Press conference

New article about the current status and updates!
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+6
Amžinai neturiu pinigų, prašau neatimkite finansų kuriuos surenku iš Nl varžybų ir premijų. -- 80 S 42 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
Kodėl pastoviai anglų kalba įkeliat, o mūsų greta nėra? Negi taip sunku išverst? -- 80 S 42 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+4
Vertimais rūpinasi savanoriai.
Visos naujienos išverčiamos į LT kalbą, reikia tik šiek tiek kantrybės. -- 80 S 42 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+4
I don't support any changes about national league competition system, please find another way to improve finances of each club, because main problem is financial crisis never ends in most of the clubs... -- 80 S 42 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+5
lower league need bonuses money to keep up higher league teams new team cant keep 8 10 team nt ok but may add league more
Balanced and like you guys added Drafts but could be better not one league up and down league are connect on other sort -- 80 S 42 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0
It's great to see that you are continously working on improving the game. The change in NL system is something I am especially interested in and have been lobbying for the EBF for a good while. I am not sure teams should be able to decide whether they join the new league instead of the national league. In the end this might just create a doublette of the international league, which seems unnecessary. Idea: it should be decided by whole nations (every 2 seasons for example, or even more rarely), and the option only available for countries with max. XX active users (36 for example, so those who have less than two NL league levels filled with active users). so LTU, China, US, Argentina would keep their NL in general, as their system work IMO. Are you opem to discussing this idea? -- 80 S 42 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+17
100% agree on RaZeev opinion! And I think decision period should be even longer that 2 seasons. -- 80 S 42 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
Our initial idea was similar, but we did not find any possible solution. If the community gives a detailed suggestion, we will definitely look at it.
Main issues:
Should these decisions be country or federation level
What exactly is the choice - national league or federation league? Or is the choice between national league and “global league” ?
What exactly happens when the decision is changed?
How often the decision can be changed?
Bigger issue is about voting. Is it really OK? Let’s imagine the situation in which a country has 5 users (one superactive player in W1 and four users in W5). Users in W5 might vote for remaining in country's league and the W1 team will continue to be unhappy that he has to play with weak teams.

Basically, creating/destroying leagues every few seasons will be quite difficult and expensive work and it might not solve anything. -- 80 S 42 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
I see your issues here, Ramune - I will think about it a little more, too, and be happy to provide you with a more detailled suggestion as wished. I am oprimistic that a good solution is possible. -- 80 S 43 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
solution on idea i like types player are like rare pass or rare shooter on like give bonus to skill that player has fan thing shuld how star team player is league or this player get more fans for games as federation league shuld be added like 4 top teams on other country top 4 as bouns money or sometgi -- 80 S 43 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
other idea i came is why not add own arena as main like you can bulid own and cost so soon not needed rent out area or sometgi -- 80 S 43 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+3
and 100% agree on RaZeev opinion!as well -- 80 S 43 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
Power112 : the arena rental system is fine as well. Now take one of the size you want, what more do you want?
Building their own arena means spending money, and many teams come to the end of the season with their bills in the red. Where do they get the money? We would favor those who have the possibility to spend (few) -- 80 S 43 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
To let everyone's finances breathe, you could increase the income from the single ticket. Now every "expensive" ticket yields $ 5.8, increasing the profit by as little as $ 1 many clubs would have fewer financial problems. The more money for the teams, the easier it is to sign strong players, the more competition. -- 80 S 43 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
power112
Here let's discuss only the topics mentioned in this news article. We asked for all other suggestions before creating a survey.
So, we are waiting for ideas about National tournaments here.

Movida,
giving more money for everyone simply creates inflation. One season you will have more money for salaries, next season all players will become more expensive because all clubs can offer bigger salaries. -- 80 S 43 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+4
Increasing earning will directly lead to increased salaries and after few seasons there would be same discussion about "increase revenue to solve monetary issue".

Extentions, minimum/average salaries depends a lot on the market itself. If managers decide to "overpay" young talents/current strong players, it strongly correlates to increased minimum/average salaries. Then it begins the cycle of increased salaries for other managers too. So such issue is basically own fault by increasing salaries in the market. -- 80 S 43 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+3
I think you should re-introduce a sponsor for national championships, even if with small amounts. And then review the prizes at the end of the season. Now if you arrive 9° in Italia 1.1 you get ZERO, if you arrive 3° in Italia 2 you get a lot of money. This is crazy! We have no convenience to be promoted nowadays. I think the last team in Series N should always receive more than the first team in Series N+1. -- 80 S 43 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+4
Saruman, i understand this issue is addressed in proposal.

