BuzzerBeater Forums

So what were you doing if not tanking? Those 10m couldn't magically appear in your budget. If you're collecting money for seasons, than you're tanking, that's at least how we in Serbia think of tanking, you don't have to relegate or have minimal salary. I have tanked in DI for several seasons with 200k+ weekly incomes.
Maybe the correct term is hoarding money, but it doesn't matter. If you're collecting money, you should be penalized, so that new managers would have a chance to catch up quicker.

thsoe millions mostly came from my previous attempt to go to highest division (didnt succed so sold trainnes). And while i was still quite competive in II.league , you cant tell me that its tanking. Yeah i`m planning (saving) some cash for the time my traines are ready to fight for real , so i can give them good teammated, and thats not hoarding-its long term planning.

I hope you at least trained some youngsters while tanking, but if you stayed at top i dont think it can be called tanking as you were planning your budget and players according, it was your strategy to make your team more competive in few seasons. It`s part of the game, if it would be easy to get to top division it wouldnt be so fun.From your text i come to conclusion - basically every top division is tanking? as they dont train that much so their incomes have to be with quite big + to afford staying at top season after season. I understand why top division teams think this is bad, because most of them run on weekly income not training.

Most of the managers in higher division are not targeting players on the TL under 60k except as backups. If there is not a good supply of higher salary players, the price will increase drastically. If they can't find a player under 60k on the TL, they will buy the next best option which will drive the price up of the 30k-60k salary players that most DIII managers use as the starters. The chain reaction continues down the supply curve screwing the lower, inexperienced managers that were suppose to be helped.

What we don't know is if the increase in supply of players under 60k will be able to counteract the increase in demand. In addition, some type of hoarders taxes could possible result in hundreds of millions of TL spending as hoarders scramble to buy players before the tax goes into effect and an increase in the promotion bonus will add to that spending as well. More spending meets more competition for players, and higher prices.

Yes and no....

Sure it screws them if they come in and try to instantly buy a team, but we know from years past new players would come in, buy 100K a week salary guys for their cup games, turn and sell them, etc. or use them until they drive themselves bankrupt.

I think it is new managers best interests to learn how to manage a team, managing a team consists of not just managing money, but also scouting players, developing players, and building a team.

if buying a team was all it took to win then Golden State shouldn't have won last year. But Golden State.... (what a concept), trained and developed several of their key players, managed their money, and made smart free agent moves where they got the players they wanted for a price they felt was fair.

Supply and Demand:
Demand only drives prices up if people keep paying the ridiculous prices.... ultimately demand goes down to a certain price point to maximize profit.

Being that most people play look inside (still), the player builds really really are not that drastically different from each other. I myself personally, on any of my stints here since Season 18, have never had a problem of finding a player that fit what I wanted that I couldn't eventually find at the price that I was willing to pay. Even now when I do a player search of players I have trained in the past that fall into the TSP >60 salary <60,000 range, where this "shortage of players, and inflation of prices, etc. is supposed to happen, that were retired because NOBODY BOUGHT THEM. Frankly, until there are 0 players in that range making way through to retirement now with all the other FAs to compete against, I don't see it as being a problem when its then the only range of players from FA.

As it stands now, Nothing is set in stone.
taxing the rich, also doesn't necessarily change things. In professional Baseball they have had the luxury tax for quite a while now... (starting in 2003 when ONLY the Yankees had to pay), Even the NBA has had a luxury tax. Frankly, it never hurt any of those teams from still being competitive and winning.

The better question to me (in my opinion) is not "how high will the tax be" but "what happens to the taxed money" does it just disappear completely? Does it get re-distributed to bad teams in lower leagues? Does it go to feed starving ex-ghana NT players? I don't know.

There is already a luxury tax in place in BB nowadays for teams who do not train players. Isn't it ironic that BB places a luxury tax for overspending teams and now they want to tax people who doesn't want to overspend also?

There is already a luxury tax in place in BB nowadays for teams who do not train players. Isn't it ironic that BB places a luxury tax for overspending teams and now they want to tax people who doesn't want to overspend also?

We do not know how this tax will look like. I expect this tax to hit teams, that have more than 20 million in the bank. That will hit like what .... a handful of teams? I don't know, you don't know and nobody else except the guy inside BB knows. We will see in a few months.

All people complaining and crying out loud, should have spoken up earlier and offered support/input/criticism for VARIOUS suggestions (including the money hoarding tax).

Everyone agrees theres too much money in the game, yet when the BBs suggest doing something about it everyone goes crazy. Can't win.

Everyone agrees theres too much money in the game, yet when the BBs suggest doing something about it everyone goes crazy. Can't win.

I don't think the total amount of money is the big problem, the distribution is troublesome though.

I am quite surprised there was no outcry because the much shorter cup in many countries - in my case this will result in substantial loss, as I will play (and lose to) a DIV I team in the first round, lose many opportunities to raise my enthusiasm, not to mention the valuable cup XP minutes and a much more volatile fan survey...

They should penalise tanking not hoarding. This is the same reaction Marin had re: daytrading. What did he do then? He hit trading, not daytrading, every kind of trading. Now what is he going to do about this? He's not penalising tanking, which is the REAL problem, but instead he will penalise everyone, even those who can compete at any level with lower payrolls.

