BuzzerBeater Forums

(https://www.buzzerbeater.com/manage/staffBox.aspx?StaffID=...)
3,25kk for trainer lvl7 It's completely ridiculous....while top player: TSP 157, 240k, 30yo costs 2kk

@Alonso, BB-Justin
1. Why don't decrease costs of trainers at least e.g. by putting more top trainers on market to promote and reward high quality training? It would be so great if newly comming users could afford on top trainers. Green arrows are addictive It's one of the best part of this game what could help them to feel in love BB and stick them to BB for longer, while currently the highest qulity training is reserved only for millionaires who have collected money for many seasons.
2. The best is Yanivsh's idea how to solve problem with high salaries

I believe all that can be fixed by single (maybe not trivial) fix, the curve of the exponential slope needs to be refined.

New salary formula is necessary with no doubt.
3. Merchandising profits should depends on recognizability of players (NOT HEIGHT OF SALARY!), so on theirs successes (especially on international area: B3, WC, BBM etc.) to promote winning players, not losing, bad quality players just because of theirs high salary.



Last edited by kozlik4 at 6/24/2022 3:37:20 PM

Hi,

I just want to point out that your calculations don't take into account the income you receive for having the player on your team. Hopefully if you train a player for 11 seasons they have a significant impact on your income (not just from Merchandise, and yes all players already can affect Merchandise income directly). Hopefully they have helped you make some money in the cup or get promotion money or have higher attendance income.

I'm not disagreeing with your recommendation... (I actually was the one who suggested this idea to Alonso before he even created the thread). I just wanted to point out that the "is training profitable?" question involves even more variables then you specified.

Thanks for your comments.

Ofcourse its not that simple to calculate the total cost of the training. But we all know, that it is easier to be competitive when you dont train any players (better stamina and free throws, playing 48 minutes tier players more , put players out of position etc). That means more wins = more income. Again, is not that simple but I can see that you feel me.

We can talk about this for hours, but at the end we can all (or most of us) agree that training a top class player is a dead end.

1. Why don't decrease costs of trainers at least e.g. by putting more top trainers on market to promote and reward high quality training? It would be so great if newly comming users could afford on top trainers. Green arrows are addictive It's one of the best part of this game what could help them to feel in love BB and stick them to BB for longer, while currently the highest qulity training is reserved only for millionaires who have collected money for many seasons.

Actually, that was my no1 suggestion if BBs want to discuss this matter. If they increase the supply of trainers the prices will go down. IMO, training must be cheaper but not too cheap because then everybody will train, players supply will increase a lot and their value will dicrease. This is an other dead end.

I have some ideas that could help to balance the economy. If BBs are ready to discuss it, I would be happy to make my suggestions

Another big revenue income from training is the fact that you don't pay the salary for the pops you get during the season. By the end of the season, you could play with players that are paid 100k$ per week while they're worth 150k$ salary because of the training they received.

Anyways, training can still be cost effective if you train "low" salary players. But right now the problem is about the huge TSP/salaries... Most of them are worth less than 2-3M$ on the market, and it will be even worse once exhaustion is fully activated given we will all need deeper rosters with the same revenues.

More weekly revenues for all or a new salary formula could readjust the market prices. But now high salary players are a huge waste of money and the NTs will soon be filled mostly by farms.

“No” as in the topic is still alive? Or “no” we will not get more income (the change will not be implemented?