BuzzerBeater Forums

Suggestions > Adding competativeness using hard and soft caps

Adding competativeness using hard and soft caps (thread closed)

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
200771.16 in reply to 200771.15
Date: 11/2/2011 11:33:06 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
105105
It does not make it only about BB managing.
It is the other way around. Current game is mostly about economy managing, and this is not the purpose of it.
You can go play monopoly if you wish to.


But how are you to sustain a club if you do not run the finances? Every club needs finances to survive. If there is no money there is no club and there is no basketball.
You can just go play basketball too if you want to. Don't manage a club. Just play ball

Did I suggest removing the economy altogether? No I didn't.
Does BB managing is more about BB and less about Economy? Yes it is.

Big market in BB is upon Arena-size. Each team can choose in what to invest more - Arena or current Roster.


There is a arena cap at 20,000 seats.

There is also a decision by the manager on whether they want to invest in arena or roster. Hence the capacity is there for all teams to be of a equal footing. Just because you want to focus on roster rather than arena or vice versa does not make the need for a salary cap. It is your decision whether you want to focus on a win now (roster) or a win later (arena) strategy. Market has nothing to do with it.
Market size, at the end, is about income (Merchandising and Arena).

This Post:
00
200771.17 in reply to 200771.12
Date: 11/2/2011 12:38:20 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
With regards to the cap, i dont think it would actually fix anything in the game. It would change how the game is played, and is probably just an alternative mechanism for implemtation of the game.



Thats the thing. Its a whole concept change on how the game is to be played. This essentially makes financial management a lot less important.

And make it more BB managing - tactics, line-ups, etc.


i think you won't reach that with hardcaps, cause then being active on the TL even get more important. Players who are salary efficient, for one league have toi few main skill in the next one, so you need to find replacement for then under the new cap. If you promote or train your player to much, you get over the cap, and have to sell.

But changing leagues with your suggestion will, lead to rebuild to keep up with etablished teams working close to the cap already - without a possible preparation time before.

This Post:
00
200771.18 in reply to 200771.15
Date: 11/2/2011 9:40:03 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
766766
There is a arena cap at 20,000 seats.


This means that the arena currently acts as a quasi-psuedo salary cap.

If Arena size roughly equals income stream, then you only ever going to be able to have a team that supports 20,000 seats (of course, throw in price differentials in seats, but ignore that for the time being)

So - 20,000 seats = $X income which only leaves $Y to spend on salary.

Sooooooooo. If you REALLY wanted to implement some kind of cap, you could just cap the arena size based on Division.
Div I - 20,000 cap
Div II - 17,000 cap
Div III - 12,000 cap
etc
etc.
Then it would be up to the player to manage his arena prices and profit after wages.
If Div I teams all had an arena of size 20,000, then essentially, they are already operating under this kind of cap-management system.




This Post:
00
200771.19 in reply to 200771.18
Date: 11/2/2011 9:59:11 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
237237
Thats what I've been saying all along. The fact that there is a soft cap in attendance at 20,000 seats means there is a limit on how much you can make.

Sooooooooo. If you REALLY wanted to implement some kind of cap, you could just cap the arena size based on Division.
Div I - 20,000 cap
Div II - 17,000 cap
Div III - 12,000 cap
etc
etc.


You don't even need that as it is already built into the game. As a simple example and random figures used to illustrate my point, you can have a 20,000 arena in D2 but you won't be able to sell all the seats out at $18 whereas if you are in D1, you would be able to.

So simply being in a higher league ensures you have more income and you as the manager need to manage your prices to ensure you try to max out your arena.


This Post:
00
200771.20 in reply to 200771.19
Date: 11/3/2011 12:04:33 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
766766
Is there another thread/GM answer/section game manual that confirm this? This is new to me, i just wanna do more research on it.

I just noticed Zyler who is in my league has an arena size of 21520, so im assuming the 20,000 you referred to is the bleechers limit. So im curious now, is there somewhere where the limits are documented officially? Or is this just a known fact?

