11/9/2012 2:26 PM
How about removing the 50% penalty for transferring funds? What was the reasoning for having it in the system?
11/9/2012 2:28 PM
without the penalty, budgeting is no longer important.

11/9/2012 2:35 PM
Posted by desanders on 11/9/2012 2:26:00 PM (view original):
How about removing the 50% penalty for transferring funds? What was the reasoning for having it in the system?
Before having the 50% penalty for transfers, transfers were not allowed at all.
11/9/2012 2:59 PM
This is kind of a funny thread when it's put right beside the one complaining about spending on FAs.

One tactic I've seen is to leave all your budget money in salary - far more than your team's actual salaries - put 20 mil in IFAs, and then transfer as needed if a "big" IFA shows up.

Without the transfer penalty, such teams might have 60 to 80 million to spend on IFAs!  Imagine the bidding wars you'd see then.

11/9/2012 6:02 PM
There's 9 budget lines with only three that can be transferred between. Budgeting would still be important. Maybe more emphasis needs to be put on scouting budget effects. 
So, transfers weren't allowed in the beginning. They improved it by allowing transfers. Improve it more by changing the penalty. maybe put a salary cap in place not a transfer penalty. say any one with a player salary budget over $100 million pays a budget penalty. Wouldn't this be more in line with  current MLB. Keep a budget total limit of $185 million still.
If I have excess in player salary why shouldn't I be able to transfer all to prospect budget. isn't it still player salary. Make the penalty if transferring from prospect to player salary only.
 
11/9/2012 7:53 PM
We also used to ride horses into battle. 

Just sayin'.
11/9/2012 11:22 PM
Posted by desanders on 11/9/2012 6:03:00 PM (view original):
There's 9 budget lines with only three that can be transferred between. Budgeting would still be important. Maybe more emphasis needs to be put on scouting budget effects. 
So, transfers weren't allowed in the beginning. They improved it by allowing transfers. Improve it more by changing the penalty. maybe put a salary cap in place not a transfer penalty. say any one with a player salary budget over $100 million pays a budget penalty. Wouldn't this be more in line with  current MLB. Keep a budget total limit of $185 million still.
If I have excess in player salary why shouldn't I be able to transfer all to prospect budget. isn't it still player salary. Make the penalty if transferring from prospect to player salary only.
 
i think this game's goal neither is nor never was to rival major league baseball. i'm just thankful we all have the same amount of money to spend.
11/10/2012 12:06 AM
Well, it certainly mirrors MLB closely enough to question the reasons for the exceptions.
11/19/2012 9:09 PM

I think the 50% penalty is a good thing, but why only have it for a minimum of $2 million?  I have $1.273 million left over after signing all my coaches.  Why shouldn't I be able to transfer the excess to Prospects or Salaries?

11/19/2012 11:03 PM
Penalty for transferring money between budgets is one of the dumbest parts of HBD.  Completely unrealistic. Removes a lot of strategy from the game. Instead of more strategy you have to make a wild to semi-educated guess during a 24 hours period. And if you miss that tiny window you're out of luck. One of several customer-hostile HBD rules that could be changed with very little programming.
11/20/2012 5:54 AM
No transfer penalty = no strategy when setting your budgets.
11/20/2012 8:48 AM
Put in floors and combine prospect, coaching and payroll.   More realistic but less planning is required.   So, yes, it's less strategy.
11/20/2012 12:05 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 11/20/2012 5:54:00 AM (view original):
No transfer penalty = no strategy when setting your budgets.
Agreed. It also means less strategy every day for the rest of the season.  I think that would be a very good tradeoff.

More Money = More Options = More Strategy.

Losing money = Fewer Options = Less Strategy.

When the budget is set, we don't know a whole lot about what options will be available to us. So it's a whole lot of guessing vs. a whole lot of strategy.

11/20/2012 1:16 PM
Pretty sure you have that wrong.  While it's not an endless supply of money, you have to decide what the best way to spend it on Day 1 or take a penalty.   If I have 130m for players, coaches and prospects, I can change what I'm doing over and over again thus covering for my poor decisions on Day 1 and beyond.
11/20/2012 1:19 PM
But I'm still OK with putting in a floor and pooling the money.   The Marlins didn't have to take their 25m when Pujols said "Screw you" and split it in half.
of 2

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.