Themenumfrage
Should a Wealth Tax be introduced for balances of 150m or more?
anmelden um abzustimmen bzw. um Abstimmungsergebnisse zu sehen
|
Autor |
Thema: Wealth Tax for 150m+ |
222 Antworten
|
|
I agree that exploring options for improvements or tweaks to the game are a good thing, and that's what we're constantly doing here: great!
However, isn't there some charm in the fact that there are multiple ways to achieve success? Should there be only one way to play your way to the top?
I mean, some people have walked the traditional path of climbing the ladders without hoarding cash and paying tons of taxes, and reached the pinnacle a few seasons after reaching Elite.
Others have won it with tons of cash hoarded, and drop down to Master for eons later. Some others drop back down all the way to Ama.
And again a bunch of others spent many seasons in Elite before reaching the top ranks.
I mean, doesn't that make the game more fun? Having multiple ways of achieving it? Boxing it all in by rules/changes, so there;s only one golden path to success left... That just sounds mighty boring.
I started hoarding moderate cash in S55 and S56, splashed it all in Pro and dropped back down to Ama (note that this was not for sponsors - i had a full deck already - or cash hoarding, i just spent loads on getting staff skills up), and have since (as Jay pointed out) never been among the richer managers., yet have had some moderate success so far. Partially due to a stalemate in M4 last season, granted, but hey, i'm up here now, yay :)
Absolutely, i may have taken the wrong path; And if that is the case, i am very glad that there's other paths to explore. Again: it would be quite boring if it was a fail-rinse-repeat cycle of the same over and over again...
Heck, i may find myself bankrupt halfway through this season, and may decide to take the Edwin Silva approach and start writing dissertations on game flaws after 216 seasons in Master. Or i may take the Monteiro approach and start hoarding cash.
On the other hand, i may not go bankrupt and win Elite right away (a guy can dream), in which case i'll need to have a long good talk with Keeney, explaining why i do feel i've had the right to. ;)
The point is: there's choice. And that is more than welcome if you ask me.
|
|
|
I'm tired and have a 90 minutes battle with a drive home in my Peugeot but your post made me smile :)
Variety is the spice of life I suppose. I don't think a huge amount of the game needs to change. The money in Amateur doesn't even bother me I just find it mind boggling that a good driver and car can perform equally or out perform an account with say good staff/facilities. The gains in these areas are miniscule for the cost. Granted that's my choice for investing in them of course.
In your instance above I assume it's increasingly difficult to build cash now due to your staff/facility levels. Wouldn't you like to see a better gain in your package than you currently do against people who don't pay a penny into them?
Anyways on that note. . . . . I'm off home.
|
|
|
Quote ( Jukka Sireni @ January 31st 2018,14:56:38 ) In a way it's funny that both
-staying at the top of Elite -getting to the top of Elite
are seen too easy. ;) I don't think the first is true any more, loss of super-TDs and introduction of energy have changed everything.
Getting to the 'top' is never going to be easy because there are so few positions up there, but it is easier now. Staying there now seems harder than getting there, which for me is the right balance because once you get there you then have the additional challenge of surviving instead of the strange sense that you're easily defending a hill while holding all the advantages. Yes it slightly devalues having a trophy because more people end up with them, but it increases the differentiating power of Elite in general.
I do understand Keeney's point that bouncing straight from Master to a championship is odd. I think Jukka also had some advantage from many in Elite not understanding energy very well at the time, but it is likely to happen again. It happens because most things needed for a champ push can be purchased on arrival, but not quite all of them and it's still the more expensive way to do it. I think the more normal way is going to be 1-3 seasons of preparation after arrival then push, as Paulo and Robert did, and that is exactly how plenty of championships have been won in the past anyway.
Meanwhile it was still possible in S61 to win a championship from an established position, and to match income & expenditure over 1 season with someone who's hoarded wealth since Ama. If it becomes near-impossible to win a trophy without recent promotion then I do think that's a problem.
I'm much more inclined to agree with Edwin's point that wealth hoarding is damaging to Master & Pro, and in those divisions the current wealth tax has less time since Ama promotion to bite sufficiently hard.
