BuzzerBeater Forums

Charles, one day you will explain to all of us the sense of the balls above the posts, they can create only flames and in the best case they're completely useless.

About your post I agree with you even if I don't like any intervention in the economy after that you said that the economy is "autoregulate" and I'm speaking about +15% in the salary for the expensive players

Hi Charles,I don't see the question of the top players as the main in the BB economy(you should know what is it in my mind :P ),but I would say my thought

For me,a player with maximum wage should be sustainable from the top teams,allowing them to have a "decent team" having one salary monster in the roster that drain money from the other's players salaries.How can we define a "decent team"?Giving the its definition,obvioulsy in terms of salary(there are many way to reach a certain level of salary),we could adjust the incomes for the measue of that hypotetic kind of team;when you made that,the manager will choose his strategy.Surely,it would be better to have a team with five players with 200k salary and three reserves with 80k salaries(plus some young trainee) than have a team with a monster with 600k of salary,four players with 125k salaries and three reserves with 50k salary(plus some young trainee),but you should allow a manager to do this choice(I said casual numbers,but I hope you understand my thought)
The increased economic posibilities should be balanced by the level of expenses of the various countries(and so returning to the main problem of the competitive/uncompetitive leagues economic balance and so on)
Nowadays,only farms team could maintain certain kind of players,and this is not good for the game


Last edited by Steve Karenn at 4/4/2010 7:22:07 PM

I agree that these players aren't good long term choices. Nonetheless their TL value will end up being lower due to their salary and even though they are mono-skilled they are still extremely good players for their position.

Will these players end being short-term ringers and if so, will they have an effect on the game? I assume "yes" on the former, and hope "no" on the latter. If it only effects the B3/NT then it's really not much of a deal. The hope is they don't become regulars in domestic cup tourney's and PO battles.

I agree that these players aren't good long term choices. Nonetheless their TL value will end up being lower due to their salary and even though they are mono-skilled they are still extremely good players for their position.

Will these players end being short-term ringers and if so, will they have an effect on the game? I assume "yes" on the former, and hope "no" on the latter. If it only effects the B3/NT then it's really not much of a deal. The hope is they don't become regulars in domestic cup tourney's and PO battles.

The transfer market has been killed sufficiently that if you decide to add a new transfer window or period of ineligibility this 'may' deter those from looking to buy short term success.

What about registering your squad for the league during the offseason week with a new ameneded squad being allowed ahead of playoffs?
What about registering a cup team which can only be amended at the last 16 stage with +3/-3 players to the original roster?

Kong Tsun Ting (7976961)
Center
Week Salary: $ 214 274
Age: 22

The last tranfer today : 2.500.000$

¿¿¿this is are you looking for???

Just like HT, we the divine player´s sell for lowerest prices...

greats teams with money in their account win, and the teams with lower capacity for reach money is going down...

I understand what the argentinian fellow is concerned about... The best players tend from now on to be sold for far less than inferior players, just because of their too high wages... Is it really what the BBs think to be the best for this game?
I know BBs hate when people compare BB to Hattrick, but in this case they are asking to be compared. Hattrick's worst characteristic (top players undervalued in the market due to too high salaries) is being reproduced here.
You know, once I wanted to reach Buzzerbeater Best (almost accomplished that last season), but now I'm really not excited anymore... within a couple of seasons, a team who wants to win that competition will need to sell all their very good players for, let's say, 25kk, and then buy 5 players with 400k wages for 2kk each (pretty cheap) and with the 15kk reamaining they will afford their wages for 1 season and then in the end of the season go bankrupt but champions of the world. Just like hattrick. The same crap. If I knew Buzzerbeater would become Hattrick - part 2 I would have never spent so much time here.

Perhaps there is a solution. If there would exist something like lifetime contract. You know, is great to have and raise drafted player, in my opinion would be also great if settled player would start to like his stable position so much, that after 5 seasons in your club would his wage slowly decrease.
There have to be any conditions, that he have to be at least 28y old, so will not be ambicious like younger kinds..

Just scares me if you start to compare BB with Hattrick, dont do that.

I really think that what it means for the economy to be in balance has been misunderstood. What it means is that the amount of salary spent, in total, is linked to the amount of income, in total. So, let me give you two examples of what this means:

It's OK if you try to keep the economy balanced. Thanks for your hard work.

1) There will almost certainly never be a player that earns $1M/week.

Why not? Because total income and total expenditure are linked. The highest salaries now will be approximately the highest salaries 20 seasons from now unless something major changes the income. The only way to get a player earning $1M/week would be if one or two individuals are much more skilled than everybody else in the game, which seems improbable.

It seems much more improbable now that nobody will train players above 13-14 skills because they are not stupid to the point of creating players nobody (even the teams that train them) want due to their wages.

2) Multiskilled players will almost certainly never be the highest-salaried player.

There will always be some people who insist upon training only a very small set of skills - BuzzerBeater is a big game with many teams that train, and it only takes a few poorly trained players to throw off the top of the curve. If the highest salaried players earn around $400k, then multiskilled players can only earn $400k if they are the most skilled according to the salary formula.

OK, so everybody, listen: there is no point in training centers or guards anymore, everybody should train only Small Forwards.

I think these two points haven't been fully appreciated.