It should be checked how min-avg wage works and if vicious circle is not created? The min wage now looks really boosted and it is exceeding sometimes average! When in real life min wage is around 50% of average wage -- 80 S 43 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
100% agree on RaZeev opinion!
We discussed the topic of a common league in the federation several times. The goal of the joint league would be more interesting competition and more funds from sponsors and income for the match. In fact, it would be best to test it for e.g. 2 seasons and then voting.
There is also the issue of national players - as I understand in the European Basketball Federation all players from associated countries would be treated in the league as national? -- 80 S 43 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
Before you make the decision to improve your finances, I'm almost going to make one of the biggest club layoffs. I very much hope that GM will be more cautious when making decisions next time, and not play any financial improvement routine just because some clubs have no funds. Or should we not squeeze finance in the first place. I have always stressed that it takes a long time for us clubs to adapt to every decision you make, so try not to change it just because of a few complaints. -- 80 S 43 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+3
The minimum salary and average salary are currently the most important problems to be solved. In a restricted market, in order to force the parent team to give up matching, the price must be abnormal. Many senior league teams often bid 50,000 or more. It is very unreasonable to use these to calculate the average salary. This conflation of salary and value has its own drawbacks. The average salary exacerbates this problem. -- 80 S 43 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
Not only is there a problem with the average salary, but the problem with the minimum salary is also very big. Many players who were eliminated by wl1 and wl2 are uninterested in the market because they demand high salaries and the lower leagues cannot afford them. Don't think this is funny, a player asks for a high salary so that he can't get a job but he unwilling to reduce salary. Is there such a fool in reality? Since renewals are now tied to the average salary, is there a need for this minimum salary? I propose to abolish the minimum salary requirement for players over 30. -- 80 S 43 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+8
I think the national league system is messed up at this point. It's probably exciting for China and Lithuania who have so many active teams. But, there are plenty of small national leagues with very few active teams.

Also, there is the situation (like in the USA) where there has been 8-9 entrenched teams in the top league. Newer teams have few problems in league 2 but have almost no competitive chance in league 1 for a very long time. It's better to stay in league 2 and fight for prize money. What's the incentive to even try to stay in league 1? A ton of losses? Less prize money? Increased chance of going bankrupt even trying?

My biggest issue with the game is the finances. I can go into it for a while but the short version is that players in the lower leagues have little margin for error financially. You need to advance to make more money and you need to spend to the limit to advance. Players hit a wall in Int 4. The difference between the top Int 4 teams and the bottom teams is large. It's easy to go bankrupt trying to close the gap.

I don't think giving away money is the answer. The draft helps some. But what is needed is a way to save your franchise short of bankruptcy. For example, say you take on contracts to try to move up. It doesn't pan out and your heading to bankruptcy. If you can't afford to buy out contracts you just lose everything and your done. Is the intention really to simply drive interested players out of the game? Maybe give teams one contract amnesty every few years or something. A little margin for error. -- 80 S 43 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+4
dkerrigan why not trying to scout players and growing them together with the club level? -- 80 S 43 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
dwyane3 Don't you know how high the salary of young potential players is now? The renewal salary of my youth team players has been higher than that of my first team. -- 80 S 43 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
I haven't noticed a big difference, most of the 16 yo with potential 7 can be extended for 3 - 4k, market price is somewhat similar. -- 80 S 43 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0
dwyane3 that's exactly what I've been doing for the most part. But it doesn't change anything. Sooner or later you hit the wall where you need to spend to stay in the higher league. If you're spending keeps you in the new league, you live on another season. If you get demoted, the massive income drop might just bust you out of the game. Is busting people out of the game a good thing?

The scouted player system isn't a solution. In fact, its almost more frustrating. Minimum salaries make it hard keep players who have any future unless you have a youth league. Which I do. But I seem to pay far more signing decent players out of basketball school than I do off the market and their salaries soar even higher on their first renewal. In the end, I simple feel punished for trying to develop players.

Looking back, I shouldn't have wasted any money scouting players, on basketball school or youth league. I should've just tried to put together a team of 8 players off of the market on 1 year contracts and only looked at developing players far later. I've definitely taken the slow and inefficient root. -- 80 S 43 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
Some users misunderstand this update - it will not increase the amount of money the clubs have.
National leagues’ finances part is about rebalancing (not increasing).
For example, by changing prizes (a bit reduce for everybody and give bonuses for the last teams)

As in every discussion, many users write about other aspects of finances in the game. We will try to create a separate article about the game's economics (minimum salary, average salary, prices of extending contracts and so on).

Please, in this discussion express your opinion ONLY about the national leagues’ update. -- 80 S 43 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
Why do we not just eliminate the NL and play more WL games? NL means nothing and is really just a hindrance that gets in the way. -- 80 S 44 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+7
why not removed then NL and WL and make one super league into Qualifiers -- 80 S 44 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
Eliminate NL, shorten the season, introduce some friendly tournaments, or continent tournaments or whatever, check the salaries of older players, (it doesn't make sense , when old and young players salary almost identical ) . my two cents -- 80 S 44 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
Just change NL format to federation games and do that the last places in these federation leagues gets bonus too which would be somewhat relatable to lower leagues 1st place -- 80 S 44 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
I like the idea of getting rid of the National League. The number of users and level of play is too unbalanced across the countries. I don't see how the outlined proposal does much to fix that. Could even make it worse as you would never know who would choose to play where from season to season.