Quote ( Miel Soeterbroek @ January 31st 2018,18:26:25 ) However, isn't there some charm in the fact that there are multiple ways to achieve success? Should there be only one way to play your way to the top? Precisely, and I think there became less choice because returning to Amateur to hoard wealth (and driver, or even staff skills) became so powerful and popular, at the expense of choices like 'rebuilding in Pro' or 'rebuilding in Master'. The new negotiations limit should help, but I'm not sure it's the full solution.
|
|
|
Quote ( Mark Witney @ January 31st 2018,11:21:20 ) What can I spend money on?? Nothing, my balance doesn't increase because I'm hoarding,
Quote ( Mark Witney @ January 31st 2018,12:59:55 ) Seriously though give purple the opportunity to invest the money, don't just tax them, that's a lazy way of solving a far more complex issue.
There are opportunities to invest the money, but it seems that people rather retain amateur with CT 0 and even make sure that happens with 6 stops to avoid points.
Racing is also investing and as long as you're just content raising your bank balance whilst comfortably staying in amateur, that can be seen as hoarding. (though probably not in your case, at least not yet)
You also have the option to Promote :)
Edit: By this I don't mean you Mark personally. AFAIK this suggestion wouldn't even concern you (from race history), because it's aimed to "proper hoarders" with "excess cash", and you've still remained under 100M
|
|
|
Quote ( Miel Soeterbroek @ January 31st 2018,18:26:25 ) However, isn't there some charm in the fact that there are multiple ways to achieve success? Should there be only one way to play your way to the top?
Well, as I previously showed, 80% of the top sponsorship in Elite followed one particular way. 84% in Master, the same particular way. Most likely higher in Pro. This doesn't sound like there are actually that many viable approaches. Not that there aren't different ways, of course there are, and some people have shown that. But there is a very high asymmetry between the success rates of said ways.
I insist that I am not stating this from a personal way. I've tracked data for a long time, so out of personal interest I'd have followed the most efficient way instead, and several of my team mates are doing that with high success. I am more interested about the implications of said mechanism. People use to look at this only one way, which is the way up. However, things aren't that simple. The very same mechanism that allow this efficient approach are the ones that force quite many managers to go down even if their skill level was higher than the par of the field. I don't know if this helps player retention, but I can guess many a few managers probably retired after realising they aren't worse than their peers, but facing waves after waves of heavily stacked managers proved to be too hard.
Also, from gameplay perspective, this doesn't make any damn sense either. Granted, several approaches are welcome, and I for one have debated quite a long time about mechanism changes that are less harmful for new people in the game. However, I find it comical that the most efficient approach is the amateur one. I've said that plenty of times, this makes as much sense as Liverpool going to Vanarama if they want to have future chances in the Champions League (or, conversely, not spending anything in transfers -pipis-, going down to Bet league and come back up with a new Coca Cola sponsor, rinse and repeat). Real life sports league are more, well, realistic, and several approaches exist there as well too. The fact multiple gameplays are welcome does not mean the game mechanisms should be suited so that the most perplexing one is the most powerful one as well.
|
|
|
|
#216 geschrieben Jan 31 2018, 20:13:32 (letzte Änderung Jan 31 2018, 20:15:11 von Mark Witney)
|
Zitat
|
Quote ( Mikko Heikkinen @ January 31st 2018,18:49:18 ) Racing is also investing and as long as you're just content raising your bank balance whilst comfortably staying in amateur, that can be seen as hoarding. (though probably not in your case, at least not yet)
You also have the option to Promote :)
Mikko,
To plan properly you need to train, test an invest, it's too easy to gain money in amateur no doubt about that. BUT taxing people for managing their finances is not the right way to proceed, as I've stated earlier my planning is why I'm in a reasonable position, with s&f that are very high, CCP in double figures and a driver that hopefully will be OK next season in pro (Yes I do plan to promote, the time in amateur has been driver training based, being unprepared is something I've done before).
The taxes in place are already punitive enough, I suggested TD's or tyre suppliers as methods to make people spend more, unfortunately as pointed out that would be hard on those that aren't prepared. Punishing those that are though is surely not the right solution? It's a bit like the government raiding your savings simply because you've been careful and financially organised and not squandered it on a 60" 3D tv with surround sound etc..
|
|
|
Quote ( Miel Soeterbroek @ January 31st 2018,18:26:25 ) I agree that exploring options for improvements or tweaks to the game are a good thing, and that's what we're constantly doing here: great!
However, isn't there some charm in the fact that there are multiple ways to achieve success? Should there be only one way to play your way to the top?
I mean, some people have walked the traditional path of climbing the ladders without hoarding cash and paying tons of taxes, and reached the pinnacle a few seasons after reaching Elite.
Others have won it with tons of cash hoarded, and drop down to Master for eons later. Some others drop back down all the way to Ama.
