy a backup guard/SG/SF every few seasons and eat depreciation there is worth it.

This Post:
00
268259.78 in reply to 268259.77
Date: 3/18/2015 6:02:39 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
14901490
This is what I did in the first season of utopia and I still have the 2 better guys I trained back then. Yes training 5 guys instead of 2 at lower potential might ease the cost issue.

the fan survey and merchandise benefits that accrue?
If they are not from your nation you get a boost of 1 ball or so in the fa survey in my experience and with a basic PR manager I was still constantly below the league average in merchandising even after 2 seasons with mostly the same trainees.

I don't know how to value that on the ledger, but I do know not having to go out and buy a backup guard/SG/SF every few seasons and eat depreciation there is worth it.
I don't believe depreciation is a significant factor between 25 and 30. I might agree it shouldn't be like that, but unless you overpay I think it's a fair assumption to think you can resell at a minimum loss, if any.

This Post:
00
268259.79 in reply to 268259.77
Date: 3/18/2015 7:09:43 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
370370
Let's say you have an 18 year old, star potential player that you drafted (or even paid up to a couple hundred thousand for). You spend four or five seasons with a level 4 trainer two position training four or five other guys with him to get a guy built the way you want, say factor in another three hundred thousand for that (seventy weeks at roughly 20k/week, divided among five players). 500k for a player built the way you want, who can play meaningful minutes at any level in the game, for fifteen seasons, with the fan survey and merchandise benefits that accrue? I don't know how to value that on the ledger, but I do know not having to go out and buy a backup guard/SG/SF every few seasons and eat depreciation there is worth it.

I'm trying to follow your example, as it seems you are trying to give training a fair shake. What is the $20k per week you speak of? Thanks.

Advertisement