BuzzerBeater Forums

I have never heard of hattrick but Ty for the info, But IMo bb need a better system for this area in all honesty.If it a direct price then so be it. Also I agree

for example if a trainer is 12K$ a week . there should be sign on fee like 500$~2500k$ .. this make more sense than a over the top bid war than can exceed to the hundred thousands or the millions. Its firm and direct.

Also i have never paid that(500k) for any trainer in a bid , but a lot are paying in a bid 100k~1million for a trainer. I don't see that as cost effective. No trainer is worth that price in a bid regardless of level. Also you still have to pay his weekly. It not cost effect, its killing teams finances.

trainers are on the market every hour or every day a new one. it just not cost effective to be bidding aways money like that. Team go through at least 2~4 trainers a season. If it 20k each that's almost 80k$.. Thats alot of money on BB.

That a whole new roster of good youth in the market. No trainer is worth that, because they don't evolve. If they evolved to better over time, then and only then bidding make sense and is cost effective long term for terms.

Last edited by Mr. Glass at 3/23/2015 4:05:23 PM

Why spend 500K on a trainer?

In a sense you're right, but the problem is with the profligate ways of the manager, not a problem in the game per se.

Last edited by Mike Franks at 3/23/2015 4:14:20 PM

Hattrick is the granddaddy of this genre of web-based sport sim games. BB-Charles spent a lot of time there, and a lot of the people recruited to help create this game also came from there. A lot of the things I enjoy most about this game are in large part because it's an improvement over how the same things were handled on HT. Some of the changes ended up not working out, of course.

I tend to agree that the auction system for staff isn't optimal, because an auction implies that the asset being purchased has some value but there's no way to recover some of that value by selling the asset later.

As far as how much some people pay for a trainer, it's the same as some people paying millions for the absolute elite trainees - it's a premium because of the scarcity of the specific thing desired. Thankfully, most of the people paying that amount of money are doing so because they are aware of the costs and believe that it's worth it, to them, to spend that amount of money for the relatively small boost it gives them compared to the alternative.

I don't think generally teams go through 2-4 trainers a season. I've had seasons where I'd go through double digits in PR managers to get the home court or road advantage, but I wouldn't spend more than a thousand or two, plus the five to seven thousand severance, and I felt like the slightly improved chance of winning was worth that. I think most trainers are probably replaced every season and a half or longer.

You cant blame the Manager for "wasting" his money when its required to attain in the market. This is the required procedure of the that area ( to bid).

The point in not inculpating someone for bidding, the system is already set up for you to be a victim. It wasteful spending because if I want that trainer im going to bid as well. Bid wars don't deal with common limits, some people take it personally and go to the bank..

BB has to lookout for the best interest of everyone in the market . Firm and direct is the best methods. 12k a week. 500$ sign on and that it. Not a 100K $ bid war for a 12k trainers. That's not a healthy thing. Then turn around and blame the managers.

You cant blame the Manager for "wasting" his money when its required to attain in the market. This is the required procedure of the that area ( to bid).

The point in not inculpating someone for bidding, the system is already set up for you to be a victim. It wasteful spending because if I want that trainer im going to bid as well. Bid wars don't deal with common limits, some people take it personally and go to the bank..

BB has to lookout for the best interest of everyone in the market . Firm and direct is the best methods. 12k a week. 500$ sign on and that it. Not a 100K $ bid war for a 12k trainers. That's not a healthy thing. Then turn around and blame the managers.

On the other hand, there's the logic that you'll never spend too much on an auction if you don't make the bid, nor will you ever sell a player for less than you want if you set the price at the minimum you'd accept.

trainee and trainer go hand and hand , ,imo this were they differ trainee's get better over time for that money spent as you said, while trainers don't, just more expensive.

1million for trainee and another 1million for trainer don't make any good finance sense for any ball club.

With the logic I'm using. 1 million for trainee and 78k r the trainer plus a 2500k$ fee fee to sign.. is much more affordable. This will go down in both areas if we go cheaply. This creates more team revenue to do other thing like arena. Better trained player as well for everyone.

well on your last part . I keep my trainers for 2/5 season if that, I do go past advanced. I don't feel the rest are worth with it, with the "48 min a game" imbalances sometimes.







Last edited by Mr. Glass at 3/23/2015 5:37:20 PM

You cant blame the Manager for "wasting" his money when its required to attain in the market.

I certainly can blame the manager, because a $500k bid is absolutely not required.

I tend to agree that the auction system for staff isn't optimal, because an auction implies that the asset being purchased has some value but there's no way to recover some of that value by selling the asset later.

It is amazing to me how pervasive the idea of $-profit is in BB. It really isn't a basketball management sim, where the sole measure of success would be more W's than L's, and where a trainer would be hired for the sole objective of helping get more W's than L's. It is no wonder the idea of bringing the economy into line gains no traction -- everybody is like a kid in a candy story throwing around Monopoly money. Very discouraging, since I wanted this to be a basketball management sim, not a day-trader's paradise where vistory is measured in cash to the almost complete disregard of W's.

On the other hand, there's the logic that you'll never spend too much on an auction if you don't make the bid, nor will you ever sell a player for less than you want if you set the price at the minimum you'd accept.

... and you'll never renew your roster if you don't make the bid, and see how well THAT works out for you.

I tend to agree that the auction system for staff isn't optimal, because an auction implies that the asset being purchased has some value but there's no way to recover some of that value by selling the asset later.

It is amazing to me how pervasive the idea of $-profit is in BB. It really isn't a basketball management sim, where the sole measure of success would be more W's than L's, and where a trainer would be hired for the sole objective of helping get more W's than L's. It is no wonder the idea of bringing the economy into line gains no traction -- everybody is like a kid in a candy story throwing around Monopoly money. Very discouraging, since I wanted this to be a basketball management sim, not a day-trader's paradise where vistory is measured in cash to the almost complete disregard of W's.

I was merely saying that an auction system only make sense (in my opinion) in an environment where the the asset being purchased is one where having a market setting a value makes sense. In a system with a fixed supply where the assets can not be returned to the market afterward, it makes more sense to have costs fixed.

I also might suggest that when you want to make a point about treating the game being a basketball sim and not an economy tycoon game, you don't lecture me on it - six of my nine primary players have been on my roster at least three *years* (not seasons, years), and two of the other three are well over 300 days tenure. My five deep reserves are three draftees and two guys with over 600 days tenure on my club.