Issue Involving Inflation and Free Agents

rylinus · 01-09-2017, 08:07 PM

I've been playing in a fictional league for some time, using inflation rates of 3-4% per year. I am now in year 2050. For the past 10-15 years (increasing more each year) a high number of quality free agents, including former MVPs and CY Winners, have gone unsigned because their demands were so high and teams ran out of money. It is no longer approaching accuracy to have so many of the best players sitting out seasons. It has also disrupted the whole way the offseason works. It makes no sense to even try to sign a free agent until the period between pre-season and spring training as demands come down precipitously, both in terms of years and $$. This has always been an issue in some form for OOTP (especially for relief pitchers, who always overvalue themselves early in the offseason) but now it is heavily impacting every free agent class.

Anyone have any suggestions for how to fix this? Anyone else having similar issues? Curious if this is a bug in my universe or with the inflation system as a whole.

Thanks!

Habsfan18 · 01-09-2017, 08:21 PM

Could just be an issue with your league financials - especially if teams are running out of money.

There was a problem quite a few patches ago where top free agent position players were going un-signed before agreeing to cheap 1 year deals but Matt reworked some of the FA logic somehow and it's been working like a charm ever since.

jpeters1734 · 01-09-2017, 08:27 PM

what happens is while media contracts go up, they aren't renewed right away. so player demands are going to be more than the team makes

PSUColonel · 01-09-2017, 09:56 PM

So is inflation not recommended?

TGH-Adfabre · 01-10-2017, 12:15 PM

There is not enough information in your post to be certain what the problem is. Here are some things I would check to figure out what is wrong.
Typically FA demands have to do with "loose" money in the league. If too much of this exists or is consolidated among a few teams it can throw other things out of whack.
1) Are the top teams making so much more money than the bottom teams that they price out the bottom teams?
2) What is your cash cap?
3) Do the majority of teams have money at the start of the offseason? Are they barely above water or in the red?
4) How far apart are the media contracts? I try to keep national media contracts close or the same. Then the income difference in ticket revenue, merchandising and local media contracts. This tends to stabilize finances.
5) How far apart are your budgets? If the top teams are 3, 4, 5+ times the bottom teams budgets there will probably be finance problems, The AI seems to have a hard time with too large of a spread.
6) Do the teams with money (assuming there are some) in need of the players that are unsigned and available in FA?

I ran an online fictional league and our demands became insanely inflated for our artificial salary cap. We adjusted finances over about 5 seasons and pulled everything back to where we wanted it. Then I just had to spend a few minutes every other season tweaking things to keep them inline.

Good luck,
Tom (LP)

USF · 01-10-2017, 12:55 PM

I never understood what the benefit of this feature is to be honest.

A healthy financially set up league will have natural inflation anyway set naturally by market demands.

NoOne · 01-10-2017, 03:21 PM

inflation or not is a personal choice, it won't make much of a difference how the game works but rather just what you see.. so you have to adjust how you value performance/$ over time... e.g. if they say 1 war =6M now... in 10 years it will be larger and you must understand that in order to spend efficiently (please know i don't use WAR this (or anything important, lol) way and i don't suggest it, either, but it's a simple way to explain).

if it's balanced correctly, inflation should not occur - or at least it is temporary in nature until you reach an equillibrium.

if you currently see things continually increasing, that's just because it hasn't reached its 'average' yet (then fluctuates around that).

TGH hit on just about everything (without going and looking in the game to loook for other things). max cash on hand is huge and relative budgets is a big deal relative to what is being seen.

check out the estimated revenue on the financial settings page. this should tell you what a typicall high-end salary will by... 160-180 and you might see a 40m/year contract on a rare occasion, but should stay in the 30's as the top paying contract. if it's higher you will see higher contracts... if one or two teams have HUGE budgets, almost all FA will demand somethign too high to start... teams still bid on them, but hte human with a big budget gets screwed a bit to avoid the problem mentioned in a previous post with players doing 1 year cheap contracts. if you have a huge budget with lots of space, basically you do not want to offer a contract until it does down a bit... otherwise EVEN if you offer more than the other teams bidding, they won't like the Human's offer. you must *guess when it's best to submit an offer.

