the game is working how its intended.
No,this is false,and I will explain you why
The goal of a BB user is to be the best in the world,so to allow everyone to win the BBB,the incomes in the various countries are the same.To be the best in your division,you should build the best team possible to be promoted and to have the possibility to reach always a better level.So,in the ideal condition,the incomes/expenses ratio in the various divisions and in the various leagues should be near 0(as many times the same BBs declared).While a weaker league reach the level of the strongest teams,the user of a small countriy,gain money that they should spend to close the gap and so returning towards the ideal economic situation,when everyone is around 0 level;in this period of time the teams of the stronger leagues would be disadvantaged on the global market,
but for a short period of time.
That is the point where the theorically perfect economical system fails drammatically in the reality.While Italy,Spain,the top and medium divisions of germany,france and so on have fastly reached the "right" incomes/expenses ratio,the large part of the countries still doesn't reach that point,and it doesn't seem that they will reach it soon.
Your country,Australia,is a perfect example for this situation.In australia the game started in season 2,you have a godd userbase(740 active users)...but you are still able to have a team in II division spending around 230k with the incomes of a II division(430k,with the possibility to arrive to 500k),so having a great advantage on the global market
The problem is that what in the Bbs minds should have been a temporarily disadvantage on the market of the users of the more competitive countries,especially of the users of medium-small division,practically has become a permanent advantage on the market of your countries teams.And I yet wrote a long post in which I demostrate how the market can influence the destiny of a team,also if the team is in the same economic condition of the other teams in his division
(152075.426)reddaddy answered to my post with an absolutely non-sense,because if I have a team only slightly worse than an another user,but I have the money to buy another player that he doesn't have,it means that I was a better or more lucky manager than my adversary in economic administration.But if a team of small country outbid me only because of a distorsion in the economic situation,and I know that this distortion is not temporarily,but practically permanent(returning to the first part of this speech),it means that the system doesn't work,so it needs to be rebalanced
And a further effect,is that,because of your greater power on the market,I am denied or strongly hindered in using some strategies,as for example like blow up my team,because you still have an higher power on the market than me(user of a large country),while the goal of blowing up their team is exactly to sacrifice results in the short time to be very powerful on the market and have better results in the future;that still not considering that in a less competitive country you have an easier way to use this kind of strategies(but the last is another point
(152075.371)I made a proposal trying to balancing the situation for us,without disadvantaging the teams in your situation,surely it could be improved,but what makes you and other users in bad faith,is the fact that you don't try to understand our points and answer with defaults argument,without trying to explain us why instead the system works well and we are wrong,as we do in our posts and or proposals
(152075.427)Last edited by Steve Karenn at 8/20/2010 1:33:42 PM