BuzzerBeater Forums

And if you read my suggestions portion, I said it could be tiered accordingly, but their revenue should be tiered as well. There is plenty of man hours in the day to work through that one.

As far as the arenas, there are threads that talk about the arena. But the reality is, if you have a "soft cap" which is known, it doesn't matter how big your stadium is - you may not fill it. There is nothing like a 10k people arena owner that can only get 6k people in it with a 10 PR guy.

With season ticket holders giving you a bonus in week 1, there is no need to soften anything.

There already is a soft cap that works through season ticket holders. Whether it functions properly or not is a different issue. The problem here is not the soft cap. The problem is that top clubs cannot get players with high enough salaries, therefore they save too much of their weekly income, which obviously inflates transfer prices.

The problem I have with the current proposition for gate receipt taxes is that it targets the 'average' top team, while in reality 'the average' team doesn't really exist. So you risk ending up with a policy that is, in effect, suboptimal for everyone. It doesn't tax half of the teams sufficiently, and overtaxes the other half.

Apparently some are already hitting the cap. I suspect one of my gaurds, w/ salary of 30k, has hit the limit, and his skills total around 80 (not including ft and stam).

Apparently some are already hitting the cap. I suspect one of my gaurds, w/ salary of 30k, has hit the limit, and his skills total around 80 (not including ft and stam).

The cap is not dependent on position. So $30,000 for guard will work the same way as $30,000 for a center.

Also, plenty of NT players train at full speed with $30,000+ salaries, so I am pretty sure the cap is higher than that.

Pretty sure based on what exactly?

Inside players are training higher, but overall they have a lot of just 4 skills, while a guard needs a lot of 6 skills.

I agree with the others that changes of this magnitude should be given more advance notice, but I appreciate that you are addressing these issues now rather than waiting for finances to get totally out-of-control.

Two questions...

1. Will the new attendance formula be less influenced by the result of the last game? My biggest issue with attendance is that its so focused on your last game result and should be more based on a longer-term average.

2. Have you considered any sort of automatic feedback mechanism that would adjust income on a more frequent period. Measure the salaries, income and cash on hand of teams in the various leagues and adjust attendance or union percentage accordingly?

And one suggestion...

1. You might consider changing top league income based on the size of the countries user base. For example, there is a disproportionate number of I clubs, because all the small countries have no II leagues and those teams have the potential to make huge income streams. If income was scaled according to user base size (not linearly, but maybe using a log function or something...that would reduce a lot of the teams making huge profits and creating run-away inflation.

For example income in various countries might scale by...

Italy (3200 users) -> log 3200 = 3.5 (income in larger countries fairly similar -- maybe there could even be a cap)
USA (900 users) -> log 900 = 2.95
Brazil (500 users) -> log 500 = 2.70
...
Bulgaria (160 users) -> log 160 = 2.20 (top league teams in medium countries might be make more like II money)
...
Japan (13 users) -> log 13 = 1.11 (top teams from smaller counties wound be making considerably less and thus wouldn't be contributing to the inflation effect).

Just a thought...

Steve
Bruins

Pretty sure based on what exactly?

Inside players are training higher, but overall they have a lot of just 4 skills, while a guard needs a lot of 6 skills.

Based on the fact that I've seen $35,000+ wage all-stars train at normal speed.

The skill distribution (and therefore the recommended position) is irrelevant, and the potential cap is based solely on what the salary of a player would be, given his current skills. That much has been mentioned here numerous times by the BB team.

My opinion about these changes Charles:

I really think these changes will create the big deflation you were afraid of. They already are. It's like the president of the Central Bank making an announcement about changes on the interest rate, and that crashing the stock markets everywhere. Teams know now that they will have a harder time making money, so consequently they will be more reluctant to spend it on their purchases, and since the market works on auctions, this will directly influence the final prices and dramatically reduce them. That's as clear as water.

I don't know about your calculations, I saw that everybody have their own, but I know that my team won't make it with 40% less. And my salaries are actually pretty small (best paid player gets only 24k). But now I'm still trying to figure out how I will survive. So you can be sure the Devils won't be participating in any auctions any time soon. Many teams in that situation (or even just afraid of being in that situation) will cause the deflation.

Second problem, also mentioned before, people sitting in big piles of cash have a huge advantage now. And that does not contradict the deflation problem (as you suggested), because what will happen is that these people will simply be able to buy many players for much cheaper now. A guy with 7 million could buy a good player yesterday, now he can build a DI championship team.

1. You might consider changing top league income based on the size of the countries user base. For example, there is a disproportionate number of I clubs, because all the small countries have no II leagues and those teams have the potential to make huge income streams. If income was scaled according to user base size (not linearly, but maybe using a log function or something...that would reduce a lot of the teams making huge profits and creating run-away inflation.

Fresh team income (as opposed to income redistribution created by transfers) is formed by TV/merchandise money and arena income, which depends on arena size/fan base. Why is it necessary to tax people based on all sorts of side factors that have no direct relation to their source of income.