And again a bunch of others spent many seasons in Elite before reaching the top ranks.
I mean, doesn't that make the game more fun? Having multiple ways of achieving it? Boxing it all in by rules/changes, so there;s only one golden path to success left... That just sounds mighty boring.
I started hoarding moderate cash in S55 and S56, splashed it all in Pro and dropped back down to Ama (note that this was not for sponsors - i had a full deck already - or cash hoarding, i just spent loads on getting staff skills up), and have since (as Jay pointed out) never been among the richer managers., yet have had some moderate success so far. Partially due to a stalemate in M4 last season, granted, but hey, i'm up here now, yay :)
Absolutely, i may have taken the wrong path; And if that is the case, i am very glad that there's other paths to explore. Again: it would be quite boring if it was a fail-rinse-repeat cycle of the same over and over again...
Heck, i may find myself bankrupt halfway through this season, and may decide to take the Edwin Silva approach and start writing dissertations on game flaws after 216 seasons in Master. Or i may take the Monteiro approach and start hoarding cash.
On the other hand, i may not go bankrupt and win Elite right away (a guy can dream), in which case i'll need to have a long good talk with Keeney, explaining why i do feel i've had the right to. ;)
The point is: there's choice. And that is more than welcome if you ask me.
I agree.
Maybe it’s because I see failure as a challenge to overcome, I think it’s great that there are multiple ways to play. I found a loophole (that’s within the rules) that is working for me. Now if I can continue to make it work wonderful, if not then I’m like Pinky and The Brain, I’ll just go back to the drawing board and try again.
Honestly, it’s not even a loophole, just a strategy I came up with while.... well, you can let your imagination run :P
|
|
|
Quote ( Miel Soeterbroek @ January 31st 2018,13:15:39 ) Do you honestly think Jukka didnt plan anything long term? That he one morning woke up and thought, oh why not?
Yes :)
|
|
|
game is complex, not complicated? :o
|
|
|
It must be finished!
Do not say the perceived / real mistakes of the game!
New players: They run away. :(:(:(
There are many clever people here. I doubt!
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Stuart Foster @ December 2nd 2017,13:53:13 ) Ok, lets bring this up into its own topic.
I am in favour of a few changes and this would be one of them.
There are currently 76 managers in Amateur with a balance of 150m or more. There are also over 150 manager's with a balance of 100m or more.
Update S97 - Amateur :- /gb/Stats.asp?type=richmanagers#scroll
$150M+ = 116 $100M+ = 388
I see this increase as a positive, in that managers are managing their money better. However if a manager just sits in Amateur for 20+ seasons just to accumulate his money, he should not be penalized for being mediocre. I have seen (been shown) managers who have amassed a shed load of money in Amateur only to spend it all in their first season in Pro...and still relegate!
Quote ( Stuart Foster @ December 2nd 2017,13:53:13 ) 1) A higher rate wealth tax to discourage people from just "hanging" in amateur stockpiling cash.
See comment above. The whole point of Amateur is to accumulate money and Sponsors in preparation for advancing to the higher levels. The quicker the better.
Your suggestion makes no sense.Plus if a manager is not spending his money, they should not be considered a threat regarding promotions.
I was going to post a new topic ,but a quick search found this old topic ..so I have resurrected it.
My suggestion is.
Teams that do well regarding money management, and are able to have a balance in excess of $1B, ( season end) should not be liable to any taxation,as long as there were 10 members in the team for the whole season.
There are no statistics that I can find re team season end balances, perhaps this could be added. But currently there are only 4 teams with a balance above $1B :- /gb/Stats.asp?type=richteams#scroll
|
|
|
Quote ( Mikko Heikkinen @ February 1st 2018,02:12:51 ) Quote ( Miel Soeterbroek @ January 31st 2018,13:15:39 )
Do you honestly think Jukka didnt plan anything long term? That he one morning woke up and thought, oh why not?
Yes :)
Lucky bastard!
|
|
|
Quote ( Adrian Moore @ February 10th 2024,01:00:23 ) The whole point of Amateur is to accumulate money and Sponsors in preparation for advancing to the higher levels. The quicker the better.
If this is the reality....woooow, it so boring! Have you read the post 211 in this conversation? i hope that real game is how wrote in that post.
However i see a lot of player that can reach master using money earned in amateur, i see few players that know how to earn money in pro (for exemple i dont know). So...i can agree with you, and i think is coming boring the game.
|
|
|