BuzzerBeater Forums

I agree but if the market prices drop at the same time for everyone I don't see any problem to pay 3,5m a player that yesterday has been sold for 7m, the question is when someone sold at 7m and can save 3,5m cause BBs changed the "market rules", we are not starting from the same line, I've 1m cash, other teams have 12m cash, if the value of the the best players will drop by the 30% there will be someone that will have an advantage on that...

I agree but if the market prices drop at the same time for everyone I don't see any problem to pay 3,5m a player that yesterday has been sold for 7m, the question is when someone sold at 7m and can save 3,5m cause BBs changed the "market rules", we are not starting from the same line, I've 1m cash, other teams have 12m cash, if the value of the the best players will drop by the 30% there will be someone that will have an advantage on that...

If you haven't the possibility to raise money,you haven't worry about that -.-"

I agree but if the market prices drop at the same time for everyone I don't see any problem to pay 3,5m a player that yesterday has been sold for 7m, the question is when someone sold at 7m and can save 3,5m cause BBs changed the "market rules", we are not starting from the same line, I've 1m cash, other teams have 12m cash, if the value of the the best players will drop by the 30% there will be someone that will have an advantage on that...

I know what you men... a team in my league sold a lot of players at the end ofthe season. He managed to raise 24m.
With prices going rapidly down when so much people is trying to sell their top players for their economic sake combined with the medium term deflation I guess he made a very good move and all the others managers who tried to improve their roster for PO/relegation games... we made some mistakes and we are going to pay for it.

Or you might also say, we already pay a lot for it.

It's been clear for some time that the economy has been in a bubble and would deflate.

My gross salary increase is 60% (c.250k to c.400k) but since I added 56k in acquisitions and 72k of salary value in training last season, my net salary increase is about 7%, less than the 10-15% predicted.

However, my net weekly income looks to have been cut by 40% :-S

So, I feckin' well hope the bubble is well and truly over and prices fall (by about 40% would be nice).

I feel decived by BB´s. They said a long time ago everything was done and the economical stuff had a self-management and now they incresed the salaries? WTF!!!!!! Men, think before doing this kind of things and never do that without explaining such an important matter like this (and unfortunately this is not the 1st time).

Another jungle market again, I started to bore this management :(

Edit: oh yes, one line dedicated to such huge matter, nice!!!!

And...is PF and Centers training death? Have you killed it? I think so.

This is self management. If the game requires a rise in salary, you'll see a rise in salary. If the game requires a decrease in salary, you'll see a decrease in salary. That's exactly what a self-regulating system acts like.
We already announced in the Allstar Break, almost 2 months ago, that we expected the salaries to be 10-15% higher this season.

is it really self managing, if you reduce the value of additional skills on high level - the value of players sink who get trained to this level which result also in players who aren't trained to the high skills. Because nowadays i could have a 800k rooster, and the home team with 500k salary will be the favorite i loose money and the other team make big profit with similiar succes - the result was reducing the overall quality to shorter training periods and maybe soemday the overall top levell was on one level.

Wasn't the target that top players aren't something just for national team, and that they should stay at least payable for top division team who make a "star" lineup? Those star was pretty unattractive before, and they get more and more unattractive because teams who don't have them get more money, which they now won't invest in that players.

Shouldn't the increase on a middle level higher then on the top level to force teams to get higher payrolls, because they get an real advantage through it.

Self-managed or not, previously announced or not, good or not for the whole game health, the fact is that many BB users will have to face "again" another economic earthquake. We will probably survive again to another strong change, which curiously comes right now that the market seemed to be quite recovered from the last economic disaster (masive injection of money in teams two seasons ago).

Another season starts and another season that we are mostly discussing about economy... Those who sold or bought players at the right moment will get a good advantage.
Those managers who do not care very much about the market movements will have to find another basket game to enjoy the strategy and tactic options of the former BuzzerBeater.

"BuzzerBeater, the best simulation game of real market economy" (with a cool live basket viewer).

I think people need to seperate out two different things that happen at the start of the season.

As Joseph started this thread, salary changes are on the order of 5-10% depending on what salary range you are looking at.

Second, all the players in the game got better.. as they do every season, sometimes massively better and so everyone's payrolls shoot up by large amounts at the start of the season... that's why you are seeing these 50% increases people are discussing. I think people are blaming the salary increase for what really is the effect of training.

Its true, if you do not promote and your players get better, you might have to sell some of them in order to keep your teams payroll in an affordable range for your division.

The game is designed so that everyone in the same division is on a roughly equal playing field, and can try to be strategic about training and recruiting prominent players, and putting together a talented but affordable roster, in hopes of promoting to a new division, where you will have more resources to buy better players and will soon be able to compete on that new, but hopefully also level playing field.

Another thing to keep in mind, is that salaries are not going to continue to go up indefinitely, what we have said is that we want to keep the upper level salary costs about the same... we thought that they would be going up faster than they actually did at first, and that's the reason for this current bump, but going forward we anticipate balancing the increase in skill a the top end with a decrease in the salary formula so that the top end players continue to cost what they cost right now, even as they get better.

