BuzzerBeater Forums

Fan survey should be tuned up. Why dont take into a count amount of accumulated money from few previous weeks. Compare it with rosters of other teams in league and create fans expectations. Once i have 16th roster and am 15th in amount of money in league my fans shouldnt go crazy after lose abroad to f.ex. 8th ranked team. While when i am no1 in economics in league and 14th in roster my fans should react accordingly..

Fan survey should be tuned up. Why dont take into a count amount of accumulated money from few previous weeks. Compare it with rosters of other teams in league and create fans expectations. Once i have 16th roster and am 15th in amount of money in league my fans shouldnt go crazy after lose abroad to f.ex. 8th ranked team. While when i am no1 in economics in league and 14th in roster my fans should react accordingly..

Excellent excellent idea!

Now this, this is reasonable, and makes sense.

Also, seeing how IRL (bad examples usually) that this kind of poor use of $ etc leads to coaches and GMs being fired from their team, give it an impact that will be meaningful but not excessive.

But to those of you who disapprove the potential tax, what would you do in place of the tax?

I don't disapprove of the tax, but I have seen plenty of reasonable alternatives proposed, too. Mostly, though, if they turned Buzzerbeater into a basketball sim instead of a play-for-profit exercise I'd be happy. Then we wouldn't need to worry about taxes.

I think it's hilarious that every time Marin posts anything it's always the same few managers that come out and choose to disrespect and attack him no matter what was said.

Haha yeah Captain Teemo is definitely one of those who are always against Marin and the EGMs and Mike Franks notoriously supports them. You could not have picked a worse thread to make this argument lol.

But to those of you who disapprove the potential tax, what would you do in place of the tax?

I believe I read that someone would like to tax only those who are making massive weekly profits. This doesn't seem like a bad idea to me. Perhaps set a maximum weekly profit for each league based off of the league average salary in a similar way that TV contact money is done?

I proposed many times that they should kill attendance for tanking teams. So if you have a substantially lower salary than the average human manager in the league, if you lose by massive blowouts every time you play a human manager you can't expect to have an attendance equal to any other team in the league. They should simply adjust the fan survey to penalise those teams more than they are penalised today. This would not be applied to new managers of course.

Now, this won't stop tanking just like that, however that would ensure that managers would try to avoid alienating their fan base (i.e. try to win some game).

Last edited by Lemonshine at 11/16/2015 6:11:20 PM

Raising salary floor like you or Iguanadon Joe are proposing = totally fine by me, I agreed on this before.

Look, just make the gate receipts fall a lot more after a prolonged serious of sucking and make them stay there even the following season when people don't tank anymore. Tanking is what causes the perceived 'hoarding' and as a matter of fact 'hoarding' itself does not cause any problem for the economy, quite the contrary. If a person has tanked 10-15 seasons and has 20-30 million in the bank:
a) he has removed cash from the economy by not using it
b) why should he change course of action after 10-15 seasons? Does it make sense to you?

No, I'll tell you who are the people who abuse the system. They are those who sell their entire team when they are in D1, with the millions they make they buy trainees and trainers nobody else can afford, get an extra 3-4 million from tanking their last season in D1. Then continue to tank for another 2-3 seasons while they train. Finally with the trainees growing up and 10-15 million in the bank they buy their way back up.

Again I don't see why people who legitimately accrued 10-15 millions over 20 seasons by training and selling, trading or by making a healthy weekly profit while working their way up the ladder should actually fall in the same category as the lame ducks who are unable to succeed without resorting to what I described above. Darkonza was right, tanking is an extremely easy way of playing and have some success in this game and, I would add, it's as lame and disruptive as daytrading.

If you're unhappy with reducing the gate receipts of the teams that are losing non stop against human managers, then how about increasing the salary floor by 30%-40% in lower level leagues and by 50% in D1. To put things into context: the EBBL has a 347k floor and a 550k-600k salary average, promoted teams with the bonus can easily make 530k gate receipts +65k/70k Merch, +193k TV contract. Even including Staff, you can easily make a 300k-350k profit per week, which is around 4 million in the first season. You can always leave exceptions for new managers to gradually introduce them to the game, although they are already giving them larger starting arenas (a good idea that is finally taken into account).


Last edited by Lemonshine at 11/16/2015 9:07:28 PM

I make around 250k a week (while spending 40k on scouting) and still expect to make the Playoffs- all that with a team below the salary floor- bots make this possible.

How should I be punished? I am not tanking...

If this luxury tax is aimed at those tanking teams it's again the wrong way. Tanking could easily be made useless. Just drop those numbers of fans attending games to a few 100, sitting on bleachers.

If you lose a lot of games in a row (not counting cup games of course) by a large margin there should be a really high attendance drop, e.g.:
1st game lost with more than 50 points: -25% for the next game
2nd game lost with more than 50 points: -50% for the next game
3rd game lost with more than 50 points: -75% for the next game
4th game lost with more than 50 points: just 500 people showing up

The margin of -50 could be higher, e.g. 60/70/ even 80 points.

That would make tanking totally unprofitable and it would even be realistic.

If this luxury tax is aimed at those tanking teams it's again the wrong way. Tanking could easily be made useless. Just drop those numbers of fans attending games to a few 100, sitting on bleachers.

If you lose a lot of games in a row (not counting cup games of course) by a large margin there should be a really high attendance drop, e.g.:
1st game lost with more than 50 points: -25% for the next game
2nd game lost with more than 50 points: -50% for the next game
3rd game lost with more than 50 points: -75% for the next game
4th game lost with more than 50 points: just 500 people showing up

The margin of -50 could be higher, e.g. 60/70/ even 80 points.

That would make tanking totally unprofitable and it would even be realistic.

This change would screw up newbie teams like nothing else we have seen before. To cripple them financially AND give them no chance to win a game would be the worst possible thing to do.

Unless there are exceptions, that make all this even more complicated and simplifying the game should be a priority.