So, for the love of this game, Devs please do things that make sense in respect of your own STATED OBJECTIVES and stop listening to the oracle of BB (who, by the way, is a professional tanking machine and has done nothing but tanking since he's come back to the game).
1) You want to limit daytrading? Tax the profits
2) You want to reduce the cash in the economy, mainly due to tanking? Make tanking unprofitable, or at least less profitable
3) You want to encourage training? Instead of killing other was to play the game, change training so that it's more profitable or gives some advantage to those who train.
4) You want to listen to the userbase before it's completely gone? Yeah that's not gonna happen. The proposals about 1-3 have been so many and yet, we have always something else.

And let's not even start considering the change to FA whereby NT can't save NT players from teams getting banned:
Team A overpays on a Team B player. With the money Team B buys a NT starter of a rival nation. Team B opens Team C and trades between his 2 teams. Team B gets banned without going bankrupt first. The NT player retires.
Considering how the current limits that prevent new teams from purchasing above a certain salary level and the fact that salaries have steadily decreased over time, I'd say this could happen with a 1 or 2 season old team.

Last edited by Lemonshine at 11/17/2015 6:09:49 AM

This is all very constructive dialogue, but there are several misconceptions here:

1. "The market prices are too high." We've had higher prices than this during the old days many seasons ago. We didn't have as much complaints about inflation then because there was no long period of deflation before it.

2. "There is only one way of playing the game". This is untrue. It's all about balance and the game is more balanced now than it has been a couple of seasons ago. It was more of a (day)trading game than a training one. Having said that, it is obvious we've been working towards motivating training and discouraging daytrading. Notice the difference: daytrading vs trading. Trading is still a viable option and a good source of income if done with some patience, even if it was negatively affected by counter-daytrading measures. Daytrading was a loophole that many cheaters used. What the forefathers of BB said still stands - "there are several ways to play the game, several ways to succeed and several ways do enjoy the game" and we truly believe that (thanks to Ziad Mbouh for the quote).

3. "The new tax will push the market prices way up". There are a couple of fundamental logical errors here. The number of teams with such big reserves that they would be taxed is very small. Those teams won't spend all of their money if the tax is implemented. Most will just ignore it or just spend the part above the threshold. Even if they do spend some money, they won't do it all at the same time. So, the effect of such a small number of teams on the market is negligible. The new tax, if at all implemented, will certainly not be extreme enough to put everyone into panic mode. It's threshold will be high and tax rate reasonable. Finally, we are aiming at discouraging extreme hoarding as an approach to the game, not team rebuilding. Extreme hoarding reduces competitiveness (it implies long periods of tanking, at least to some extent) and is certainly not fun for anyone affected, while rebuilding is an integral part of the game. We are also considering a grace period, something that would give you some time to get under the threshold if you're in the middle of rebuilding and not get hit by the tax. This is why the details are still in the works.

4. "The effect of Free Agency on the market is enormous". This is hugely exaggerated. While the FA's seem like a very important part of the market, they only hold a very small percentage of it. This was true even before S31 changes. They can help reduce prices by a small margin and are used having their limited effect in mind.

5. "The effect of the new promotion bonuses on the market is substantial". Untrue. The ratio of promoting teams versus the total number of teams is small. Giving them a more money in a one-off capacity won't affect the market that much. It will be probably affected, of course, but not in the long run and not by much.

So, these should help understand our changes. I'll try to answer any further constructive well-intended questions, as much as my free time allows.

Thank you for speaking up.

This is all very constructive dialogue, but there are several misconceptions here:

...incuding a couple of yours!

1. "The market prices are too high." We've had higher prices than this during the old days many seasons ago.

That's no excuse! All that means is that this isn't the first time prices have been too high. They are so high now that there is only one way to play -- train -- using the illogical Hattrick training system in place, which you refuse to acknowledge.

2. "There is only one way of playing the game". This is untrue. It's all about balance and the game is more balanced now than it has been a couple of seasons ago. It was more of a (day)trading game than a training one. Having said that, it is obvious we've been working towards motivating training and discouraging daytrading.

There is one of your biggest misconceptions. It is no longer possible to build a team through the transfer market. The game is train or die. Yes, it is obvious you've been "working towards motivating training." We all know that. Too bad you did it in a way that wrecked the finances for the rest of us instead of simply reforming training itself so that every manger would do it.

3. "The new tax will push the market prices way up".
4. "The effect of Free Agency on the market is enormous".
5. "The effect of the new promotion bonuses on the market is substantial".

No one is saying any of these. You are the one exaggerating. In that you sound like the expert from Japan. No one knows the ultimate effects. We just hope for the best but fear the worst, based on recent changes. The new bonuses will introduce more money into the game, that much is certain. You have done nothing (deliberately) to drain excess money from the game, that also is certain. Can you fault us for thinking things will continue in the same direction, the same downward spiral?

I hate to be so direct, but you seem bent on continuing to develop a training exercise pretending to be a basketball sim. Those of us who wanted a basketball sim will just have to look elsewhere I guess. You can have your training thing.

You have done nothing (deliberately) to drain excess money from the game, that also is certain.

Most cup competitions in small nations much shorter now.I myself will lose about ~200k every season, which equals almost a whole weeks profit.