(example: i offered 28M for X years and the guy said it was unacceptable... 2 other teams were bidding.. i thoguht somethign was fishy because tehy couldn't afford what i offered.. so i "acted as" and looked... they were WAY below what i offered... i've never heard of an athlete choosing a contract that much smaller than the competition, lol. ~10m/year less than my offer... per year!, if i recall or near it -- but it's necesary if a large budget exists in teh league to avoid those problems stated above - plus it's typically a human who boosts up revenue for their team relative to the league... ~12-14+ market teams can handle 300M payrolls - this will substantially increase demands if a few teams are this high)

also, make sure nothing in team budgets is nearing 2billion... max cash on hand + budget = 2bill is a bad bad thing... the program cannot handle numbers above (2^32)/ 2 (signed +/- = /2). that includes products, sums, quotients that you never see in the UI... the results of any math that needs to be done cannot be larger. (on the inflation screen, you can fix this by applying a /10^X to all values etc which keeps the values small, desipite how it's displayed on the screen.)

Le Grande Orange · 01-10-2017, 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rylinus

I've been playing in a fictional league for some time, using inflation rates of 3-4% per year.

Time for me to make my standard statement on such things:

'Inflation' in baseball (defined here as the gradual rise in revenue and expenses) has not and does not follow the same curve as inflation in the general economy, e.g. the commonly cited figures of the U.S. consumer price index.

Baseball revenue and salaries exhibited little growth for many decades, then, starting in the mid-1970s with the advent of cable TV, began an exponential growth in both (a trend which continued to the present).

rylinus · 01-11-2017, 02:24 AM

Thank you everyone for your responses on this. TGH-Adfabre, here are responses to your specific questions.

1) Are the top teams making so much more money than the bottom teams that they price out the bottom teams?
Yes. There is a huge gap in earning power between top and bottom teams. See more details below.
2) What is your cash cap?
I don't use a a cap.
3) Do the majority of teams have money at the start of the offseason? Are they barely above water or in the red?
Most have some or a lot of $$ at the start of the offseason. A few are in the red. It just goes quickly.
4) How far apart are the media contracts? I try to keep national media contracts close or the same. Then the income difference in ticket revenue, merchandising and local media contracts. This tends to stabilize finances.
There is a wide range. Top media contract is for $863 million, the bottom is at $232.
5) How far apart are your budgets? If the top teams are 3, 4, 5+ times the bottom teams budgets there will probably be finance problems, The AI seems to have a hard time with too large of a spread.
The spread as of now is $711 million for the top team and $424 for the bottom. The payrolls range from 1.3 billion to $374 million. The average payroll is just over a billion dollars. Right now each team is averaging losing $160 million per year.
6) Do the teams with money (assuming there are some) in need of the players that are unsigned and available in FA?
No, except for some rebuilding teams all the other teams spend all their money and it simply runs out by the time the preseason hits.

To me it seems that the cost of contracts is simply out of control. Right now the top player in the league makes $274 million per year. The 25th highest paid player makes $132 million. The "average" quality player makes $42.5 million. A "good" quality player makes $85m per year. What seems to be happening is that between locking up players approaching free agency and then the early offseason, teams just run out of cash.

I toyed with simply setting settings back to 2015 rates but it created an odd effect where new free agents/arbitration are getting those offers but current contracts remain at the inflated 2050 rates.

I think I just need to call this experiment a bust. It is unfortunate but I don't know how else to salvage this league. Open to any suggestions any of you might have.

My own two cents - it seems inflation should be a natural part of the game (salaries do go up each year in MLB) but for the purposes of OOTP should be much lower, say 1-2%, rather than trying to reflect realistic inflation.

jpeters1734 · 01-11-2017, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by USF

I never understood what the benefit of this feature is to be honest.

A healthy financially set up league will have natural inflation anyway set naturally by market demands.

how would you have natural inflation? If league revenue stays the same every year, there is no inflation

PSUColonel · 01-11-2017, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rylinus

My own two cents - it seems inflation should be a natural part of the game (salaries do go up each year in MLB) but for the purposes of OOTP should be much lower, say 1-2%, rather than trying to reflect realistic inflation.

But won't the same result come about...but just much slower? So instead of the problems taking 50 years to manifest, it takes 100?

TGH-Adfabre · 01-11-2017, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rylinus

Thank you everyone for your responses on this. TGH-Adfabre, here are responses to your specific questions.

