BuzzerBeater Forums

What if you stop training that player from now until the end of the season? What if you give him single position training in his most salary affected skill?

I had two suggestions there:

1- a snapshot in time, which gave an estimate of where his salary was heading, given his current skillset. It could be a range if there is uncertainty about where salaries are headed, I don't really care. But if you give the player more training, then there are no guarantees.
2- an estimate that updates every Friday, after training.

I think either of those addresses your concerns.

I do not think that uncertainty in this situation is good. Some people might get into a panic about their salaries next season, dumping players, allowing others to cash in. Or we will have a massive dump at the beginning of next season as people are surprised with their new salary levels.

Some of the newbies I have been helping also sometimes get excited about players towards the end of the season, because they have low salaries but high skills, not realizing their salary will increase at the start of the new season. So a salary estimator would also eliminate some of that confusion.

If you have high salary players, assume a 12.5% salary increase. If you mid salary player, assume a 4-6% increase. If you have low salary players, assume nothing.

As BB-Charles mentioned, your definition of high salary and my definition could be completely different. So right now all I can do is assume an upper bound of 10-15% and hope for the best next season.

Just reading back to see Joesph Ka's estimate of the salary change at the start of this season. I am guessing something similar will be used next season, so perhaps this would be a good place to start for thinking about salaries next season:

(122827.1)

I don't think option one would help at all, especially for trainees. Option 2 is an excellent suggestion in theory. I don't know enough about programming to know how difficult and time-consuming and other computer-related things it might be to implement.
Maybe I am in the minority, but I really like that a lot of these things are uncertain and vague. It makes the game far more interesting to me. However, I always assume that my payroll will rise in the off-season. To do otherwise is foolishness. In the seven off-seasons I have been around for, my team payroll has never once gone down.

.

Well, I think I will just assume that the way they handled the salary change last time will be the same this time, and make an approximation based off of that. The trouble I have with my estimate is - what will be the salary of some of the highest players next season with no changes? I am currently using $600,000 as my base, maybe that is too much, maybe that is too little.

So my point - are you going to allow teams to cash in on 1 player (lets say $5-6mil guy) and then let them use that as operating revenue ie. $400k per week to finance their success (albeit short term) or do you see benefits in capping team salaries to a percentage of arena/team revenue?

Teams certainly have the option of using up long-term assets to finance short-term success. This is a good thing from several points of view for long-term balance. I would hope that if one team in a top division does this, it might spur the others to do the same -- after all, you only get so many chances to win a top division, right? So it produces an arms race that has the short-term effect of a competitive game and the long-term effect of top teams burning assets and letting others catch up. Good for competitive balance, right?

Ahh.... nice..... makes a lot of sense... lets all go stockpile some cash!!

I hear you on the salaries but to watch untrained players go up 15% is a bit harsh... sure mono-skilled players seem to be gaining less interest these days but now the top end of the skills range (phenomenal +) start to look pretty alien... it would be nice to have a viable reason to build a real multi skilled monster!

So my point - are you going to allow teams to cash in on 1 player (lets say $5-6mil guy) and then let them use that as operating revenue ie. $400k per week to finance their success (albeit short term) or do you see benefits in capping team salaries to a percentage of arena/team revenue?

Teams certainly have the option of using up long-term assets to finance short-term success. This is a good thing from several points of view for long-term balance. I would hope that if one team in a top division does this, it might spur the others to do the same -- after all, you only get so many chances to win a top division, right? So it produces an arms race that has the short-term effect of a competitive game and the long-term effect of top teams burning assets and letting others catch up. Good for competitive balance, right?

Ahh.... nice..... makes a lot of sense... lets all go stockpile some cash!!

I hear you on the salaries but to watch untrained players go up 15% is a bit harsh... sure mono-skilled players seem to be gaining less interest these days but now the top end of the skills range (phenomenal +) start to look pretty alien... it would be nice to have a viable reason to build a real multi skilled monster!

monoskilled players are good when u play against bot.
when u have some user to play against (in order of 3/4, eh :P) u will have some problem.

it's funny u are realizing it in these days :D


Last edited by ÐΞﮎ@þiﮎA at 2/4/2010 9:48:33 PM

I hear you on the salaries but to watch untrained players go up 15% is a bit harsh...

I totally agree with him.

I've read from you(and others BB) that you're idea of a good training is that one that allows the player to be a perfect multi-skilled player. We all know that bb managers still train young monsters(im just referring to C/PF) and they are mono-skilled players with a lack of secundary skills. When they have a high salary most of the times they are sold to new teams who stop training them. So with the new economic rules you are preparing, the managers who are paying the high salarys of this big mans are going to be '' punished'' when they dindt train that players and if their salary is higher that doesnt mean they will train them.

If now we dont see that players with a high salary arriving to their maximum potential the main reason is because their managers cant afford more pop-ups or they are planning to sell them in a short term. As a nt coach i know the situation of some players(from my country) and with the new rule i imagine they are going to be in the TL most of the time.

Also this will affect to others managers that for a while trained his drafted star player to a lets say 100k-150k salary or more and stopped training him because they dindt want to sell him. Whats gonna happen now? They will have to sell it because there wont be any way to keep them on their team and im referring to managers from DIII-IV.

I see this rule as an indirect for all of us to train in the way that BB's want(and im not saying if its good or bad). This new rule is totally out of sense as i see it, for those players that had a bad training now is late to ''fix'' them and rising their salarys is not the solution. However if you wanna have a multi-skilled player reaching his salary/potential lets say legendary or historic it has to be done with mono-skilled trainings...

Last edited by Marot at 2/4/2010 9:48:42 PM

I think we might share different opinions on what makes a real multi-skilled monster!

Im not talking about a guy with a bunch of Prof-Prolific and a couple of Sens/Trem. Im talking about a 6xMarvellous + with Prom-Prolific wherever else its possible.

I think we might share different opinions on what makes a real multi-skilled monster!

Im not talking about a guy with a bunch of Prof-Prolific and a couple of Sens/Trem. Im talking about a 6xMarvellous + with Prom-Prolific wherever else its possible.

Do you really have or do you really have ever seen in BB a player with 6 Marvellous and some others prolific skills?I would to congratulate with this player trainee,I tried to create a similar player but training for seasons and season I cannot do it.
But are you sure that tou have seeen him,or you dreamed it?