I took over a new team and I noticed something I hadn't seen before. Being the first season, I have a choice of setting my budget based off of last season's numbers, or resetting to default budget. I gain open salary with the budget reset but I lose money available to other things, dropping to a max of 14 mil instead of 20 mil. For the veterans, which way do you think is the better way to go?

Depends on the status of the roster you inherited, and what you intend to do with it.

If you're not going to change much and you need what the last owner had, stick close to it. If you're going to tear down and reset, then do so.

Thanks

Where do I go to keep the budgets from the previous owner? I am not seeing that option.

On Set Budget Day, you will see the two options near the top of the page. The two options will not show up until that day.

It took me a while to realize that when I take over a new team, it isn't just about the players on the roster, it is also about what he previous owner was doing with the team. I typically draft high school and spend some $ in Intl, so if I see that the previous owner drafted college players and hadn't recruited a single Intl in the last four seasons, then I need to decide if I am going to change my strategy or start from scratch.

However, starting from scratch stinks because then you can only have a $14M training budget.

I think it is stupid you cannot move more around each season and have a limit of only 4.

When you take over a team, you should be able to set it for whatever you want. Ridiculous that it is that restrictive.

Is the reasoning for that to stop people from taking over teams with a new alias and resetting the budget? Seems like an unlikely thing to happen lol.

I definitely think you should have more leeway when taking over, at-least let you pick a couple areas that you can max out. And then I’d like the max Per season to move up to 5, that way you could go from 20-0 & vice versa within 4 seasons.

Posted by pray4pro on 8/23/2020 12:00:00 PM (view original):
Is the reasoning for that to stop people from taking over teams with a new alias and resetting the budget? Seems like an unlikely thing to happen lol.

I definitely think you should have more leeway when taking over, at-least let you pick a couple areas that you can max out. And then I’d like the max Per season to move up to 5, that way you could go from 20-0 & vice versa within 4 seasons.

I like this idea of not getting rid of the limits, but increasing them from four.

Also, I think because of the way that HBD has it setup, the limits makes sense. It's not like we are out there hiring a scout or a doctor or a strength coach. I think if you are hiring a scout/doctor/strength coach like you are a hitting coach/pitching coach/bench coach, then you could immediately move from being a great HS player scouting Organization to being a great Col player scouting Organization. However, since you are just allocating money, it makes sense to put a limit on it. A hospital can't just become the best hospital in the region over night. They need a plan that takes a handful of years to implement and perfect. Same thing with a gym or a scouting department.

And, to get off tangent a bit, if HBD did implement something like OOTP baseball, where you are hiring a head scout that has certain skills, they would need to be careful because many people don't like the coach hiring phase of this game. Also, since each team would be competing for the best scouts, there are going to be haves and have-nots which will really make some folks angry if they missed out on a great scouting during scout hiring in a season where they have a top pick.

What is interesting about removing limits is that there is a chance that it tilts scouting inefficiencies from season to season. I don't know about you guys, but I have noticed that each World has a unique scouting efficiency/inefficiency. I just joined Moonlight Graham and it has the text book definition of perfectly efficient -- 10M College Scouting; 10M HS Scouting; 10M Intl Scouting. However, in Weaver, it's currently 7M College Scouting; 12M HS Scouting; 9M Intl Scouting. Since there is such a significant spread between HS and Col scouting, if there were no limits, I could immediately move from max HS scouting to max Col scouting. However, since it will take me five seasons to move from max to max, i decided not to change anything at all. On the one hand, it would be nice be able to take advantage of this inefficiency immediately. However, on the other hand, if there were no limits, the inefficiency could disappear in one season if enough owners realized it and moved their budgets because of it. That would be hilarious -- here you are thinking that you are cute and clever only to find out that thirteen other owners were just as cute and clever and you are all sitting there facepalming.

Posted by tlowster on 8/16/2020 6:06:00 PM (view original):
It took me a while to realize that when I take over a new team, it isn't just about the players on the roster, it is also about what he previous owner was doing with the team. I typically draft high school and spend some $ in Intl, so if I see that the previous owner drafted college players and hadn't recruited a single Intl in the last four seasons, then I need to decide if I am going to change my strategy or start from scratch.

However, starting from scratch stinks because then you can only have a $14M training budget.

Are there any experienced owners there who don't run $20M training? Because I wonder if there's a meaningful downside to simply dropping the budget to $165M and making the engine assume everyone has $20M training (the upside being that new owners and experienced owners of new teams wouldn't have to suffer a season of $14M).

Posted by dedelman on 8/23/2020 4:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tlowster on 8/16/2020 6:06:00 PM (view original):
It took me a while to realize that when I take over a new team, it isn't just about the players on the roster, it is also about what he previous owner was doing with the team. I typically draft high school and spend some $ in Intl, so if I see that the previous owner drafted college players and hadn't recruited a single Intl in the last four seasons, then I need to decide if I am going to change my strategy or start from scratch.

However, starting from scratch stinks because then you can only have a $14M training budget.

Are there any experienced owners there who don't run $20M training? Because I wonder if there's a meaningful downside to simply dropping the budget to $165M and making the engine assume everyone has $20M training (the upside being that new owners and experienced owners of new teams wouldn't have to suffer a season of $14M).

I like that idea as well.
Queue the choice-limiting police!