BuzzerBeater Forums

With the insurance money (which needs to be measured on the actual value, maybe the TPE of the player) you get a rental from the TL AND you pay his salary instead of your injured player.

It's like picking up someone from the waivers to fill a roster hole in real life, but in BB there are no free transfers, hence you should pay a premium based on salary and worth and you get a payment from the insurance also based on salary and worth of the player. The insurance payment(s) must cover at least the salary of your player for the entire duration of the injury AND either a lump sum to help acquire a replacement of similar value or the possibility to acquire such a player at a hefty discount. For example after the injury and until it's over, the first player the manager acquires will be treated as the designated replacement, so in my case I could go out and find a similar 115-120 TSP SF-like MVP+ 25 year as a replacement for my injured trainee and pay 50% of my winning bid, while the other 50% is paid by the insurance.

This is doable and it's fair for people who are hit by injuries. You can say it's bad luck you get injuries, but in real life you have tools to manage the situation, insurances are one of those, while in BB you have none. People would still be inconvenienced, but at least they will be presented with a meaningful choice.

You mean someone like:
Henrik Sunesson (40186580) Center
Weekly salary: $ 3 195
Role: draws a paycheck
DMI: 17400
Age: 18
Height: 6'7" / 201 cm
Potential: MVP
Game Shape: respectable
Jump Shot: pitiful Jump Range: respectable
Outside Def.: awful Handling: respectable
Driving: awful Passing: inept
Inside Shot: average Inside Def.: respectable
Rebounding: average Shot Blocking: mediocre
Stamina: respectable Free Throw: inept

Experience: atrocious TSP: 50 (26 + 24)

He looks better to me than any of your trainees, but he's just 70 skills short of my real trainees. I bought him when I though I'd sell one of the others, but the problem remains. Injuries cost money in terms of salary and missed training. At the very least the economic side needs to be manageable by the managers.

With the insurance money (which needs to be measured on the actual value, maybe the TPE of the player) you get a rental from the TL AND you pay his salary instead of your injured player.

TPE is no way to measure a players value. It fluctuates so hard for some kind of player, it's not even useful. I would hate to see millions paid, just because a player goes down for like 2 weeks. This would also kill any tendency to see transfer prices deflate a bit.

I would hate to see millions paid, just because a player goes down for like 2 weeks. This would also kill any tendency to see transfer prices deflate a bit.

It's just luck, isn't it? Or does it work only one way and we only have to suffer?

You also need to pay for the privilege and you will never know if it is worthwhile to pay premiums in the end. That is the nature of the trade...

Last edited by Lemonshine at 9/19/2016 7:28:03 AM

In the long run, the injury bug will affect us all to the same extent. So maybe the issue is not as big as perceived?

Maybe, but this is an issue that needs to be looked at, because I'm sure people do quit because of this. I've seen a couple myself in the past (the 5 week, superior doctor guy, actually quit the following season after demoting, so not counting him)

...He looks better to me than any of your trainees, but he's just 70 skills short of my real trainees...

That's a pretty vicious burn, my friend. Fortunately, I have e-feelings insurance. I think it covers irrelevant e-peen stroking.

I'll admit I haven't given the thread a serious read, so I'll save any updates to the opinion you were responding to for later. One question though:

For example after the injury and until it's over, the first player the manager acquires will be treated as the designated replacement, so in my case I could go out and find a similar 115-120 TSP SF-like MVP+ 25 year as a replacement for my injured trainee and pay 50% of my winning bid, while the other 50% is paid by the insurance.

This is doable and it's fair for people who are hit by injuries.

Just to be clear, you are saying that you are willing to junk your injured trainee, write him off. retire him,etc.?

That's a pretty vicious burn, my friend.

I was just mentioning that I already have another trainable good prospect which you could have noticed by looking at my team's roster and it does not make me change my mind about the overall situation.

Just to be clear, you are saying that you are willing to junk your injured trainee, write him off. retire him,etc.?

If you give me the money to replace him with another who is similar, I have no problem to bin him forever. The problem is that my other trainee whom I put for sale 10 days ago, to see if he could go to an English manager, I had to repurchase for €5.6 million though, so it might be problematic. Unfortunately my trainee who got injured is the 3rd highest paid and 2nd best player on my team. He does not cost 200k/week, but to me it does have a significant impact on my economy and competitiveness that I can't just overlook because I have another trainable player.

I was just mentioning that I already have another trainable good prospect which you could have noticed by looking at my team's roster and it does not make me change my mind about the overall situation.

Ah, ok, I understand. My comment was posted @everybody, which to me meant to no one in particular. The player you posted is a good prospect, but is a little raw to be expected to fill in for a starter in a pinch. This player (36746240), as you noted, is a far worse prospect, but last game he was able to step in after my best defender fouled out and did an admirable job defensively against a $120K/wk 16.0 rating player, m2m, in a patient offensive set. So, imo, your player is unquestionably a better prospect. My trainee currently provides more depth, though. Is there an equilbrium point between our two approaches that would leave you better prepared to deal with an injury? The same 400k, spent on a 20-21 yo instead of an 18yo, etc? Or not spent at all like a "rainy day fund"? Sitting on an 18yo old MVP doesn't seem like it would have a positive impact on his value anyway. What's the difference between a prospect being injured for a week or a prospect that is intentionally not trained for a week as far as TPE is concerned?

If you give me the money to replace him with another who is similar, I have no problem to bin him forever.

I really think this would need to be part of the model, just to avoid exploits and "insurance fraud", otherwise someone could roll with a minimal doctor, trash his team, buy a new team at half price (minus insurance premium costs), and sell his originals for a tidy profit.

He does not cost 200k/week, but to me it does have a significant impact on my economy and competitiveness that I can't just overlook because I have another trainable player.

Injuries suck. A lot of this involves risk. If you are one injury away from being totally screwed you have already overlooked something, or you have assumed a risk in seeking a greater reward. Is that unfair, to say that?

That look you give when you have 2 injuries vs a bot and it screws your minutes and rotations for the next 3 weeks?

Ya I'm making it now.