BuzzerBeater Forums

unless you mean that all 8 teams would have no salary to pay in offseason. but would it be logical? all season you have to pay, and when its time for most important matches, your players are playing for free.

and it wouldn't change anything, but probadly he mean that you don't pay salary when you are finished with your regular games.

and it wouldn't change anything, but probadly he mean that you don't pay salary when you are finished with your regular games.

what do you consider "regular" games. if a team is in finals, so the other teams which are not do not pay salary's? what advantage you get instead of promotion then?

and it wouldn't change anything, but probadly he mean that you don't pay salary when you are finished with your regular games.

what do you consider "regular" games. if a team is in finals, so the other teams which are not do not pay salary's? what advantage you get instead of promotion then?

extra mins for training, a better fan survey for next season and the Chanche for promotion and it shouldn't be an instant handicap.

extra mins for training

does it really pays off considering you dont have to pay 500k salarys? (1st league).

a better fan survey for next season

this allready is implemented, but people think it's worthless.

does it really pays off considering you dont have to pay 500k salarys? (1st league).

for many leagues it pays of, but don't forget you still have income to pay your salary. So also a little bonus is a bonus.

this allready is implemented, but people think it's worthless.

i think the people consider it as not big enough, or to bad to catch - but it is still a bit extra money.

In the end, the actual cost should be pretty neutral, so if you don't play the playoff you probadly have a comparable amount of money in the end then someone is playing the PO or relegation - but you have still a bunce of advantages and hopefully the ambition to play succesful(and not to play unsuccesful to get an instant advantage)

Simply having no salary to pay during the offseason would solve all these problems.

Comon guys, no salary for offseason is not an option. I can buy great players (200k+ salary) just before the playoffs. Even if I fail to win my first PO game, no harm done, no salary to uphold. I can sell those players before the next season starts without having any fear of actually paying those salarys.
Best solution would be, playing one game for relegation, with scrimmage attendance income. Everyone should know that there are 14 weeks in a season. There are 11 home games with income. Cup and PO games are ment as a bonus (meaning you should not count on them while making plans for the next season).

I agree that no salary to pay in post season is not a good solution

However,The point is not diminuish the incomes of the 6th and 7th teams,but raise the incomes of the 3rd-4th-5th-8th team during this period of time,because is a general problem to pay salaries during this period,and especially for 3rd-4th-5th and 8th teams suffer because they have less o zero incomes during this period

Last edited by Steve Karenn at 9/26/2010 5:24:35 AM

You can't base your argument on the fact that it is a general problem to pay for the salaries during this period. If you can't pay for the salaries, it's not a game design problem, it's a managerial problem. Even if you finish top table, you can lose your first PO game and 'lose scheduled income'. A thoughtful manager must be prepared to face this situation.

It should be a managerial decision to choose to take financial risks, you'll reap on the rewards if you succeed and face the consequences, if you fail. It's fairly easy to calculate roughly income and expenses for a season of 14 weeks. As it was already pointed out before, the problem is the baseline weekly economy which is misleading and a trap where noobs are destined to fall in on their first season.

That said, that the 6th place could be more attractive than the 5th is a game problem. I don't have any good suggestion myself to correct that. Financial awards for final classification could be one but to make it attractive would require to inject insane loads of money which is a definite no :D Unless a large overhaul of BB economy... and I suspect it's not in the cards.

You can't base your argument on the fact that it is a general problem to pay for the salaries during this period. If you can't pay for the salaries, it's not a game design problem, it's a managerial problem.

It should be a managerial decision to choose to take financial risks, you'll reap on the rewards if you succeed and face the consequences, if you fail. It's fairly easy to calculate roughly income and expenses for a season of 14 weeks

Wrong
You had to manage your finances and calculate your incomes and expenses,but at the start of the season you can't calculate a lot of factors.Cup draw is a big factor,you can find a top league team in the first round,as you can find a lot of bot or very bad teams for the first 3-4-5-6 round,so there's an enormous diference not only on the strictly cup incomes,but also in the choice of how manage the 3 game/week,and on the fan survey for all the season.And this affect also the others team,so you can win or lose unexpected game in your schedule,because the teams have different choices to do to manage th 3 game/week

And this affect not so much the survival of the teams,as much more the programming in the medium-long period.All the effort that you put in such competitive leagues to save some money to improve your team in the future,can be nullified by some occasional event,for example there are some leagues balanced in a way that if you are unablle to set one time your line-up and you have a WO,you can drop for the second or third place to the fifth.
And as you should know,there's an enormous difference between the incomes of a second or a fifth team.

And if the problem is general,it means that it' not a single user fault,but there are some lacks in the system,that I and other users yet explained in the previous posts

And there are lots of other factors, if you lose games, you'll make less money than if you win, sometimes you have to sell a player for less than planned or buy one for more than you intended first, your best player can get injured and it will cost you games. There are very unfair ones, you play away on saturdays or you are seeded in the schedule rotation after your league's strongest team against whom everyone ties and during the whole season, you'll face teams that have tied the game before. And so on...
Because of all this factors, you need a financial safety margin. You can choose to reduce it, it's sometimes wise but then if you fail, you need a plan to recoup like selling a player. Some don't have a safety plan...

But this is just a deflection, you want to maximize what you can't completely maximize, maybe it's the root for your frustration. How much do you make from the cup ? 150k this season, 250k last season, 0k the season before.
Your player's wages, approx 240k. Your arena receipt, approx 175k reg season.
If winning 3 or 4 cup games is a decisive factor for your finances, you are taking too many risks... maybe.

5th/8th, zero income during the PO + the two losing teams in the first PO game, close to zero income, if I were to lose my first PO game at your arena, I would be thrilled with the 75k you'd share with me but it wouldn't cover half my players and staff wages.

So 4 out of 8 teams in one conference, 8 out of 16 teams in one league, half the teams in BB get no income or close to no income during the PO, do you realise that ?
Making place 3-5 more attractive is a real issue but don't base your argument on the fact it is a general problem to pay for the salaries during this period. It's a problem for those who have created the problem.

So 4 out of 8 teams in one conference, 8 out of 16 teams in one league, half the teams in BB get no income or close to no income during the PO, do you realise that ?
Making place 3-5 more attractive is a real issue but don't base your argument on the fact it is a general problem to pay for the salaries during this period. It's a problem for those who have created the problem.

Yes,this is way the actual sytem has strong lacks,and there are teams that at a certain point of the season,start to tank to reach lower positions,so distorting the competition and affecting also the other teams,that depending on their schedule can find a team at the full strenght,or a team with lucky fan,bench warmers and young trainees

Improve the incomes for these teams,avoid these distorsion,and generally help a little bit the economy,so helping to fight the actual deflaction of the market,because if a team of II division lose 800k-1M in only two weeks,this team can't use these money in the market