BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > Bidding on trainers need to go

Bidding on trainers need to go

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
268432.12 in reply to 268432.7
Date: 3/23/2015 6:23:23 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
370370
I tend to agree that the auction system for staff isn't optimal, because an auction implies that the asset being purchased has some value but there's no way to recover some of that value by selling the asset later.

It is amazing to me how pervasive the idea of $-profit is in BB. It really isn't a basketball management sim, where the sole measure of success would be more W's than L's, and where a trainer would be hired for the sole objective of helping get more W's than L's. It is no wonder the idea of bringing the economy into line gains no traction -- everybody is like a kid in a candy story throwing around Monopoly money. Very discouraging, since I wanted this to be a basketball management sim, not a day-trader's paradise where vistory is measured in cash to the almost complete disregard of W's.

This Post:
00
268432.13 in reply to 268432.9
Date: 3/23/2015 6:25:48 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
370370
On the other hand, there's the logic that you'll never spend too much on an auction if you don't make the bid, nor will you ever sell a player for less than you want if you set the price at the minimum you'd accept.
... and you'll never renew your roster if you don't make the bid, and see how well THAT works out for you.

This Post:
00
268432.14 in reply to 268432.12
Date: 3/23/2015 7:41:14 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
I tend to agree that the auction system for staff isn't optimal, because an auction implies that the asset being purchased has some value but there's no way to recover some of that value by selling the asset later.

It is amazing to me how pervasive the idea of $-profit is in BB. It really isn't a basketball management sim, where the sole measure of success would be more W's than L's, and where a trainer would be hired for the sole objective of helping get more W's than L's. It is no wonder the idea of bringing the economy into line gains no traction -- everybody is like a kid in a candy story throwing around Monopoly money. Very discouraging, since I wanted this to be a basketball management sim, not a day-trader's paradise where vistory is measured in cash to the almost complete disregard of W's.


I was merely saying that an auction system only make sense (in my opinion) in an environment where the the asset being purchased is one where having a market setting a value makes sense. In a system with a fixed supply where the assets can not be returned to the market afterward, it makes more sense to have costs fixed.

I also might suggest that when you want to make a point about treating the game being a basketball sim and not an economy tycoon game, you don't lecture me on it - six of my nine primary players have been on my roster at least three *years* (not seasons, years), and two of the other three are well over 300 days tenure. My five deep reserves are three draftees and two guys with over 600 days tenure on my club.

This Post:
00
268432.16 in reply to 268432.14
Date: 3/24/2015 3:25:58 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
370370
...there's no way to recover some of that value by selling the asset later.
I wasn't "lecturing" you and I apologize if I came off that way. I was merely observing how pervasive the almighty dollar is as an end in itself, whereas in a basketball management game W's should be the end in itself. In basketball, a team doesn't hire a coach or trainer with the idea of selling him at a later date -- period.

This Post:
11
268432.17 in reply to 268432.16
Date: 3/24/2015 9:03:40 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
...there's no way to recover some of that value by selling the asset later.
I wasn't "lecturing" you and I apologize if I came off that way. I was merely observing how pervasive the almighty dollar is as an end in itself, whereas in a basketball management game W's should be the end in itself. In basketball, a team doesn't hire a coach or trainer with the idea of selling him at a later date -- period.


Which is precisely why there shouldn't be an auction for them.

This Post:
00
268432.18 in reply to 268432.17
Date: 3/24/2015 12:12:01 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
370370
I can't tell if you missed the point or if you're arguing Devil's advocate to keep the thread alive, so I'll let it drop.

This Post:
00
268432.20 in reply to 268432.19
Date: 3/25/2015 2:18:32 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
- Allow to promote a player as a trainer. The level of the trainer will depend not on how much you pay for it, but on his TSP at the moment when you decide to promote him. For example TSP>130 -> level 7; TSP>110 -> level 6; TSP>90 -> level 5 etc etc.
Allowing the manager to influence the player decreasing speed at a fixed convenient price, like 50k per 10 games.


I'm curious why you'd pick TSP at the moment of promotion. I'd think experience would probably be a better choice, or maybe maximum TSP during his career (which I think is stored because of the Hall of Fame), but you may have a better reason for this.

This Post:
11
268432.22 in reply to 268432.21
Date: 3/25/2015 3:05:12 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
32293229
- Allow to promote a player as a trainer. The level of the trainer will depend not on how much you pay for it, but on his TSP at the moment when you decide to promote him. For example TSP>130 -> level 7; TSP>110 -> level 6; TSP>90 -> level 5 etc etc.
Allowing the manager to influence the player decreasing speed at a fixed convenient price, like 50k per 10 games.


I'm curious why you'd pick TSP at the moment of promotion. I'd think experience would probably be a better choice, or maybe maximum TSP during his career (which I think is stored because of the Hall of Fame), but you may have a better reason for this.

I prefer TSP at the moment of the switch because I think it might be the most fair option. Maximum TSP will encourage overbidding on extremely old player once good, while experience will not account for the effort made to train a player, since if they are put in a 3 or 6 players training rotation they usually end up playing less than a normal player.
TSP at the moment might also influence the switch decision making process, since as an owner of the club I'd have to find the proper balance to reconvert a still valuable player into the trainer.


That makes sense, for sure. On the other hand, I think the main reason I'd like something like this personally is to keep players who have been part of my club for a long time and allow them to continue to be useful. Maybe a "max TSP with current club" instead? That eliminates the overbidding on very old players, but still acknowledges that the player was once better.

I'm out of +1s to give, but it's a fun idea.

Advertisement