BuzzerBeater Forums

I agree with bidding, I also hate bidding and bidding again. I think that could be great to have something like ebay system for a staff transfers (not for players - there I would like to see 5 minutes waiting if rebid:D)

The point is that this system have to suck money from top teams. Thanks to this will have these in lower divisions any chance to get you (or me) soon if your management will not be brilliant. This is a good point.

Imagine that if you want to train players, you need now in highest leaguest only best in your league. To make such a thing you can do 1 phase training, that means high costs for great coach, high costs for his wage and high costs for the player above sensational level...

..these things are for the lower teams unnecessary, so they doesn't have to spend so much money and can get (example) II. division soon anyway. On the other side - if you want a most effective training, you have to use your crap draftees or buy anyone for a millions to have any opportunity to have most effective training, you cannot use now trained players from lower divisions (for the training) thanks to this, that means highest divisions have to think about next steps extremely...

Last edited by Iordanou at 11/25/2008 7:25:06 AM

I have to say i like the new system!

You have predictable future salaries and can therefore roughly calculate the price you should bit to get a new coach. And if you are pleased with a level 4 ataff member you can get them pretty cheap...

I say the new system can be improved. A one time transfer fee that does not go back into the market, unlike a player transfer where it goes to the selling team, is just economic leakage. Unless of course is what the BBs intended all along.

How about getting managers to bid on staff salaries instead? 19k? 22k? 25k?
Much like RL, you decide how much you want to pay him and he'll accept the highest offer.

How about getting managers to bid on staff salaries instead? 19k? 22k? 25k?
Much like RL, you decide how much you want to pay him and he'll accept the highest offer.

Not likely to happen: what this means is that if you strike gold on transfer day, you will be saving money each week for what, 10 seasons? Nah.

You cannot save money for 10 seasons with the weekly increment in place. I only suggested removing the one time transfer bid with a salary based bidding system, not the weekly increments which ensures staff turnaround.

So how would you make managers to change an staff by the time?

You make managers change staff by using the current system where the wages increase weekly.

What changes in the system I propose is the staff's starting salary is dependent on the salary you offered him. So managers don't have to part with a lump of transfer funds which doesn't go back into the market but instead just payoff the severance fee and start paying the new guy his salary.

It also brings a sense of realism to the game where employers offer you better paychecks to change jobs, not a huge lump of cash.

Here's a bonus : Once you hire a staff, he remains yours for two seasons. After two seasons, other teams can offer him a bigger paycheck to prise him away from you. Makes those with really rare specialties be much sought after. It's very much a rough idea, not a complete product.

Last edited by Sparkle at 11/27/2008 10:01:57 AM

I understand the system you are proposing, however meanwhile I will have an luck and get a coach lvl 6 with wage 25k, and this wage will be permanently 25k, I have no motivation to change him by the time...

..do you have any solution for that?

Perhaps I worded my previous post a bit too blurry.

Wages are not permanent. Like the current system, it increases every week. So this week you pay 25k, next week you pay 25.5k and so on.

Well problem could be on my side, while I'm not used to speak fluent english.

I suppose that this system would make you bid on like 50k or more to get the coach, wages could be enormous, because if there isn't such a staff member for a next 24 hours, there will be wage bidwar and than we are at the same situation, however with great expenses every week...

50k would be a little extreme. If a manager decides that he wants to pay 50k a week to one of his staff, I say we let him.

Or if we don't go with the weekly increase if salary, we can go for the two season staff lock. Staff is paid a set amount which does not increase and is obligated to serve your club for two seasons. After two seasons, other clubs can 'see' your staff and his salary. If they think he is suitable, they can offer him a higher salary. You have 3 days to offer him a better salary before he leaves for the new team.

That way we don't have to worry about people keeping low paid staff for 10 seasons or so. And it puts the onus on the clubs to actively scout and pinch these low wage earners.