no content
AdBlocker active?
It seems you are using software to block advertisements. You could help us if you could switch it off when visiting redzoneaction.org.
The reason is very simple: Advertisements help us running the site, to offer you the game in a good quality for free. So if you like the game, please support us by purchasing a Supporter Account or disabling the AdBlocker on this site.
Thank you very much!
Main / Discussions / Brainstorming on training system overview Search Forum | |
Navigation: |< < 1 2 7 8 9 > >| | |
Poster | Message |
posted: 2018-11-16 16:38:34 (ID: 100134463) Report Abuse | |
To keep team finances in control you can increase teams basic salaries by increasing wage increases for player in the 30 avg skills.
For example .skills averaging in the 30's wage increases to 1.21 then in the 40's to 1.08 That would be approx $104,300 for avg 40 skills and aprox $250,000 at 50 skills. A formula something like that would make a avg 42 skill about half the salary of a 50 skill. Much more reasonable. I think even closing that gap even more. Need to make over 40 skills players worth the money. |
|
Quote Reply Edit | |
posted: 2018-11-16 21:21:17 (ID: 100134464) Report Abuse | |
There is a reason the wage system is as it is now, to force managers making decisions.
Lowering the wages would just shift the decision point and would not change much, from my point of view. |
|
Quote Reply Edit | |
posted: 2018-11-17 08:22:30 (ID: 100134467) Report Abuse | |
making the function more flat wipes away the challenge of mastering your roster. In my opinion it has to be the opposite...
|
|
Quote Reply Edit | |
janos
|
posted: 2018-11-17 12:19:56 (ID: 100134471) Report Abuse |
I agree, that there are few new teams joining RZA.
On the other hand the training system needs to be modified in a sense, that we should not be able to train like 20 DL's under a strong DL AC. Or 16 LB's. A team needs 5 DL's+5 extra as a backup and next generation team. All the rest are young 20-30 skilled all go to the market. They are with top phisycals and relatively high exp, ca. 3 Imho this is an important factor, that the market is dead. Is it a good idea to enable young teams to jump start buying top notch guys? Shouldn't they train their squad gradually? Referring the question above, is it a good idea to give them tons of money after completing the stadium, that they can buy anyone? Do not misunderstand me, I am supporting, that they close the gap, but I thinkg they should "work for it". I do not agree, that initial prices are ok. A young player trained up ca. skill 40 should not enter the market at a lesser amount than a friendly game income. A guy like that serves a team for 8-10 years even in div1, and supports it for many games. |
|
Quote Reply Edit | |
posted: 2018-11-17 13:11:33 (ID: 100134472) Report Abuse | |
janos wrote:
I agree, that there are few new teams joining RZA. On the other hand the training system needs to be modified in a sense, that we should not be able to train like 20 DL's under a strong DL AC. Or 16 LB's. A team needs 5 DL's+5 extra as a backup and next generation team. All the rest are young 20-30 skilled all go to the market. They are with top phisycals and relatively high exp, ca. 3 First of all, did Peter introduce the limits on a high level to limit the shock when they were introduced in the first place. There could be a further reduction in the future. Whether that is needed of healthy is a thing of opinion. You say you need 8-10 for a game as DL, fine. Add a few more for training next gen, because no drafty or ya-graduate is usually fit to play even as backup on high level rosters. So maybe 2-4 more. Now add evenually invests in say 1 to 3 players you want to sell on the market every 2 to 5 years to get extra money as strategy, because you have a strong coach on that position. And now add specific demands on defense systems as coaching style. If you play DL-heavy defenses you need more than 10, maybe 12 or 13. Suddenly you are at 20 DLs as max. That guy do not need so many LBs, sure, but if you spread the logic of above over all teams and ideas, the limits might be high, but not super high in extreme meassures. janos wrote:
Imho this is an important factor, that the market is dead. Is it a good idea to enable young teams to jump start buying top notch guys? Shouldn't they train their squad gradually? Referring the question above, is it a good idea to give them tons of money after completing the stadium, that they can buy anyone? Do not misunderstand me, I am supporting, that they close the gap, but I thinkg they should "work for it". That was always the case. When stadium is finished you have MONEY. I made in roughly 700 mio in season 3 to 9 of RZA. The difference was, there was not that much stuff to buy. So the change should be to educate the players on smart investments, not to limit the offer. janos wrote:
I do not agree, that initial prices are ok. A young player trained up ca. skill 40 should not enter the market at a lesser amount than a friendly game income. A guy like that serves a team for 8-10 years even in div1, and supports it for many games. If the market is dead, you will not sell a player if asked for 400K or 4mio. So increasing the starting price will not change anything, you have to cut him anyway. Sure those few worth a bid would generate more income, but likely even less would be sold. |
|
Quote Reply Edit | |
Mücke
|
posted: 2018-11-17 14:19:28 (ID: 100134475) Report Abuse |
Cant follow the agitaion/argumentation anymore. On one hand one is tired about a dead market, on the other one refuses suggestions that could turn that around (several ideas were mentioned in this thread).
