BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Staff Salary

Staff Salary

Set priority
Show messages by
From: Icce
This Post:
00
204053.1
Date: 12/6/2011 5:58:25 AM
GlobalniTrotlni
SKL
Overall Posts Rated:
111111
I find the BB a great game and I am a supporter for one year. The only thing that is REALLY bothering me is that staff pay increases EVERY week for 2%, which equals a little less than 30% in a season. I think that staff salary should increase the same as by players or at least a little more reality based (lets say 10% a year or so). What do you think? Or at least that you could sell your coach like your players, since you have to pay anyway a fee for him.
Poll:  Would you like BB to chance the staff salary system?
Response Votes Result
Yes 51
60.0% 60.0% 60.0%
60.0%
No 34
40.0% 40.0% 40.0%
40.0%
This poll ended on 1/6/2012.

From: CrazyEye

To: Icce
This Post:
00
204053.2 in reply to 204053.1
Date: 12/6/2011 8:38:02 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
my comment to this, is salary increase just per 10% each season, i would switch staff every 5 season or so ;) So you could deleted it completly.

And now i move this to global, i am not really sure is it the ideal fit but this is definately nothing you want help about.

From: Icce

This Post:
00
204053.3 in reply to 204053.2
Date: 12/6/2011 9:51:11 AM
GlobalniTrotlni
SKL
Overall Posts Rated:
111111
I do not understand why so many people are agaist a change here. Like you said, 10% YEARLY salary raise would be a much fairer version, since I really do not know a sport where the salaries of staff would increase so much over the year and the Fee for them would be this high..


From: CrazyEye

To: Icce
This Post:
00
204053.4 in reply to 204053.3
Date: 12/6/2011 10:25:40 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
it is about the need to do something there, with 10% increase each season i would do something at the staff maybe every fifth season. In this case i would like something like facilities more, which you build one time, and then could forget about it ... Cause the 5 season rhythm shows the need for activity which isn't there anymore.

beofore it the staff salarys was constant, but they decrease there level over time, so that you had to check them regulary and replace from time to time, and then i like this more cause it is less random and you could plan with it and get advanatage not through luck but through planing.

Unrealitic is both.

From: wozzvt

To: Icce
This Post:
33
204053.6 in reply to 204053.3
Date: 12/6/2011 1:18:57 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
228228
Eh, here's the problem I see. If salaries didn't increase as fast, you wouldn't change as frequently. Because of that, when it's time to buy one, you'd be buying a guy for a *long* time and the total salary cost would be lower, so therefore would be willing to pay much, much more for them. So you're not ultimately really changing anything, you're just shifting the money around. Instead of paying more for increases in salaries, you're forcing teams to pay more up front. This then hurts teams that don't have as much cash available (i.e., lower division teams), and I really don't think we need more changes that help the richer upper division teams.

From: Tangosz

This Post:
00
204053.7 in reply to 204053.6
Date: 12/6/2011 2:14:03 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
573573
I don't know who you are, or what your motivations are, but you keep talking like that, and they're gonna take your 1 per center card away.

From: wozzvt

This Post:
11
204053.8 in reply to 204053.7
Date: 12/6/2011 2:23:16 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
228228
My taxes supported your promotion bonus! Get off my lawn, lousy hippie!

From: Icce

This Post:
00
204053.9 in reply to 204053.6
Date: 12/6/2011 2:28:48 PM
GlobalniTrotlni
SKL
Overall Posts Rated:
111111
I would not exactly agree with this view. Since it would be known that staff would not be changed that much and would know that they will have for example a coach for 5 seasons, they would wait for an appropriate price for him. Sure, at the start the higher division (richer) teams would buy staff for more, but other teams would wait and not buy. Therefore they would get the wanting staff for less money. That would be a chain reaction I think. But now one would buy a trainer level 5 (salary 16k) for 300k+, level 6 (salary 19k) for 600k etc...And they have to do it every three season because of the increased salaries. So how do you think that the new system would hurt lower division teams? In all logic it would be the quite opposite. I do not see a lower divison team who can afford to pay 700k for a coach every three seasons.

From: Saltori

To: Icce
This Post:
00
204053.10 in reply to 204053.9
Date: 12/6/2011 2:40:10 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
177177
Wouldn't be '' To change '' instead '' To chance '' ?

From: wozzvt

To: Icce
This Post:
00
204053.11 in reply to 204053.9
Date: 12/6/2011 2:50:11 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
228228
I would not exactly agree with this view. Since it would be known that staff would not be changed that much and would know that they will have for example a coach for 5 seasons, they would wait for an appropriate price for him. Sure, at the start the higher division (richer) teams would buy staff for more, but other teams would wait and not buy. Therefore they would get the wanting staff for less money. That would be a chain reaction I think. But now one would buy a trainer level 5 (salary 16k) for 300k+, level 6 (salary 19k) for 600k etc...And they have to do it every three season because of the increased salaries. So how do you think that the new system would hurt lower division teams? In all logic it would be the quite opposite. I do not see a lower divison team who can afford to pay 700k for a coach every three seasons.

You may very well be right. Lowering demand would lower the prices (assuming that supply didn't change with the rest of this, which seems unlikely).

But, I can tell you, I would *definitely* pay more for a trainer if I knew I wouldn't have to replace him for 5 seasons. And I suspect everyone here would do the same. So prices would definitely go up, which hurts the lower division teams more (before they could buy a guy and hope that they would have promoted by the time they need to replace him and buy a new one... with this, they need all that cash up front).