BuzzerBeater Forums

First:
my 3 specialists had this wages: Doctor 1,000 Trainer 20,114 PR 1,000 Tot: 22,114
now: 2,000 -19,556 -2,000 Total: 23,556 Balance minus1,442.

Second: All the 3 specialists will be more demanding week after week so in few weeks my expenses will be very high...what the remedy? Fire (paying the too expensive one, so I pay one week an overexpensive one only to replace with another less expensive) and go to auction...
So only to keep your chosen level of specialist, you had to fire, pay, go to the auction and yuo don'tt expect to take away moneey?

Listen, I do appreciate your efforts to expand this truly magnificient game, really.
But this implementation is wrong, you are heavily modifying our economic balance; this system it's like an economic cancer that grows week after week and that we can stop only wasting money only to replace a level x with another level x less expensive.
Even don't making pay to fire the old specialist it would be only an attenuation of the problems; with this system I'm going to expend maybe 200,000 r more to buy at the market a level 5 of a lesser wage, and after a few weeks again?
It's unbeareble.

Ok, I'm surely curious (and scared) to see what will be the weekly raise.

Only please understand that for us seminewbies (2nd season for me), we don't navigate in gold as it seems you (the developers) think. At this time I had an equilibrate economy with a 30.000 weekly gain, so in a season I gain +/- 420.000 - the 3 weeks of pause...so 200k / 250k.
In fact, in an entire season I don't gain enough money to buy a decent player, if you seriuos reduce this very little edge I won't be capable to buy more than a player every 2 o 3 seasons.
MAybe I will make a reason of this, i keep my players and my draftee and I will be happy, but if you oblige me to keep down my top coach what it remains? Lesser coach means lesser train, with no market...what my possibilities to grow?

Think again please, this weekly encrease of wages is murderous.
Thanks for your attention.

Last edited by Francy at 10/11/2008 2:08:55 PM

Maybe the idea is that you just in RL sport should sell your talents when you finished training them and to buy another talent for that money and that the best teams will end up with your talents until you are capable of threatening them due to higher arena incomes and a very good economically strategical solution.

For me it is logical that I should train a player one or two seasons when I am in a lower division and to sell and buy another prospect, maybe even a bit bigger prospect than the one I just sold. To be in the top you got no possiblity to train those big talents as your team needs fully trained players to win matches which is not the case in the lower divisions with less competable teams. This must at least be the whole idea that BB tries to create the game within.

How big are the weekly increases planned to be?

Well, let's see what the numbers look like globally when things settle down.

With that said, I hope you will think back to the past few months and realize that if we had a goal of lowering revenue, we would not be shy about telling people that we wanted to lower revenue and explaining our reasons why we felt it was important to do so.

You cant ignore the fact that you want to lower our global revenue. I didnt see the reason for lowering our tournement revenue and now this, rising wages of staff. After these 2 changes it seems to us that you want to lower our revenue.

I disagreed with the salary increase thing when you first proposed it and I still don't like it. It means that I constantly will need to be looking for a new coach to maximize my team's economy. In other words, I will have to devote more time playing the game. I will have to figure out the optimal time to change coaches and the optimal price.

The old system is not very interesting but at least it was easier to understand when to make changes.

Wouldn't it be better to have your coach become a free agent at a fixed date after you sign him? Then at least I know when I will have to replace the coach.

Also, I would much rather bid on the weekly salary of the coach rather than a huge "bonus" that goes nowhere. Either that or take away the salary of the coach altogether.

Finally, I don't get the relation to the real world. The coach's skill is not improving but he gets constant salary increases which are more than inflation?

Last edited by HeadPaperPusher at 10/11/2008 5:58:20 PM

I will have to figure out the optimal time to change coaches and the optimal price.

Just the same way you have to figure out the optimal player skills, wages and tactics. That's what the game is all about, really.

No, this is not the point...it's not anymore a question of good management , it's a fight to survival without the option of buy or to proper train the players.
If I get a +250k in a year (+250k because my team is going well) and then I had to spend the same to fire and rehire a level 5 coach I cannot play anymore. Only survive.
It is no good or bad management if I had no options.

And more, I'm also obliged to waste other money to free my team from doctors and pr that I surely cannot substain and that are the same draining my resources.

I'm curious to see the level of abandons after some weeks of this foolish thing...

No, this is not the point...it's not anymore a question of good management , it's a fight to survival without the option of buy or to proper train the players.

You know what? It's exactly the same for everyone else. And it's _always_ a question of good management -- the guys who usually survive are the ones who manage best.