janos wrote:
Is it a good idea to enable young teams to jump start buying top notch guys? Yes. Leave it up to the manager how to play the game. janos wrote:Shouldn't they train their squad gradually?
Yes, sure. janos wrote:Referring the question above, is it a good idea to give them tons of money after completing the stadium, that they can buy anyone?
Yes. Why not, if they managed it well. On top: w/o money, no market. janos wrote:I do not agree, that initial prices are ok.
Would you agree having the free decision by yourself to set the starting bid-price at $50k or $500k? janos wrote:A young player trained up ca. skill 40 should not enter the market at a lesser amount than a friendly game income.
Why not!? His "true" value will be figured out during bidding process, not by starting price. In general: For a game it is more valuable not to restrict too much and leave the decision making to the managers. Trying several ways to reach a goal is more fun than a one-way guided tour. Pete, a question in regard of the wage thing. First, I like the way it is for players who are on a roster. Make it a hard decision to stick with expensive guys. But what about the wage-claims of player who find themself on the transfermarket? Meaning: Are there any ideas to lower their wage-claims? Or would you rather stick with the system as it is as of today with transfermarket players? |
|
Quote Reply Edit | |
posted: 2018-11-17 15:54:19 (ID: 100134481) Report Abuse | |
You can reduce their wage claims...use the HR department and negotiate on free agents, as example.
|
|
Quote Reply Edit | |
posted: 2018-11-18 14:30:25 (ID: 100134521) Report Abuse | |
Could have an option of just giving the player away free as long as another team is willing to take him and his salary.
|
|
Quote Reply Edit | |
posted: 2018-11-18 17:40:54 (ID: 100134526) Report Abuse | |
it is called "cancel contract"
|
|
Quote Reply Edit | |
janos
|
posted: 2018-11-19 20:42:03 (ID: 100134546) Report Abuse |
jack6 wrote:
You say you need 8-10 for a game as DL, fine. I wrote 5 first string and 5 for backup/nextgen. There is no way one can manage 20 for the squad financially, unless they are young trainees. NFL teams have max. 10 DL's on roster and that covers all the defensive options. jack6 wrote:
If the market is dead, you will not sell a player if asked for 400K or 4mio. So increasing the starting price will not change anything, you have to cut him anyway. I selected him, because he seemed to be valuable. It wouldn't have been cut anyway. I don't care if it isn't get sold, but if it is its price should be reasonable. It would be a good idea, that managers define the price of their players instead of an artificial initial price. Mücke wrote:
Yes. Leave it up to the manager how to play the game. In general: For a game it is more valuable not to restrict too much and leave the decision making to the managers. Trying several ways to reach a goal is more fun than a one-way guided tour. Would be a great idea to have at least a single option for comeback for those, who entered the red and not to punish them all along and destroy their team for not being alerted all the time. Mücke wrote:
Would you agree having the free decision by yourself to set the starting bid-price at $50k or $500k? Why not!? His "true" value will be figured out during bidding process, not by starting price. Yes. if I own sg. I want to determine its price. And of course the price would not be less than a friendly income. So let's talk abount 5M instead of 500k as initial prices. True value is only reflected if the market is perfectly operating. |
|
Quote Reply Edit | |
reply Mark this thread unread | |
Navigation: |< < 1 2 7 8 9 > >| | |
Main / Discussions / Brainstorming on training system overview |