Posted by wallyworld15 on 2/4/2016 1:36:00 PM (view original):
As a new player of HBD I find having to start with a "reset" budget 105m payroll and scouting at 10m and being restricted to the 4m increase is a huge disadvantage especially if you are taking on terrible team.  Having 14m in any scouting and not understanding just how "fuzzy" the numbers you are looking at isn't helping a bad team get better.  I have seen IFA numbers being inflated/deflated as much as 25-30% from the 14m IFA scouting I had and the 20m scouting another member of my world had.

It is my understanding that many worlds don't want teams "tanking" but at the same time there is so much going on for a new player that it can be a tad overwhelming.  When you are really trying to make a solid pick and you are stuck with 14m scouting you are potentially gambling on the ratings numbers you are seeing stemming from these initial budgeting restrictions.  That gives a distinct advantage over other teams with top picks that have had the opportunity to max out their scouting.

Here's the problem with removing those restrictions:

You're running a high payroll, "win now" team.  You punt virtually all your scouting (0 HS, 0 COL, 0 IFA, 0 ADV) so that you can throw all your budget into payroll.  Your team ages out and it's time to rebuild.  You want to tear the payroll down to a minimum, max out your scouting budgets up to $20m , etc, and start acquiring youth via the draft and IFA.

Under the current system, it would take you five seasons to do that.  You have to plan for that.  It's part of the strategy.

If you take away the default and +/- $4m restrictions for new owners, then you're likely to see an owner leave the world, create an alias, come back to his team as a "new" owner, and immediately adjust his budgets to the other extreme.  This avoids the strategy of long term planning, which is supposed to be an intrinsic component of a dynasty game.

What if they fuzzed current ratings a little and tied it to advanced scouting?

Well under the current system you could already get 70% of the way there by doing the same thing.  You could drop your team, pick it back up as an alias and you then could reset HS, COL, and IFA to $14 million.  Now you would have the annoying factor of having medical and training at $14 million as well (which is a big deal) but it is still possible to "reset" your scouting 70% of the way in one season.

I don't think it is a good idea to hamstring new owners in worlds solely because of people who may take advantage on the fringe.  I took on a disaster team in Champions league this year.  I have 9 picks in the top 100 and have to deal with my training budget, and scouting at $14 million.  By the time it is $20 I will be out of the "rebuilding mode".  Why as a new owner would I ever skimp on scouting in real life if I knew the team is a disaster that needs rebuilt?  

There is something to be said for an advantage for owners who stick around for 3 seasons getting to plan it all out and max the right budgets.  However with scouting being $20 being even more important it is quite a big drawback now for new owners. 

Posted by gotigers17 on 2/4/2016 3:16:00 PM (view original):
Well under the current system you could already get 70% of the way there by doing the same thing.  You could drop your team, pick it back up as an alias and you then could reset HS, COL, and IFA to $14 million.  Now you would have the annoying factor of having medical and training at $14 million as well (which is a big deal) but it is still possible to "reset" your scouting 70% of the way in one season.

I don't think it is a good idea to hamstring new owners in worlds solely because of people who may take advantage on the fringe.  I took on a disaster team in Champions league this year.  I have 9 picks in the top 100 and have to deal with my training budget, and scouting at $14 million.  By the time it is $20 I will be out of the "rebuilding mode".  Why as a new owner would I ever skimp on scouting in real life if I knew the team is a disaster that needs rebuilt?  

There is something to be said for an advantage for owners who stick around for 3 seasons getting to plan it all out and max the right budgets.  However with scouting being $20 being even more important it is quite a big drawback now for new owners. 

Yeah, but 70% <> 100%.

To get to 100%, it would still take 3 seasons.

The idea remains.  By season 2 you would be to $18 million in all levels.  Year 1 they may not even have a good draft pick anyway.  Not sure how much of a deterrent that really is.  If a long time owner of a team is willing to create an alias to bypass the rules they can pretty effectively do it by the beginning of season 2. 

What the +- 4 starting at 10 million rule does for sure is hamstring new owners in the first season of a rebuild, or as a newbie.  Not sure the benefit out weighs the cost.  I for one find that for league health that it is good to have as many teams as possible at $20 million in training and close to it in medical. 