So if someone wants to make the argument that the top level teams cannot afford the current salaries they can try.. but i know the numbers and top division teams were making a lot of money last season, and this salary increase put a dent in their profit.. but didn't make it impossible to run a team.

All those that were clamoring about inflation should also be satisfied, and lower transfer prices will mean less profit to be made with day trading, and will put focus away from the economic factors.

When you zoom out and look at the changes we have made over the last 2-3 seasons, I think you can see that we have been trying to make inter division competition more even, tried to avoid having players that are not affordable to have on your team, and have tried to make these changes as slowly as we could possibly imagine in order to lessen the impact... of course, changes have transitory impacts. An auto-adjusting economy doesn't mean that there will never be adjustments, we just hope that we settle into a nice equilibrium. Clearly we aren't there yet...

Second, all the players in the game got better.. as they do every season, sometimes massively better and so everyone's payrolls shoot up by large amounts at the start of the season... that's why you are seeing these 50% increases people are discussing. I think people are blaming the salary increase for what really is the effect of training.

i got +150, and maybe 30k of them was through training with the existing formulas ;)

So if someone wants to make the argument that the top level teams cannot afford the current salaries they can try.. but i know the numbers and top division teams were making a lot of money last season, and this salary increase put a dent in their profit.. but didn't make it impossible to run a team.

not impossible, but the teams who making profit still doing it, the team who was close to zero now make big minus in average the change was succesfull but i thing the target was messed because lot higher payrolls brings few "bonus" which will decrease the value and the motivation to bring player to top level now even U21 are close to overpaid players not only the NT players.
Maybe not all are forced to sell, but i don't feel that i had an big advantage about a team who pays 300k less with similiar sideskills at the players, because top level skills are so expensive(and logical step against would be reducing the cost myself to get maybe more balanced players with the profit, and not to be afraid of bancrupcy if i miss the conference titel)

All those that were clamoring about inflation should also be satisfied, and lower transfer prices will mean less profit to be made with day trading, and will put focus away from the economic factors.

mmmh really, if i daytrade betwen players who are worth 1,5 Million and selled for one million, i could do the same with lower prices only the salarys are a bit higher ;) But i had to do fewer trades to get a high skilled player, which makes it more attractive(especially in combination with the taxes). And because of the taxes, the trading mostly appears in the cheap amrket and works with qunatity and player who you could sell for the multiple buying price(aand this market isn't affected at all).

So if someone wants to make the argument that the top level teams cannot afford the current salaries they can try.. but i know the numbers and top division teams were making a lot of money last season, and this salary increase put a dent in their profit.. but didn't make it impossible to run a team.

i didn't run profit last season, so could i afford it this season?

you got +150 out of how much? well i know how much (though i won't broadcast that number publicaly), and i so i know that more than 30k through training.

Furthermore, i know from looking at your league you have competitive revenue and competitive salaries with your compatriots, so if you are all running in the red, you are all in the same boat.

if you think you can compete just as well with lower salaried players you should do so... I think you are probably wrong, but if you think a player is overpaid for his value i dont' see why you should have him on your team.

no... if you are trading a player who you are buying for 1M and selling for 1.5 million, i suspect that if you now can buy a player for 500K then you won't be able to sell him for 1M, but probably closer to 750K. I don't see any reason to believe daytrading fluctuations shouldn't scale with price. So now your day trading profit has been cut in half.

The lower priced players are affected less.. but not in a non trivial way... and reducing the overall money supply is going to have trickle down effects which are going to effect market prices even at the lower levels.

Everyone should not be running in the red.. everyone is on the same boat... if players are really unaffordable we will see the price/skill curve invert.. but it hasn't, so that's not what is going on.

I hope my tone is not condescending.. i know you have complained about that in the past, I just disagree with your arguments, I don't mean any of my disagreements to sound personal.

Last edited by BB-Forrest at 3/23/2010 8:05:08 PM

The problem is that you´re only talkig about economy and not about its impact on the game. I repeat (again):

-Have you killed PF and C training? I think so, do you?

-Have you killed most of managers of III, IV,.... divisions? I think so, do you?

-Have you shown the way to success is training PG-SG? I think so, do you?

-Is now possible compete in a long-therm against people who train PG-SG and they have centers monoskill who only defend and get rebounds? No, it´s not. They save loads of money with those kind of monoskill centers and they can train full time PG-SG cause they can earn 200K and that fact won´t be a problem cause those players will have a top level.

-Do you really think that salaries of both kind of players are really fair/equal? No, I don´t. Top PG-SG earn 200-250K, Top PF-C earn 500-600K.
-Do you think most of managers will train the same things and use a kind of pattern? Yes, I do. Do you?

It seems like you tried something but you got another huge thing you did not expect: the end of tactical and versatility spirit.

They´re only questions, you could (and I´d be so pleased) answer.

Bye

Last edited by Foto at 3/23/2010 8:21:10 PM