If im understanding correctly your second point there, what your saying is in lower divisions, its harder to sell more expensive tickets? Is this purely driven by the division? Or is it more driven by the fact that lower division teams may not have as good a PR manager, nor as good a players?
eg: If i had the BEST pr manager, and I had a DIV I competitive roster, aside from going broke, shouldn't I be able to sell just as many seats in Div III as compared to Div I, (assume same prices) Or, as you are suggesting, is there a hidden "Divisional effect on ticket sales" component in the game?

Which, if that is the case, then again, im curious, if you know of this being discussed, let me know so i can search the forums for it. its good info, thanks for that.




This Post:
22
200771.21 in reply to 200771.20
Date: 11/3/2011 12:52:24 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
237237
Is there another thread/GM answer/section game manual that confirm this? This is new to me, i just wanna do more research on it.

I just noticed Zyler who is in my league has an arena size of 21520, so im assuming the 20,000 you referred to is the bleechers limit. So im curious now, is there somewhere where the limits are documented officially? Or is this just a known fact?


There is a softcap of 20,000 seats for a arena. You can have more seats but it means that once you are over 20,000 it becomes a lot more difficult to fill those seats. That is why most teams will have just over 20,000 seats. That is 20,000 for the whole arena. Not bleachers.

This was announced back in season 11 or something and the news page don't go back that far.

If im understanding correctly your second point there, what your saying is in lower divisions, its harder to sell more expensive tickets? Is this purely driven by the division? Or is it more driven by the fact that lower division teams may not have as good a PR manager, nor as good a players?


What I am saying is that the lower divisions can not charge the same prices as higher divisions and think the same amount of seats will be filled. Being in a higher division allows you to charge higher prices (all else being equal). Say you have 10,000 bleachers. If you try to charge $20 per seat and you are in Division 4 then maybe only 1000 seats will be filled. If you charge $20 a seat and you are in ABBL then 10000 seats will be filled.

Simply put, more fans are willing to pay to watch top tier teams play.

This Post:
00
200771.22 in reply to 200771.21
Date: 11/3/2011 2:42:49 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
766766
Ok excellent, good example and well described.

So its a divisional effect. very good to know.

which essentially is the cap in the system. Great stuff!


This Post:
00
200771.23 in reply to 200771.22
Date: 11/3/2011 4:30:08 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
3535
In addition to this arena thing, I would say that the whole game is designed in such a way that a cap is really not needed.

The goal of a cap is to make the playing field even, in the event that the owners of different teams have different personal financial wealth.
You know, an Italian fashion entrepreneur may be richer than a Greek shipowner and poorer than a Russian gas magnate (or the opposite, I don't know).
In BB this simply cannot happen.

This Post:
00
200771.24 in reply to 200771.23
Date: 11/3/2011 11:39:58 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
105105
1) Currently the Arena is acting as a soft-cap only from 20,000 (upon messages from this thread).

For lower divisions this can be called - non-existing.
It is like defining a soft-cap of 500 million dollars on the NBA...

2) The Arena is not exactly a soft-cap.
In soft cap there is a tax that is being shared to the other teams on that league who hadn't passed the cap.

3) In most leagues in BB you will have those that will have much more money than others, and will have a much more expensive roster.

4) And again, I still not sure whether there should be a cap.
The only thing that makes me still believe that BB need something like this is that a new user currently has much less money to purchase players (and develop the Arena etc.) which makes it less welcoming to new users.

This Post:
00
200771.25 in reply to 200771.24
Date: 11/3/2011 12:17:23 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
3535

3) In most leagues in BB you will have those that will have much more money than others, and will have a much more expensive roster.


Yes, but unless I'm missing something, that will purely be the result of better economic management, and not a pre-existing condition that distorts the playing field.
BB gives all teams equal possibilities and rules, it's a manager's credit if he achieves a better economic situation.

This Post:
00
200771.26 in reply to 200771.24
Date: 11/3/2011 1:27:10 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
3) In most leagues in BB you will have those that will have much more money than others, and will have a much more expensive roster.


who will have a stronger roster with a hard cap too, cause you can get extra quality in paying more salaries or in paying more for secondary skill when you buy a player.

Advertisement