Posted by tecwrg on 2/4/2016 1:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wallyworld15 on 2/4/2016 1:36:00 PM (view original):
As a new player of HBD I find having to start with a "reset" budget 105m payroll and scouting at 10m and being restricted to the 4m increase is a huge disadvantage especially if you are taking on terrible team.  Having 14m in any scouting and not understanding just how "fuzzy" the numbers you are looking at isn't helping a bad team get better.  I have seen IFA numbers being inflated/deflated as much as 25-30% from the 14m IFA scouting I had and the 20m scouting another member of my world had.

It is my understanding that many worlds don't want teams "tanking" but at the same time there is so much going on for a new player that it can be a tad overwhelming.  When you are really trying to make a solid pick and you are stuck with 14m scouting you are potentially gambling on the ratings numbers you are seeing stemming from these initial budgeting restrictions.  That gives a distinct advantage over other teams with top picks that have had the opportunity to max out their scouting.

Here's the problem with removing those restrictions:

You're running a high payroll, "win now" team.  You punt virtually all your scouting (0 HS, 0 COL, 0 IFA, 0 ADV) so that you can throw all your budget into payroll.  Your team ages out and it's time to rebuild.  You want to tear the payroll down to a minimum, max out your scouting budgets up to $20m , etc, and start acquiring youth via the draft and IFA.

Under the current system, it would take you five seasons to do that.  You have to plan for that.  It's part of the strategy.

If you take away the default and +/- $4m restrictions for new owners, then you're likely to see an owner leave the world, create an alias, come back to his team as a "new" owner, and immediately adjust his budgets to the other extreme.  This avoids the strategy of long term planning, which is supposed to be an intrinsic component of a dynasty game.

I think in your first season acquiring a team, you should be allowed to max all scouting and medical, training to $20 million. One time offer. And only up, not down to 0.

Even if the developers can't get behind that, you should be able to get medical and training up to $20 mill when you take on a team.

I always thought "fuzzy" ratings would be better accomplished by letter grades.  If a hitter had an "A" potential for power.... that would mean his power potential is anywhere from 85-100 (just an example) but the actual number is unknown.

I recommended that and 1-6 grades(I think that's how BL teams do it).   Nobody liked it.

You should be allowed to max training, and training only, in your first season with a team.  Actually, that's not radical enough.  Training should be eliminated; budgets should be reduced to $165M and the engine should be set as if everyone has $20M in training.  

As it is now, the only people who don't run $20M training are n00bs who don't know better, and people taking on new franchises; these are exactly whom you don't want to disadvantage if you're trying to keep worlds alive.  Kill training. 

Why not eliminate budgets all together?  There's only one way to play the game per some of the people in this forum, and they should be set at those all knowing win maximizing amounts.  I didn't check the profiles, but I'm pretty sure they win the World Series in every season they play using their can't miss strategy, so let them set the defaults!

While I pretty much agree with you, alog, training is pretty essential.    I offer lots of advice and I preface it with "There are lots of ways to play and win at this game" but I always recommend getting training up immediately.    It helps develop prospects and slow decline in veterans.   Unless you plan on playing the game with 26-30 y/o players exclusively, you kind of need it.

That said, I'd get dropping to 16 and maybe even 12 for a season or two.    It could be a necessary evil. 

Sorry to bang the drum again about the "buy only IFAs and trade rape noobs" strategy, but it involves minimizing most budget categories including training and especially medical... and those guys have done well for themselves.  Although the changes to scouting may be moderating the effectiveness of that strategy.

I agree with that statement, Mike.  I do not agree that the only people who don't run $20 in training are those who don't know better.  (I realize you were not the one who made that statement)

Posted by damag on 2/4/2016 8:48:00 PM (view original):
Sorry to bang the drum again about the "buy only IFAs and trade rape noobs" strategy, but it involves minimizing most budget categories including training and especially medical... and those guys have done well for themselves.  Although the changes to scouting may be moderating the effectiveness of that strategy.

definitely a benefit of the ratings fuzziness that this strategy has become less effective.