I would prefer regional leagues. Divide the countries into zones based on geography and active users. Some zones might be large and incorporate a lot of countries and some zones might be 1 country (like Lithuania and China).

Then play regional league first in the schedule. Don't intermix games with WL. Regional league would be about tuning your team for WL and filling out you're roster. The draft would occur after regional league. Then WL games straight through to the end of the season. -- 80 S 44 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
Not a bad idea, Dkerrigan... -- 80 S 44 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+2
i agree NL needs fixed or removed because in countries with less users you have 4-5 good people that just hang out at the top and everyone else it takes a few years to even come close to catching up. -- 80 S 44 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
Doing the NL first (with a different format from the current one) and after the WL also means changing the rules of the players' market. To renew or not certain players you need confirmation or not in the WL.
Without upsetting the schedule of the NL one could simply merge 2 or 3 small nations into a single NL so as to maintain a good level. -- 80 S 44 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
We could do the opposite: WL first and NL second. So when limited market begins we already know in what WL we’ll be playing -- 80 S 44 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
saruman I thought about WL first in the schedule as well. My thinking that it should be second was that WL is the "real" league. Seems weird to me that in week 1, WL league games are getting played at the same time many users are scrambling to finish their rosters. By the time some users get their rosters set and see them play a game or two (especially in lower leagues) their team is already doomed to the bottom 16.

If national league (or regional league) was about finishing your roster and tuning your team, it would suddenly have real purpose. -- 80 S 44 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
My suggestion, instead of NL, maybe there could be easier to make continental leagues. Like American league, European league and Asian league. Adding teams from Africa, Australia and Oceania to similar time zone leagues, or to league where is lower number of teams. I believe this sistem could have no effect on the decisions of the federations -- 80 S 44 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+5
Why do you need such a dramatic change? There's a lot other improvements in the game like coaches update, that is also very important. Imo the whole system isn't that bad, just some nations need to be merged. These things like "many users are scrambling to finish their rosters" are bs. Why don't you take this as an advantage of yours? Build a team in the limited market and beat your opps while they're still "scrambling". -- 80 S 44 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+4
dkerrigan Ok but...I’ve always seen limited market as “the real market”...more players at stake and higher quality. So it would be good to enter it already knowing the results of “the real competition” (WL). It’s a different point of view...you’re focusing more on the present season, I’m focusing more on the following one. -- 80 S 44 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0
Hello, sorry, I didn’t read every answers.
I don’t know if independant tournament is a good solution. It’s a risk to have a privates tournament like euro league or Nba.

I have an other idea. In France, we have the chance to be a normal community with around 30 active teams. Next to, in Belgium, they don’t have a lot of active teams. I think, if we delete Belgium league and give the choice to different teams to play in an other league. French speaking in French league, dutch speaking in Netherland league.
And we can do the same thing in Swiss league with french speaking, german speaking, etc...

Available for talk about this -- 80 S 44 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+3
What do you think about instead of country's league we have a continent league (or maybe a regional league). Of course that option will not work for every place, but I think that if we divide the teams in continental leagues, we will have stronger leagues.

I just think that by looking where there's more players to hire in the free market, I don't know exactly what are the strongest or maybe more active leagues in the game. -- 80 S 62 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+1
“Region/continental” leagues would have the same problem as it is now - different strength. And if one team in that region becomes a TOP team, it would play against a lot weaker opponents.

Joining a few countries to one league has some issues I already explained in my comments above.

So far I still think that the best solution would be to let teams individually decide to leave (or rejoin from the bottom league) their national tournaments. -- 80 S 63 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+0
Just want to leave it here.
Europe has Spain (15 leagues), Greece (7 leagues), Latvia (7 leagues), France (7 leagues), Italy (7 leagues), UK (3 leagues), Czechia (3 leagues), Germany (3 leagues), Turkey (3 leagues), Russia (3 leagues), there is Sweeden and Netherlands teams too (maybe this continet should be splitted to North and South esspecially if there will be Lithuania (127 leagues))
America has Argentina (7 Leagues) and USA (15 leagues), there is teams from Canada, Jamaica, Brasil maybe teams from Africa could be included in this list
Asia main country is China (63 leagues), but there could be added Australia, Philippines, Japan, Taiwan, Thailand maybe teams from Middle East
In all of these continents I see TOP teams, there is no such thing like a different strenght in my oppinion -- 80 S 63 d.
-- (Translate) (Translate EN)
+5