In the case of (7976961), for example, we're talking about a young but mainly monoskilled player. It is always going to be possible to create a player who is not very useful for their salary, and such a player will probably not do well on the transfer market. I don't see this as a problem - owners are given the freedom to choose the players they want to create, but in return they have to accept that some choices will be better than others. There are a handful of players in the database with 25+ jump shot, driving, and handling and no more than 5 in any other skill. These players will almost certainly never be able to justify their large salary, and I suspect that if listed for sale, the purchase price would be quite low. I don't think that's a failure of game design, though.

So I really had misunderstood what you meant by 'multiskilled player'. Of course players who are 25+ on driving and handling and 5 on every other skill are useless. I wouldn't pay $1 for a guy like that. But when a player who is 16 on every skill on the perimeter, or is 18 on every inside skill, gets undervalued on the market due to his wages now I understand that this is because he is unbalanced, he was supposed to be 11 on every skill, otherwise he gets too 'unbalanced' and the stupid guy that spent 10 seasons doing everything right, training 48 minutes on a single position, sacrificing his own team, having paid a fortune to purchase this player when he was 18 or having spent tons of money in the draft, this guy must be punished for all that stupidity of being correct and organized when training. This guy must be punished by having his guy totally undervalued on the market, and if he doesn't get the price he wants, he must be punished for having that player on his roster for a fortune/week. He must be punished for training a center or a guard, because centers and guards are 'unbalanced' by nature. Ok, now I understood.




Edited the bold mark


Just to clarify, if it is not clear enough: the bold parts on the quoted part are written by me, not by BB-Charles.

Last edited by LA-Bernspin at 4/5/2010 9:11:47 AM

In the case of (7976961), for example, we're talking about a young but mainly monoskilled player. It is always going to be possible to create a player who is not very useful for their salary, and such a player will probably not do well on the transfer market. I don't see this as a problem - owners are given the freedom to choose the players they want to create, but in return they have to accept that some choices will be better than others. There are a handful of players in the database with 25+ jump shot, driving, and handling and no more than 5 in any other skill. These players will almost certainly never be able to justify their large salary, and I suspect that if listed for sale, the purchase price would be quite low. I don't think that's a failure of game design, though.

So what I am trying to say is that the value of a player should be given by the market depending on the player's skills, and not on the player's wages. The way the game is going is creating big distortions and will be very harmfull to the future of the game. Please don't be so blind for what is going on, I understand that mathematically and/or statistically the game could be fine, but, you know, this game is not just about statistics or math, you are just killing training and that's very serious.

I know you probably will play deaf and say that the game has reached equilibrium and so on, but I would appreciate if you listen a little bit someone who plays since season 2, who has been a supporter for a long time , who has his team ranked above #5 in Brazil and #200 in the world and has just being elected as coach of the Brazilian U-21 team.

Last edited by LA-Bernspin at 4/5/2010 9:23:58 AM

So what I am trying to say is that the value of a player should be given by the market depending on the player's skills, and not on the player's wages.

This is only partially true,because players with a too high salary for their efficiency will be always paid less on the market than players with a better salary/efficiency ratio,that's a market rule(and i still don't see how in the future will be good to have very high levels in shot blocking for example,even if it will be increased his value in the game engine)
What is wrong in the economic architecture of the game is that no one players that want to compete at the top levels can afford the highest wages players without destroying their teams or making the rest of their teams weak(for the top level)

So what I am trying to say is that the value of a player should be given by the market depending on the player's skills, and not on the player's wages.

This is exactly what's going to happen. I'm not sure if we were clear enough before, which might led to a misunderstanding, I don't think you fully understand what Charles was trying to say, so I'll make a second try.

We need to seperate two things here, which are the best players (1) and the highest wages (2).

The best players will not earn the most. You need to see the salary as a scale where players are being put in. A 500k player now, will probably not be a 500k player a few seasons from now (he will most certainly earn less, unless suddenly global income dramatically increases). As we expect some people will keep creating monoskilled monsters, the bunch of top end salary players (who again, are not the best players) will be monoskilled. This means that the best players, the better trained multiskilled ones, will earn less.

So in the end we'll see the best players being sold for the highest prices. These players will never earn 500k/wk since the monoskilled monsters will always fill the top end of the salary scale. This means the best players are affordable for top teams within their salary budget, thus their market price will go up. It's logical that the monoskilled top end salary monster will be sold for less since he's a worse player (and got a higher salary).

I also don't think you should be afraid we see the 'divine tricks' happen that much in BuzzerBeater as in Hattrick. The Hattrick engine supports monoskilled players (which is changing a bit lately, but still it's mostly singleskilled focussed). If you train a goalkeeper to 30+ goalkeeping you got the best you can get, if you train a playmaker to 30+ you got the best you can get. If you train a center to 30+ IS, ID and RB or a SG in 30 JS, HD and DR, you don't get the best you can get, you just get the highest possible salary. The BuzzerBeater engine supports multiskilled players since the start of the game way more than Hattrick ever did. The engine will try to exploit the weaknesses of the opponent, which means that in a matchup the play that can attack from the outside and inside will try take easy shots on the inside vs a monoskilled outside player and visa versa.

I don't see a 2,5m/wk monoskilled team winning the B3 in 10 seasons from now, I don't think such a team is able to beat a multiskilled one. I completely agree with your reasoning that we don't want to see a lot of this divine stuff happening here, and I really think it's not gonna happen.

Last edited by BB-Patrick at 4/5/2010 10:13:44 AM