1) Are the top teams making so much more money than the bottom teams that they price out the bottom teams?
Yes. There is a huge gap in earning power between top and bottom teams. See more details below.
2) What is your cash cap?
I don't use a a cap.
3) Do the majority of teams have money at the start of the offseason? Are they barely above water or in the red?
Most have some or a lot of $$ at the start of the offseason. A few are in the red. It just goes quickly.
4) How far apart are the media contracts? I try to keep national media contracts close or the same. Then the income difference in ticket revenue, merchandising and local media contracts. This tends to stabilize finances.
There is a wide range. Top media contract is for $863 million, the bottom is at $232.
5) How far apart are your budgets? If the top teams are 3, 4, 5+ times the bottom teams budgets there will probably be finance problems, The AI seems to have a hard time with too large of a spread.
The spread as of now is $711 million for the top team and $424 for the bottom. The payrolls range from 1.3 billion to $374 million. The average payroll is just over a billion dollars. Right now each team is averaging losing $160 million per year.
6) Do the teams with money (assuming there are some) in need of the players that are unsigned and available in FA?
No, except for some rebuilding teams all the other teams spend all their money and it simply runs out by the time the preseason hits.

To me it seems that the cost of contracts is simply out of control. Right now the top player in the league makes $274 million per year. The 25th highest paid player makes $132 million. The "average" quality player makes $42.5 million. A "good" quality player makes $85m per year. What seems to be happening is that between locking up players approaching free agency and then the early offseason, teams just run out of cash.

I toyed with simply setting settings back to 2015 rates but it created an odd effect where new free agents/arbitration are getting those offers but current contracts remain at the inflated 2050 rates.

I think I just need to call this experiment a bust. It is unfortunate but I don't know how else to salvage this league. Open to any suggestions any of you might have.

My own two cents - it seems inflation should be a natural part of the game (salaries do go up each year in MLB) but for the purposes of OOTP should be much lower, say 1-2%, rather than trying to reflect realistic inflation.

If you want to spend a little time and energy you can fix this league over 5-10 seasons. If it is not worth it then start over. Post here or PM me and I will give you some ideas that should stop this problem either way.

Good Luck,
Tom (LP)

Le Grande Orange · 01-11-2017, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by USF

A healthy financially set up league will have natural inflation anyway set naturally by market demands.

Actually, no, it shouldn't, in that if overall league revenue is the same every year, then while salaries might fluctuate year-to-year, the trend overall is flat, since there is no additional money chasing after the same number of players. For salaries to rise, there has to be more money available for them to access, and that means more league revenue than in the previous season (or, alternatively, more money redirected from other areas of expense into the player salaries category).

Ideally, the financial model in OOTP would be able to recreate two types of financial scenarios:

(1) The 'steady-state universe' where revenue and salaries are flat over the long-term, thus allowing the user to enjoy a consistent league universe where whether it's the league's 15th or 115th season, the same player salary regime is in effect. (E.g. if you like the 1950s era, you could play it permanently in your league.)

(2) The 'inflationary universe' where over the long-term there is a rise in revenue and player salaries. This rise should be, in my view, based on the historical MLB reality, and the user could select where on that historical growth curve where they want to set their league. E.g. you could start your league's finances with the 1950s era, in which case you know things will increase gradually in your league for about twenty years or so, after which you'll start seeing exponential growth.

(One of the interesting 'what if' questions that arise is what kind of salary growth would have occurred had free agency not taken place? An examination of the real-life available data indicates that player salaries would have grown in response to league revenue growth, but at a slower rate than that with free agency. Also, the salary curve, that is, the ratio between highest, middle, and lowest paid players would be much flatter without free agency - the adoption of free agency greatly pushed up the disparity between highest, middle, and lowest paid players.)

NoOne · 01-11-2017, 07:32 PM

there's many reasons you are seeing what you are seeing based on your answers to TGH's questions.

you really need to use a max cash cap. keep it under 30M and you'll be okay... i prefer the default 10M. this mainly benefits the richer teams, so the divide that is there is that much larger... it also takes time for teams to build up a large cash reserve - this can cause temporary inflation until the league hits an equillibrium state.

if there are many rich teams, not jsut a large divide, any time more than one is interested in a player, you will get an elevated salary.. think about making a Bell curve distribution of Market Sizes. fat in the middle (maybe a range of 3 sizes in the middle?), roughly the same # as you make some poor and rich. if it's roughly broken evenly into 1/3rds or quartiles, that works too.. .just don't make it too extreme in distribution... having some 10-14+'s and 1-3's isn't a problem if you do it right. don't make a parabolic distribution curve of market sizes!

changing it midstream.. err mid-game... may need to assign fictional contracts to avoid any transition problems of old and enourmous amounts. also, the financial coefficient should be dropped back to 1.000 or whatever makes sense for what you are changing to.

