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 / Suggestions / continuing the blind bidding topic... Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< 2 3 4 > >| | |
| Rating: | |
| Poster | Message |
|
Ranagol
|
posted: 2012-02-24 15:48:31 (ID: 29617) Report Abuse |
|
Since the original suggestion got a little off topic with all the "who's got time to be online and who doesn't", I'd like to post my idea here.
So here's a thought: 1. How about the maximum you can bid on a player is his wage x 1000. 2. Any ammount you bid above that increases his wage when he joins the winning bidder's team. 3. This increase will stay with him throughout his carreer as long as he's with that same team. 4. When he gets put up on the TM his wage goes back to normal. So with an example check out this guy: 1. His wage is 18.000, so the maximum bid can be 18 million without any increase in wage. 2. Someone goes as high as 36 million with his bid. 18/36 = 0,5 so a factor of 1,5 will be put on the player's wage. This means the player will have a wage of 27.000 after joining the winning bidder's team. 3. When this guy's tackling skill goes up to 40, his wage should be around 88.300 (accoring to the manual) But since he has a 1,5 on his wage it'll be 132,450. That's what I mean by the increase staying with him throughout his career. 4. In case the manager decides to sell the guy at 40 tackling, since his wage is killing his economy (through overbidding him so much earlier, i.e. poor long term decision), the wage shown on the TM is of course the original 88.300. So his wage x 1000 equals 88 million without any "penalty", which is a lot of bidding room. This way 40+ skill guys won't often have such penalties, and won't kill the economy at that stage of the game. This is just a rough idea, but I think there won't be much cheating possibilities with this system without hurting our own economy in the process. The maximum 16k and 50% bidding steps could be gone. Of course people could just put their players up on the TM for the x1000 price, but I don't think every player is worth that much (like a player with a wage of 400 is definitely not worth 400k unless he has really high physicals) so the market will decide the prices. But just to be sure there should be a "report strange bidding" button or something. Thoughts? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Admin
Contact |
posted: 2012-02-24 15:55:27 (ID: 29620) |
|
I don't get it completely
 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2012-02-24 16:11:16 (ID: 29625) Report Abuse |
|
I like..
A lot!  |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Ranagol
|
posted: 2012-02-24 16:11:31 (ID: 29626) Report Abuse |
|
Admin wrote:
I don't get it completely Basically if you bid on a player for more than what he's worth (wage x 1000), then the player will ask for more money as well... |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
sfniner08
|
posted: 2012-02-24 16:14:10 (ID: 29627) Report Abuse |
|
I suppose it is much like reaching a contract with that player but doing so during the bidding process. So, my question is this: If that is his salary, how long does his contract last? Right now the longest contracts are 5 years for franchise players. This would almost get rid of the HR department, right? It is a huge shift.
I'm not saying I'm against it, but I would like to explore all the implications first. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JonnyP
|
posted: 2012-02-24 16:17:33 (ID: 29628) Report Abuse |
|
I'm guessing the HR option would still be there, just that he would ask for a % extra based on how much was spent on him.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Ranagol
|
posted: 2012-02-24 16:20:54 (ID: 29629) Report Abuse |
|
sfniner08 wrote:
I suppose it is much like reaching a contract with that player but doing so during the bidding process. So, my question is this: If that is his salary, how long does his contract last? Right now the longest contracts are 5 years for franchise players. This would almost get rid of the HR department, right? It is a huge shift. I'm not saying I'm against it, but I would like to explore all the implications first. Well you could look at it that way, but it's not a contract. The HR Department stays as it is, overbid players will just have higher salaries (without HRD) and higher contracts (with HRD). And it's just an idea I wanted to put out there. Nothing's written in stone, so any ideas, suggestions how to make it better is appreciated. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Buffalo
|
posted: 2012-02-24 16:21:10 (ID: 29630) Report Abuse |
|
I think this idea is worth to discuss about.
What I definitly would like, that you get a hint before you confirm the bid, with the wagefactor. Would this suggestion, work the way around, that you pay less, if you are below the "maximum bid". Would you take allways the estimated wage of a palyer based on the skills or the true wage, if a manager use the HR-department? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
sfniner08
|
posted: 2012-02-24 16:21:16 (ID: 29631) Report Abuse |
|
So what mechanism would be in place to keep the manager from having that player have a one year contract then renegotiating the next season for a lower price?
If you want to have this idea and keep the HR department, can Peter program it to work this way? At first this sounds like it is a good idea, but it does become complex once you dig a little deeper. If you were to start the game at the beginning in design then it would be much easier, but now it alters the system in place drastically. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Turtlemania
|
posted: 2012-02-24 16:24:12 (ID: 29632) Report Abuse |
|
Con1: Unexperienced users might auction one with a high salary premium - train him up and not be aware of the "higher" salary increases
Personally i dont like it - i would not have a problem with it to manage it But look out how much user get into financial trouble - this would extrapolate it Pro: would force manger to rethink bidding strategy and focus more into develop own players - but from my observation the first "smart" manager do already anyway |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< 2 3 4 > >| | |
| Main / Suggestions / continuing the blind bidding topic... | |
