| Автор |
Тема: Gain cash for downgrading Facilities during the season |
41 одговори
|
|
|
|
I like the idea, gives manager's options. I agree it doesn't help in the long term but it could add a little more suspense towards the end of the season with retention for other managers (re the post above ^)
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Freddie Higgs @ June 24th 2016,02:50:19 ) My concern with Keeneys suggestion is if someone's in some quite seriously negative balance after race 16 and in normal circumstances they would have no way of retaining but if they sold off all their facilities they would potentially make some serious cash, so it would be a rather over powered lifeline IMO
No way. You didn't get a lot of money by that, and it still depending how bad your situation is. And even if you make some money and survive, you lose a lot on your facilities, and you will have to rebuild them. That is not gonna be easy.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Michael Keeney @ June 23rd 2016,14:42:18 )
I was wondering if we could downgrade facilities and maybe staff for a cost?
At the end of the season if someone is negative they get their staff/facilities sold off. This I'm aware of.
However for situations I'm in now for instance if I was to be able to sell some facilities off which in theory could happen in real life. You could claw back some instant cash?
Thoughts?
Could we possibly revisit this suggestion now that 4 years have gone by and GPRO has evolved?
For example, we are now able to "undo upgrades" of our car parts if no other actions have been made.
If i needed money, i would see off my possessions and start to liquidate, it's not far fetch to be able to sell off real estate.
I do agree it needs to be at a small fraction of the original costs. Someone mentioned at the same value they are sold off at the end of the season, I would agree with that.
Also, like another manager mentioned, this could be useful when a manager plans his finances perfectly but gets hit with a random.
Let's say the random happens in race 14 and the manager ends up negative $500,000 in cash at the end of the race because instead of finishing 14th they finished 30th and lost at least $2,000,000 in race revenue?
Let's keep this going, next race is the driver's favourite track and the car parts need to be upgraded but they can't do so because they are in negative due to an unforeseen and unfortunate random.
If this "selling off facilities" is a possibility, then instead of suffering 2 races in a row, I would agree that we let the poor manager downgrade some facilities to gain the $500,001 needed to go back in the black, in order to be able to upgrade his car parts for the next race. Now if he goes negative again, that's his problem to deal with.
With this option at least the manager has a chance to recover (and not have to downgrade) for the next race after an unforeseen random has already penalized him.
And we all know how bad randoms hurt when timed "perfectly" (there are plenty of posts on that!).
|
|
|
|
Let's remember that this is a management game. That is, you need to manage the whole package to become successful. I know that random's are not manageable, still you need to manage the aftermath. If my season is finished because of a random or even three in 2 races, I've not managed my team very well.
Off the top, I think I see a situation where the 'manager' takes advantage of that type of change. A rinse and repeat doing it twice in a season, may give him an advantage over others, who are trying to retain. On the other hand, only allowed once per season might address that.
Certainly makes little sense if that strategy is part of your promotion planning. It still comes down to preparedness and planning even if things go against you.
If only..... I could have my random's 'timed perfectly' ;)
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Roy Mitchell @ August 11th 2020,17:46:50 )
Off the top, I think I see a situation where the 'manager' takes advantage of that type of change. A rinse and repeat doing it twice in a season, may give him an advantage over others, who are trying to retain. On the other hand, only allowed once per season might address that.
Once is better than none. I also don't think you should be able to sell off facilities unless you are in the negative.
and it could even be free for the first time and then it costs supporter credits the next time during the same season? (not sure about the supporter credits, but Supporter credits is good for the game, however in this case, it also creates an advantage over the free players)
Let's also remember that your facilities naturally degrade over time, therefore realistically, how many times could you potentially downgrade in one season to really save your season? Not many, it will be very hard to do it multiple times, IMO. This is taking in to consideration that if you are selling off facilities to begin with, you are already in the negative, which means that after the next race, if you want to train your driver and upgrade your car parts and test, you will probably not have enough money to upgrade your facilities again.
If this was to be implemented, the win/lose ratio for buying vs. selling facilities should be such that doing it multiple times in 1 season yields a big financial disadvantage to the manager doing it (kind of like when you change your driver with a 17 race contract, 5 times during a season
|
|
|
|
You can already downgrade facilities and lower costs over time. It's up to you to risk getting in big trouble if something (no matter what) unfortunate happens. I think that's part of the management :)
Quote ( Kevin Fortin @ August 14th 2020,18:26:49 )
If this was to be implemented, the win/lose ratio for buying vs. selling facilities should be such that doing it multiple times in 1 season yields a big financial disadvantage to the manager doing it (kind of like when you change your driver with a 17 race contract, 5 times during a season
I agree with that sentence; it would be a safety harness to save money in the (very) short term, for example to avoid a relegation
|
|
|
|
The suggestion is a 'fail' the one pro is that you could do this at all. The cons are numerous and as the discussion is going there may be more.
It doesn't lead into a 'management situation' at all. It's what I would call, reactive management in a crises. Spit happens but you still have to manage, don't you?
That's my opinion, anyway. :)
|
|
|
|
Should you need this money to make your day, you're already on a downward spiral.
All I would say is: Try again, do better!
|
|
|
|
Does no one else see how it would be utterly abused as a way of avoiding paying taxes?
|
|
|
|
For all the talk of this aiding in bad planning, I see some ways this could be used for good planning.
Having the ability to rapidly increase S/F in order to gain trainable staff skills then immediately downgrade for 50% of the cost might be worth it to some managers
|
|
|
|
|
|
You can do that now. You don't get any money but... why should you?
You have the expense to upgrade the facilities and train Staff then the option lower the facilities to a lvl you can afford, simple. hehheee
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Kevin Fortin @ August 14th 2020,18:26:49 ) Quote
Once is better than none. I also don't think you should be able to sell off facilities unless you are in the negative.
i did suggest that only managers in the negative would be able to downgrade for cash. That could remove the 'avoiding taxes' comment and players using it to train staff many times.
But what if the cash back was only 1/17 of what you would pay? A $4,200,000 cost for facilities upgrades, in return would pay you $247,050 if the same levels were sold off (an example could be level 20 to 40 and then 40 down to 20). That's a big loss (for what advantages again)? Just to get you out of the negative after a random?
|
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Română
Italiano
Português
Português
Français
Polski
Русский
Български
Српски
Nederlands
Vlaams
Suomi
Lietuvių
Čeština
Magyar
Eesti keel
Slovenčina
Türkçe
Shqip
Ελληνικά
Hrvatski
Bahasa Melayu
Dansk
Pirate