You won't see the contract ratios adhered to in your financial environment they way it stands currently. too much money at the top along with massive cash reserves will cause oddities.

also, a ~3% inflation for the entire US market is fine to use... the industry inflation rate is WAY higher than the nation's. it should slow down, but just look at the new media contracts... it's not found the ceiling yet, at which point it will increase with normal inflation rates due to the currency's inevitable loss of value over time. (popularity cannot last forever - baseball will hit a wall sometime soon, and when they ignore it that will make the market correction that much worse)

MrBojangles · 01-18-2017, 12:51 AM

Reading the long, detailed responses on this post makes me wish I had paid better attention in economics class! Way too much thinking involved in this topic

PSUColonel · 02-22-2017, 03:18 AM

Botton line....revenue needs to be increase along with the salaries.

TGH-Adfabre · 02-22-2017, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

Botton line....revenue needs to be increase along with the salaries.

Salaries increase because of revenue.

PSUColonel · 02-22-2017, 08:03 PM

So what exactly messes things up if you decide to use inflation?

NoOne · 02-23-2017, 03:06 AM

if a # approaches 2billion, you need to use option to apply some factoring or whatever they labeled it in the game.. coefficient?

it will lop a few zeroes off behind-the-scenes, but you still see it displayed as if nothing has changed.

numbers are defined with a range in a program (the type determines what it is)... it can't do the math with number that large, because it simply doesn't have that many fingers to count on. it gets to 10, scratches its a@@ and maybe does something funky maybe just lops of something at the ends, lol. junk in, junk out.

01-09-2017, 08:07 PM	#1
rylinus Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Mar 2016 Posts: 29	Issue Involving Inflation and Free Agents I've been playing in a fictional league for some time, using inflation rates of 3-4% per year. I am now in year 2050. For the past 10-15 years (increasing more each year) a high number of quality free agents, including former MVPs and CY Winners, have gone unsigned because their demands were so high and teams ran out of money. It is no longer approaching accuracy to have so many of the best players sitting out seasons. It has also disrupted the whole way the offseason works. It makes no sense to even try to sign a free agent until the period between pre-season and spring training as demands come down precipitously, both in terms of years and $$. This has always been an issue in some form for OOTP (especially for relief pitchers, who always overvalue themselves early in the offseason) but now it is heavily impacting every free agent class. Anyone have any suggestions for how to fix this? Anyone else having similar issues? Curious if this is a bug in my universe or with the inflation system as a whole. Thanks!

01-09-2017, 08:21 PM	#2
Habsfan18 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Canada Posts: 2,245	Could just be an issue with your league financials - especially if teams are running out of money. There was a problem quite a few patches ago where top free agent position players were going un-signed before agreeing to cheap 1 year deals but Matt reworked some of the FA logic somehow and it's been working like a charm ever since. __________________ Tiburcio Suggia - Greatest of all-time? http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...-all-time.html OOTP and FHM Beta Tester

01-09-2017, 08:27 PM	#3
jpeters1734 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2014 Location: Juust a bit outside... Posts: 6,216	what happens is while media contracts go up, they aren't renewed right away. so player demands are going to be more than the team makes __________________ "Cannonball Coming!" Go Bucs!! Founder and League Caretaker of the Professional Baseball Circuit, www.probaseballcircuit.com An Un-Official Guide to Minor League Management in OOTP 21 Ratings Scale Conversion Cross-Reference Cheat Sheet

