BuzzerBeater Forums

I constructed my team so I don't have to go in hibernation mode.

I believe my team is extremely strong for a 400k salary price. More importantly, all the players are about 27, so they have their entire prime career time in front of them. After they retire, I would still have ridiculous amount of money to repeat the cycle.

I wasn't going to tank, I was going to earn much more money than tankers :)

The tax simply sets a limit for how much money can actually be made, and personally, I think we were very lenient with it. 

I agree with you. 25 million in lower divisions doesn't eliminate tanking.

IMO, it should be geared towards making promotion more attractive. If you can hoard the same amount in the lower divisions, there is no negative to rebuilding from rock bottom. If the higher divisions have access to a higher limit than the one below, it gives more incentive to stay competitive and avoid relegation.

Last edited by Perriwinkle Blue at 2/19/2016 4:57:28 AM

... and personally, I think we were very lenient with it.

Well, it probably applies to less than 1% of all the teams in BB, and most of them have so much money that the tax doesn't even make a dent. Yeah, I would have to agree with you -- lenient for sure.

Well, it probably applies to less than 1% of all the teams in BB, and most of them have so much money that the tax doesn't even make a dent. Yeah, I would have to agree with you -- lenient for sure.

It does make a dent, it actually chews off everything above 25 mil. For example if a team had 50 mil at the given week, they would be paying 2.5 million tax that week.

@Ryan, Perpete

I don't see it the same way, or you don't see my point of view.

I've invested 19 million to purchase 6 players for my team, plus my 3 own trainees whom I trained since the beginning(10 seasons I think), they are also worth at least 6 million.

So I could've built a B3 contender. Instead I opted to make a weaker team, but who will make money, and last for a long time, thus allowing me to repeat the process.

Note that in this post, I'm not talking about the tax itself. What I'm arguing, I don't see it as a less respectable way of playing. You and Perpete basically accused me of abusing the game.

I just see it as a tradeoff. My team will be weaker, but give me money. What I get in money, I lose on competitiveness.

Key here is the loss of competitiveness. I can show you my players, and you will see it's beautifully set up. I haven't had chance to gauge my team strength yet, and still have two seasons of training planned, but I'm certain the team would be a tough, gritty opponent in any league in BB.

Personally, I see only one good way of balancing micronations issue. Of course, I don't know how to implement it, and if it's possible to implement it anyway.

It's to make arena attendances completely independent of league level. I have no idea how the formulas look like, so this a blunt suggestion, but there may be some way to make them depend on league strength instead. Meaning that attendances in a half bot league will be the same, regardless if it's a div IV in a large nation, or a div I in micronation. Attendances would also be the same in a div I where average salaries are 300k, as in a div II where average salaries are 300k.

My point is that this would be a core change to balance the game, while the rich people tax was just a patch that didn't solve anything essential.

Yes, that's exactly my point. With a core change like that, coupled with a completely new fan survey system, the economy would be much more balanced in terms of macro vs micronations(which is an issue often brought up). Which would probably lead to many issues that we have today, not existing at all.

Those numbers look absolutely horrible though, not sure how the WR works. My league has relatively high average salaries(no bots yet, but div IIs are slowly getting empty), 434k. Average salaries would be a better way to determine a league strength.