| Forum » Suggestions » Super Star Tax | Date | |
|---|---|---|
|
Should a income tax system be incorporated to create Super Stars
|
||
|
Username
908 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
lucifer i am sorry for posting such a stupid post but such high taxes wouldn't be implemented. | 03/03/2012 20:12 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Fiscal
4046 msgs.
Best scorer
|
What good can come from paying taxes? In the real world, people only pay taxes on the premise that their financial value, or greater, will be recompensed in the form of otherwise unobtainable services - education, transport, and healthcare for example. I fail to see the advantage of paying virtual tax, if, as many have already suggested, it will ultimately penalise those players that have done better than others, without really giving them anything in return. Aside from perhaps a philanthropic knowledge that there is less of a gap between the rich and poor teams, there is surely no conceivable incentive for any manager eligible for higher taxes to think it is a good thing for the game. |
03/03/2012 21:45 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
2108 msgs.
Best scorer
|
Read the link he gave u. We're suffering superinflation. Prices are crazy and money needs to be taken out of the game, we have a few people who are able to charge outrageous prices players new people would need. This ruined the Spanish server and it is in danger of ruining ours. If any of you have solutions we'd be more than happy to listen. Edited by hewhoamareismyself 04-03-2012 03:27 |
04/03/2012 03:22 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Fiscal
4046 msgs.
Best scorer
|
I have read it, and I don't doubt that the prices of players are going up. However, I just do not see, in my opinion, what good any kind of progressive tax policy can do to keep the prices down, as keeping the prices down is surely a secondary concern, a bi-product of the real issue. A rise in prices may just be a natural progression or the game while it is still settling in, and while we are still not yet up to the maximum number of divisions. The real problem is how to equalise the widening gap between the rich and the poor teams, and what I think the OP was getting at, and a progressive tax rate may be able to solve this issue. If we wish to narrow the gap between the rich and the poor, then a progressive tax rate on stadium lease payments, for example, could go some way to satisfying this aim. This is in a similar vein to the rising cost of accessories, and serves in some way to balance the financial situations between divisions. In the EPL, parachute payments are given to relegated teams by a collective league fund, in order to cushion their landing in the lower division. This, while not lowering prices, may smooth the gaps between two given divisions. Another method could be the opening of the loan market throughout the season. I understand the reasoning behind it - that teams who are guaranteed of their league position may loan their best players to a friend for the last few rounds of the season. However, this is also hindering and limiting the supply of players. My team is in Division 6, and while I do not have any fringe players of value to many teams, a team in Division 4 or above may have players who will never get a game for them, and yet would be a star player in Divisions 5, 6, or 7. To combat the problems of nepotism, and loaning of the best players to friends, there could be a limit to the numbers of loan players available, either to each team, or between two specific teams. Another idea would be to establish a cap on the number of league games a player could play if the manager intends to loan him. For example, if a player has played 25 or more league games, he may not be eligible for the loan market. These are just three suggestions, which may or may not be plausible. However, I would exercise caution in assuming that just because the price of the players is rising, that this is not natural, and maybe instead consider that the market has not yet had enough time to balance. There will always be rich and poor teams, but in Striker Manager's limitations, also comes a benefit. You cannot cheat the system, in general, in the same way you can in real life, but SM offers a very limited number of outlets in which to 'invest' money away from taxation. As such, it should not be so difficult to curb the rich/poor divide, but as for keeping prices down, that is a different issue. |
04/03/2012 10:30 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
130 msgs.
Substitute
|
After reading the other posts on hyper inflation I am starting to understand that the problem is supply of the better players. Surely flooding the market with good players would blow inflation out the water. The taxation i see in hindsight might just punish the players who have built up a team. We do however need something to take money off the table. I am also quite partial to the "Turkish leveler", take a few zero's off the current balance sheets. This alone will remove quite a bit off the table and sort of reset the field. | 05/03/2012 21:50 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
6256 msgs.
Golden Ball
|
biking, I agree with you, when I started you could run a GB search and had to pick which players you wanted. And by that I mean there were loads of them. People used to do 95% prog searches(or even 99) and 80% searches were rubbish, these days if you get a 80% prog player he could be worth 50m. Supply has stopped, we need supply to stop the silliness that I'm seeing. |
05/03/2012 22:27 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
251 msgs.
First-team player
|
One way to counter inflation in my honest and humble opinion is to increase ratings of school players. I find these days my excellent and high schools are producing less of good progression players in comparison with last month. More good players in the market will drive the players price lower. Maybe we could add another level in schools which is above excellent and call it outstanding. And make it mega expensive so more money can be taken out of the system. But in this outstanding level, you can choose your desired position of the player. So there you go, this will have the double impact to curb the inflation and also give something positive to the managers. Happy days for everyone!!!! | 05/03/2012 23:15 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
2108 msgs.
Best scorer
|
KaSul said: One way to counter inflation in my honest and humble opinion is to increase ratings of school players. I find these days my excellent and high schools are producing less of good progression players in comparison with last month. More good players in the market will drive the players price lower. Maybe we could add another level in schools which is above excellent and call it outstanding. And make it mega expensive so more money can be taken out of the system. But in this outstanding level, you can choose your desired position of the player. So there you go, this will have the double impact to curb the inflation and also give something positive to the managers. Happy days for everyone!!!! If we get enough people on it it most certainly will work KaS. However if the prices are so ridiculous that only the Cules and the Milanistas of this game can afford it it'll just drive the prices more out of control. |
06/03/2012 02:06 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
130 msgs.
Substitute
|
Tax the incomes per game, I'm not sure there is a tax like this. Then allow school creation to be cheaper and easier to upgrade and then produce players on a more regular basis. This will flood the market with cheap high prog players. It will still take a season or two to train those players so the incentive is to stick it out. Also it takes at least a season or two to get the hang of the game. I'm pretty addicted and read the FAQ's and forums just to get the hang of things. One of the first things I realized was that you had to invest in your stadium. If I had done this from the beginning then I would have been in a better position today. | 06/03/2012 05:44 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
769 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
I wonder if the only solution is to tax this or tax that ( i.e stadium or income or games) to reduce the money that people have.I still think that the manager who puts in the effort in reinvesting and building a team is the one who would get most hit by this taxing system.The idea of having more high progression players from schools is good as people who invest in schools pay a lot for the school along with weekly costs and this takes money out of the system and might encourage more to do it. | 06/03/2012 06:10 |
| Mustangs - Div2/Gr2 | ||
4