01-10-2017, 12:15 PM	#5
TGH-Adfabre Hall Of Famer Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 2,599	There is not enough information in your post to be certain what the problem is. Here are some things I would check to figure out what is wrong. Typically FA demands have to do with "loose" money in the league. If too much of this exists or is consolidated among a few teams it can throw other things out of whack. 1) Are the top teams making so much more money than the bottom teams that they price out the bottom teams? 2) What is your cash cap? 3) Do the majority of teams have money at the start of the offseason? Are they barely above water or in the red? 4) How far apart are the media contracts? I try to keep national media contracts close or the same. Then the income difference in ticket revenue, merchandising and local media contracts. This tends to stabilize finances. 5) How far apart are your budgets? If the top teams are 3, 4, 5+ times the bottom teams budgets there will probably be finance problems, The AI seems to have a hard time with too large of a spread. 6) Do the teams with money (assuming there are some) in need of the players that are unsigned and available in FA? I ran an online fictional league and our demands became insanely inflated for our artificial salary cap. We adjusted finances over about 5 seasons and pulled everything back to where we wanted it. Then I just had to spend a few minutes every other season tweaking things to keep them inline. Good luck, Tom (LP) __________________ You mock me, therefore I am My wife

01-10-2017, 12:55 PM	#6
USF All Star Starter Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Maple, ON - Canada Posts: 1,085	I never understood what the benefit of this feature is to be honest. A healthy financially set up league will have natural inflation anyway set naturally by market demands. __________________ Commissioner of the ABL http://www.usfleagues.net/website/

01-09-2017, 09:56 PM	#4
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,105	So is inflation not recommended?

01-10-2017, 03:21 PM	#7
NoOne Banned Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,273 Infractions: 0/2 (4)	inflation or not is a personal choice, it won't make much of a difference how the game works but rather just what you see.. so you have to adjust how you value performance/$ over time... e.g. if they say 1 war =6M now... in 10 years it will be larger and you must understand that in order to spend efficiently (please know i don't use WAR this (or anything important, lol) way and i don't suggest it, either, but it's a simple way to explain). if it's balanced correctly, inflation should not occur - or at least it is temporary in nature until you reach an equillibrium. if you currently see things continually increasing, that's just because it hasn't reached its 'average' yet (then fluctuates around that). TGH hit on just about everything (without going and looking in the game to loook for other things). max cash on hand is huge and relative budgets is a big deal relative to what is being seen. check out the estimated revenue on the financial settings page. this should tell you what a typicall high-end salary will by... 160-180 and you might see a 40m/year contract on a rare occasion, but should stay in the 30's as the top paying contract. if it's higher you will see higher contracts... if one or two teams have HUGE budgets, almost all FA will demand somethign too high to start... teams still bid on them, but hte human with a big budget gets screwed a bit to avoid the problem mentioned in a previous post with players doing 1 year cheap contracts. if you have a huge budget with lots of space, basically you do not want to offer a contract until it does down a bit... otherwise EVEN if you offer more than the other teams bidding, they won't like the Human's offer. you must guess when it's best to submit an offer. (example: i offered 28M for X years and the guy said it was unacceptable... 2 other teams were bidding.. i thoguht somethign was fishy because tehy couldn't afford what i offered.. so i "acted as" and looked... they were WAY below what i offered... i've never heard of an athlete choosing a contract that much smaller than the competition, lol. ~10m/year less than my offer... per year!, if i recall or near it -- but it's necesary if a large budget exists in teh league to avoid those problems stated above - plus it's typically a human who boosts up revenue for their team relative to the league... ~12-14+ market teams can handle 300M payrolls - this will substantially increase demands if a few teams are this high) also, make sure nothing in team budgets is nearing 2billion... max cash on hand + budget = 2bill is a bad bad thing... the program cannot handle numbers above (2^32)/ 2 (signed +/- = /2). that includes products, sums, quotients that you never see in the UI... the results of any math that needs to be done cannot be larger. (on the inflation screen, you can fix this by applying a /10^X to all values etc which keeps the values small, desipite how it's displayed on the screen.) Last edited by NoOne; 01-10-2017 at 03:29 PM.*

