Salary Settings Not Working for Managers

DreamTeams · 06-09-2006, 06:42 PM

I notice that coaches are getting paid high salaries even though the average is set. For example I set the average manager salary to 85K. But, in the game some head mangers are making 250K. Is this how things are supposed to work or is it a bug?

Also I checked my player salaries and all are within the parameters that I set in the game set up. So, looks like the parameters I set for managers is being ignored. Anyone else notice this?

Here are my salary settings...

Avg Coach 85k
Min Player Salary 50k
Super Star 200k
Star 100k
Good 80k
Above Avg 75k
Avg 60k
Below Avg 56k
Fair 52k
Poor 50k

Thanks for checking into this.

DreamTeams · 06-13-2006, 12:26 AM

quick bump

Raidergoo · 06-14-2006, 04:30 PM

This seems working as designed. The player parameters don't affect a coach salary.

Some managers ( he who shall not be named in St. Louis ) get paid far more than average.

DreamTeams · 06-14-2006, 11:05 PM

Hmmm. That's strange, because the game has 'Average Coach Salary' parameter to set. Here's a thought...

Perhaps the 'average coach salary' parameter does not apply to head managers but under coaches. As I take a glance at the personnel on each team I notice that head managers and GM's earn around the same amount as super star players in my league. So their salaries must be based on the 'super star player salary' perameter. If that is the case then I'm good with that. I don't mind my league managers standing toe-to-toe with their super star players, salary wise. I like this.

DreamTeams · 06-14-2006, 11:19 PM

On second glance I notice that bench coaches make about the same amount as the super stars, too. But other under coaches make less and some far less. But, the good thing is that coaches salaries are within the paramaters set for players. So, if your range for players salaries are set at $50k to 200k, the managers will be paid within that parameter also. Upper managers and the GM being paid around the highest amount set.

endgame · 06-14-2006, 11:26 PM

Apparently that's why I hadn't noticed it as a problem. I always dial down my Superstar and Star salaries regardless of the coefficient.

John · 06-15-2006, 06:42 PM

UMMM... there is a player salary average as well... but its no problem to see super star players making superstar salaries. Why should it not be the same with coaches. After all, it is an "average".I would bet, if you added up all the salaries of all your personnel (minor league included), and divided by the number of personnell (which if i remember my math, is how an average is calculated), it would be close to what you set as the average (unless, of course, you loaded your teams with all high end staff... but give it a try on a few teams that the AI staffed).

remember... 4 of 3 people have difficulty with fractions!!!!!

DreamTeams · 06-16-2006, 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John

UMMM... there is a player salary average as well... but its no problem to see super star players making superstar salaries. Why should it not be the same with coaches. After all, it is an "average".I would bet, if you added up all the salaries of all your personnel (minor league included), and divided by the number of personnell (which if i remember my math, is how an average is calculated), it would be close to what you set as the average (unless, of course, you loaded your teams with all high end staff... but give it a try on a few teams that the AI staffed).

remember... 4 of 3 people have difficulty with fractions!!!!!

No need. I play in god mode so all of my teams are staffed by the AI. As long as the salaries for managers are being set within the parameters set for players, I'm thrilled with that.:-)

battists · 07-06-2006, 04:41 PM

Hi guys,

Sorry for joining the party so late.

I've done some testing on this in my beta of Patch 2, and I don't see any issues right now. I set the coach salary average to 85K in a fictional league, started the game, and all of the coaches are making right in that area, with the higher-ranked ones making a decent chunk more and the weakest ones making far less.

So, for now, I'm going to mark this as "claimed fixed." We can certainly discuss more if you have a specific scenario you'd like me to try!

Thanks,

Steve

06-09-2006, 06:42 PM	#1
DreamTeams Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 2,522	Salary Settings Not Working for Managers I notice that coaches are getting paid high salaries even though the average is set. For example I set the average manager salary to 85K. But, in the game some head mangers are making 250K. Is this how things are supposed to work or is it a bug? Also I checked my player salaries and all are within the parameters that I set in the game set up. So, looks like the parameters I set for managers is being ignored. Anyone else notice this? Here are my salary settings... Avg Coach 85k Min Player Salary 50k Super Star 200k Star 100k Good 80k Above Avg 75k Avg 60k Below Avg 56k Fair 52k Poor 50k Thanks for checking into this. __________________

06-13-2006, 12:26 AM	#2
DreamTeams Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 2,522	quick bump __________________

06-14-2006, 11:05 PM	#4
DreamTeams Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 2,522	Hmmm. That's strange, because the game has 'Average Coach Salary' parameter to set. Here's a thought... Perhaps the 'average coach salary' parameter does not apply to head managers but under coaches. As I take a glance at the personnel on each team I notice that head managers and GM's earn around the same amount as super star players in my league. So their salaries must be based on the 'super star player salary' perameter. If that is the case then I'm good with that. I don't mind my league managers standing toe-to-toe with their super star players, salary wise. I like this. __________________ Last edited by DreamTeams; 06-14-2006 at 11:06 PM.

06-14-2006, 11:19 PM	#5
DreamTeams Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 2,522	On second glance I notice that bench coaches make about the same amount as the super stars, too. But other under coaches make less and some far less. But, the good thing is that coaches salaries are within the paramaters set for players. So, if your range for players salaries are set at $50k to 200k, the managers will be paid within that parameter also. Upper managers and the GM being paid around the highest amount set. __________________

06-14-2006, 11:26 PM	#6
endgame Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 16,842	Apparently that's why I hadn't noticed it as a problem. I always dial down my Superstar and Star salaries regardless of the coefficient. __________________ "Try again. Fail again. Fail better." -- Samuel Beckett _____________________________________________

06-14-2006, 04:30 PM	#3
Raidergoo Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 9,005	This seems working as designed. The player parameters don't affect a coach salary. Some managers ( he who shall not be named in St. Louis ) get paid far more than average.

06-15-2006, 06:42 PM	#7
John Minors (Double A) Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Pittsburgh PA Posts: 186	UMMM... there is a player salary average as well... but its no problem to see super star players making superstar salaries. Why should it not be the same with coaches. After all, it is an "average".I would bet, if you added up all the salaries of all your personnel (minor league included), and divided by the number of personnell (which if i remember my math, is how an average is calculated), it would be close to what you set as the average (unless, of course, you loaded your teams with all high end staff... but give it a try on a few teams that the AI staffed). remember... 4 of 3 people have difficulty with fractions!!!!!

07-06-2006, 04:41 PM	#9
battists Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 18,506 Blog Entries: 7	Hi guys, Sorry for joining the party so late. I've done some testing on this in my beta of Patch 2, and I don't see any issues right now. I set the coach salary average to 85K in a fictional league, started the game, and all of the coaches are making right in that area, with the higher-ranked ones making a decent chunk more and the weakest ones making far less. So, for now, I'm going to mark this as "claimed fixed." We can certainly discuss more if you have a specific scenario you'd like me to try! Thanks, Steve