motd are u participating in this or are u a manager or just supervising ?

I'm not playing or managing. Only running the league in season 1.

I have some considerations: i think that the players should have a rank with how much money they made (salaries) and titles won. So just being the cheapest player possible is not an advantage for him.

We have something in the works to track player income over time. Not sure how it helps address the advantage of being a cheap player. Nevertheless, it should add good value to the league, so we plan to track this. Will reveal more, as things get clearer.

If im not wrong, the total money a season will generate is 675 nohhams, what means that teams cant use more then that for salaries (or 112.5 each team). But a good team can make 175 nohhams and a bad maybe only 50. The good will buy better players and will pay them, the bad will lost the good players and will have bad replacements. I think that maybe after 2 or 3 seasons we come to a very unbalanced situation (although i think that every team receiving 50 each turn helps a lot, probably something more needs to be done).

On an average, teams should earn 112.5 Nohhams under the current model. I think you are looking at a very extreme case here. For a club to make only 50 Nohhams(from the base income) they would have to lose EVERY game. Given that all clubs start off on an equal footing, I think it is safe to say this will not happen :)
I would expect something around a 30% win rate for the worst performing club, and 70% for the best. That means the best club would get something around 127.5 and the worst 87.5, which seems reasonable. The base income is designed to bring some sort of stability and ensure that the top clubs don't run away with the league. However, we'll have to observe if the current model will achieve a good balance. Worst case, if things don't work out, we can always quickly correct the economy in season 2. I'm not too concerned here.

There is an update to the economy(altered income on wins/losses and base income) based on a good suggestion by Fleecemaster. Will make that public sometime tomorrow.

The extreme scenario wasnt for the first turn, its for some turns after: if team A has 70% and team B 30%, next season team A can reinforce better and maybe go to 75%, while team B reinforce and could go to 25% (random values).. this could create a very unbalanced situation after some seasons. But, as you said, with corrections at the season 2 if needed this problem disappear.

MOTD can you kindly change my game count to 10
i think i will go with 10

me as well i can go with 10 i guess

What I meant about worrying, was the concern that poorer clubs won't be able to buy new players, but there seems to be more players than spots, so any club, even with only 50 Nohhams base income, could probably pick up 10 players at 5 Nohhams each, and so long as they win just a couple of games they can probably start to make some profit, I don't think it's unrecoverable once a club loses all it's money. Besides, you can always allow a club to go into administration or something, they lose all rights to players, and they start again with 200 Nohhans, something like that?

Edit: In a lot of games I've built in the past that feature economies, I've learn a couple of simple facts. All you need is a base source of income that anyone can get hold of no matter what (you have one) and also something un-capped that gives players an advantage and most importantly that takes money out of the game. I think if you set it up right, buying ever more expensive players should serve that purpose, just don't let players get that money back, I think that's maybe where you're going wrong? (Releasing to the pool returns money right? Well imo, it shouldn't, else money never leaves the system apart from through salaries, but they are balanced by the prize money it seems...)

Top teams get more money through prizes, but also spend more on players, there's your balance...

Edited 2/18/2016 10:12:14

I wonder if they'll come a time when players are worth 1000 Nohhams plus. Scary, although it happened to football last century, now the top players are worth around £100M.

Yeah, football is where I'm drawing the comparison, it's a pretty similar system to what is needed I think, but if managers pay 1000 Nohhams, that's a way to remove money from the system and keep it stable :)

Please, let me in. I can play 10 games and would like to be sent to as lower league you can manage or at least to middle one.

I can say that I am about average player in 1v1, but I am better in team games.

Edited 2/18/2016 12:31:38

"I'm not 100% sure why that would bother MoD, imo..."

No matter how well he plays, his team loses. It'd be like being the oly good player on your team in hockey/soccer/football etc. where player ultimate goal is often to win the championship.

I will take part

5 games count

If im not wrong, the total money a season will generate is 675 nohhams, what means that teams cant use more then that for salaries (or 112.5 each team). But a good team can make 175 nohhams and a bad maybe only 50. The good will buy better players and will pay them, the bad will lost the good players and will have bad replacements. I think that maybe after 2 or 3 seasons we come to a very unbalanced situation (although i think that every team receiving 50 each turn helps a lot, probably something more needs to be done).

If we compare this to football/soccer or any other sports of that kind, you could expect the same. But sometimes people or teams appear or dissappear against all bets. I think you also forget about one point: A player should be able to disagree to join a team. I don't know how this would affect the behavior, but may make it more difficult for some teams to get players.
Maybe players can also negotiate about their salary?

I would really like to see that it is possible for a player to start his own team if he gained enough money. But Fleemaster is right too. There has to be a way to remove money again.

I was thinking the same about a playerbeing able to start their own team with their salary (like David Beckham) but I'm pretty sure the salary is the way money is taken out the system - it doesn't go to the players just out of the team and then spent on a luxurious lifestyle life in footy.
Can't have players disagree which team they are on, it's like holding an auction for a painting and not letting the highest bidder buy it, it doesn't work.

This would be interesting if coins were used as payment; you could spend $50 on it and get all the good players like Real Madrid.

But it would be costly and harder to do

Edited 2/18/2016 16:46:42

"But sometimes people or teams appear or disappear against all bets."
Leicester, Chelsea, Valencia.

To balance, we could work some sort of draft for low-level players or something, but I think we should leave it alone.

Yeah, things can always be added in later, it's good to keep it simple for now and get all the basics sorted out :)

I don't think a player should be able to say no to being bought, but then, they could still play below their ability, perhaps that can be part of it though, keep them happy, and also even give them more salary perhaps. That could make things pretty interesting! :P

Instead of having a 30% value salary, is it not better to have negotiable salaries (like 2 stage transfers in football.

Maybe in the future, I guess for now it's better to keep it at 30%, it was just an idea :)

Something will have to be changed for next season though... The way the current trade is set up (performance based) isn't good, it's too easy for a player to manipulate his own "worth"

He could potentially hold a club to random (or even just to piss them off) but playing poorly, this will not only get the club no prize money, but also will lower their price, meaning the club gets less return from the pool.

I'm sure MotD will figure all this out in time though :)

Edited 2/18/2016 19:30:17

Yeah but Fleece if they do that they would never get hired again.