01-11-2017, 02:24 AM	#9
rylinus Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Mar 2016 Posts: 29	Thank you everyone for your responses on this. TGH-Adfabre, here are responses to your specific questions. 1) Are the top teams making so much more money than the bottom teams that they price out the bottom teams? Yes. There is a huge gap in earning power between top and bottom teams. See more details below. 2) What is your cash cap? I don't use a a cap. 3) Do the majority of teams have money at the start of the offseason? Are they barely above water or in the red? Most have some or a lot of $$ at the start of the offseason. A few are in the red. It just goes quickly. 4) How far apart are the media contracts? I try to keep national media contracts close or the same. Then the income difference in ticket revenue, merchandising and local media contracts. This tends to stabilize finances. There is a wide range. Top media contract is for $863 million, the bottom is at $232. 5) How far apart are your budgets? If the top teams are 3, 4, 5+ times the bottom teams budgets there will probably be finance problems, The AI seems to have a hard time with too large of a spread. The spread as of now is $711 million for the top team and $424 for the bottom. The payrolls range from 1.3 billion to $374 million. The average payroll is just over a billion dollars. Right now each team is averaging losing $160 million per year. 6) Do the teams with money (assuming there are some) in need of the players that are unsigned and available in FA? No, except for some rebuilding teams all the other teams spend all their money and it simply runs out by the time the preseason hits. To me it seems that the cost of contracts is simply out of control. Right now the top player in the league makes $274 million per year. The 25th highest paid player makes $132 million. The "average" quality player makes $42.5 million. A "good" quality player makes $85m per year. What seems to be happening is that between locking up players approaching free agency and then the early offseason, teams just run out of cash. I toyed with simply setting settings back to 2015 rates but it created an odd effect where new free agents/arbitration are getting those offers but current contracts remain at the inflated 2050 rates. I think I just need to call this experiment a bust. It is unfortunate but I don't know how else to salvage this league. Open to any suggestions any of you might have. My own two cents - it seems inflation should be a natural part of the game (salaries do go up each year in MLB) but for the purposes of OOTP should be much lower, say 1-2%, rather than trying to reflect realistic inflation.

01-11-2017, 07:32 PM	#14
NoOne Banned Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,273 Infractions: 0/2 (4)	there's many reasons you are seeing what you are seeing based on your answers to TGH's questions. you really need to use a max cash cap. keep it under 30M and you'll be okay... i prefer the default 10M. this mainly benefits the richer teams, so the divide that is there is that much larger... it also takes time for teams to build up a large cash reserve - this can cause temporary inflation until the league hits an equillibrium state. if there are many rich teams, not jsut a large divide, any time more than one is interested in a player, you will get an elevated salary.. think about making a Bell curve distribution of Market Sizes. fat in the middle (maybe a range of 3 sizes in the middle?), roughly the same # as you make some poor and rich. if it's roughly broken evenly into 1/3rds or quartiles, that works too.. .just don't make it too extreme in distribution... having some 10-14+'s and 1-3's isn't a problem if you do it right. don't make a parabolic distribution curve of market sizes! changing it midstream.. err mid-game... may need to assign fictional contracts to avoid any transition problems of old and enourmous amounts. also, the financial coefficient should be dropped back to 1.000 or whatever makes sense for what you are changing to. You won't see the contract ratios adhered to in your financial environment they way it stands currently. too much money at the top along with massive cash reserves will cause oddities. also, a ~3% inflation for the entire US market is fine to use... the industry inflation rate is WAY higher than the nation's. it should slow down, but just look at the new media contracts... it's not found the ceiling yet, at which point it will increase with normal inflation rates due to the currency's inevitable loss of value over time. (popularity cannot last forever - baseball will hit a wall sometime soon, and when they ignore it that will make the market correction that much worse) Last edited by NoOne; 01-11-2017 at 07:38 PM.

01-18-2017, 12:51 AM	#15
MrBojangles All Star Reserve Join Date: Apr 2016 Location: low and inside Posts: 568	Reading the long, detailed responses on this post makes me wish I had paid better attention in economics class! Way too much thinking involved in this topic

02-22-2017, 03:18 AM	#16
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,105	Botton line....revenue needs to be increase along with the salaries.

02-22-2017, 08:03 PM	#18
PSUColonel Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 13,105	So what exactly messes things up if you decide to use inflation?

02-23-2017, 03:06 AM	#19
NoOne Banned Join Date: Apr 2015 Posts: 7,273 Infractions: 0/2 (4)	if a # approaches 2billion, you need to use option to apply some factoring or whatever they labeled it in the game.. coefficient? it will lop a few zeroes off behind-the-scenes, but you still see it displayed as if nothing has changed. numbers are defined with a range in a program (the type determines what it is)... it can't do the math with number that large, because it simply doesn't have that many fingers to count on. it gets to 10, scratches its a@@ and maybe does something funky maybe just lops of something at the ends, lol. junk in, junk out.