BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > [Official] Salary Formulas update

[Official] Salary Formulas update

Set priority
Show messages by
Message deleted
This Post:
11
324393.39 in reply to 324393.35
Date: 7/1/2024 1:03:02 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
138138
I don't know if the opinion of a newcomer will be interesting to the new owners but I think that salaries should be weighted, at least minimally based on the age of the players.
That is to say, a very young player who, well trained, could rise a lot should have a salary slightly higher than what he had at the start of the season, I'm not saying what he will theoretically have at the end of the season, but something higher because it is assumed that he will give up something more.
On the other hand, the opposite happens with very mature players, each year their performance drops a lot and therefore the price that has to be paid for them is much higher than the performance they give on the field.

As a BBfiction proposal, it would be to have the possibility of signing contracts with the players for 2 or 4 years (with annual updates like now) but that they are not a commodity in the hands of the teams and they have a minimum decision-making capacity. If the contract is fulfilled and they are free, there must be an auction for them not for the purchase price, or not only for that, but also for the salary paid or the level of the team.

From: deanswer

This Post:
00
324393.41 in reply to 324393.40
Date: 7/2/2024 2:04:33 PM
deanswer
II.4
Overall Posts Rated:
186186
Second Team:
dequestion
I would suggest:
- decrease the cost of JS for PF
- decrease the cost of JR for Guards
- decrease a bit the cost of IS for PF and C

As you said it is quite weird that inside attack is not from the pf/c

S52 CUP WINNER S66 BBM11 winner "non dire gatto se non ce l'hai nel sacco"
This Post:
22
324393.42 in reply to 324393.41
Date: 7/2/2024 5:25:30 PM
deanswer
II.4
Overall Posts Rated:
186186
Second Team:
dequestion
I would suggest:
- decrease the cost of JS for PF
- decrease the cost of JR for Guards
- decrease a bit the cost of IS for PF and C

As you said it is quite weird that inside attack is not from the pf/c

and to put a maximum wage to pay at 250K, does not matter if real salary would be higher, max you will pay 250k
this is a way to let people train new (crazy) profiles
Give more value to top players and NT players.

and train 3 skills players with no regret

S52 CUP WINNER S66 BBM11 winner "non dire gatto se non ce l'hai nel sacco"
This Post:
22
324393.43 in reply to 324393.42
Date: 7/2/2024 7:10:22 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
138138
and to put a maximum wage to pay at 250K, does not matter if real salary would be higher, max you will pay 250k
this is a way to let people train new (crazy) profiles
Give more value to top players and NT players.

and train 3 skills players with no regret


If the maximum salary limit (for example at 250K as you indicate) included the prohibition of accumulating more than two or three players per team with that maximum salary, I would see it as correct. Otherwise it would be an incentive to create countless monstrous players without fear of paying a million dollars for them.
Naturally, the national teams could line up as many players as they have available with the maximum salary.

This Post:
33
324393.44 in reply to 324393.1
Date: 7/4/2024 3:40:15 AM
Ziuwari
ACBB
Overall Posts Rated:
880880
I don't think any big change in the salary formulas is needed right now. Outside tactics are already stronger than inside tactics but inside tactics are viable because teams can afford to have players with huge OD. An increase in the cost of OD would finish that, and it would probably end in everyone playing outside tactics like in the early days of BB. If you want to increase the cost of OD (which is comprehensible since IMHO that skill is too good in salary/performance ratio), it would also need to be accompanied by a effectiveness decrease of outside tactics. But, in any case, I think these kind of changes should be implemented very progressively, along no less than 5 seasons.

If I had to change anything related to skill cost, I'd change passing. And it'd be a decrease in salary for PG.

This Post:
33
324393.45 in reply to 324393.40
Date: 7/5/2024 4:13:05 AM
QQguest
I.1
Overall Posts Rated:
335335
I roughly looked at the discussions here and in the Discord group and found that one perspective hasn't been mentioned:
The salary formula affects matches between teams from different divisions.

Firstly, cup games and BBM/B3 may involve matches between teams from different divisions.
Setting aside the advantages of Attitude and luck (including home advantage and injuries), the most important factor is the strength gap between the two sides.
For a low-salary team, such as a Division 2 team with a 300k salary, versus a high-salary team, such as a Division 1 team with a 600k salary,
If there is "absolutely no chance" for low-salary team, then this part of the game becomes boring.
If the salary formula almost entirely reflects match strength, it could lead to such a consequence.

Under the current salary formula, a low-salary team needs to use good secondary skills (especially IS for outside players and OD for inside players) and sacrifice some skills to compete against a high-salary team with bad secondary skills.
Although it is still difficult to win, there is at least some hope.
Therefore, it can be seen that the salary formula must find a balance between almost completely reflecting match strength and maintaining gameplay.

Alonso repeatedly mentioned that any balance or changes to the salary formulas won't be massive or huge.
If the impact is less than the salary updates in S37 (223143.53) and S38 (223143.57) or, for example, if the salary increases by 5% to 7%, I don't think we need to worry too much because after the last salary updates, we were still able to train in the same way.

Last edited by little Guest at 7/5/2024 8:55:45 AM

Advertisement