U1/U2 are on a break for the United World Cup. New seasons will begin in November.
MSWL UNITEDMSWL U2TMVL
Tuesday, December 3rd, 2024 - 04:45:55 PM (gmt)
 
ball MSWL UNITED ② Season 38 // Landing
 
Home Auctions Blog Forum History Login Rules Scores Stats TablesTeams
 
Coaches Directory Donate Guest Rankings Schedule Updates Waitlist Wall
 

Join
MSWL
UNITED!

Recent Entries

Allan Sellers
10 Comments
Eduard Habermann
16 Comments
Matthew Fowler
5 Comments
James Tucker
11 Comments
John Holden
11 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
9 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
Vick Hall
2 Comments
Vick Hall
8 Comments
Allan Sellers
3 Comments
Allan Sellers
9 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
13 Comments
Vick Hall
13 Comments
Vick Hall
19 Comments
Craig Bucknall
13 Comments
Jason Halpin
19 Comments
John Holden
11 Comments
Vick Hall
13 Comments
Phil McIntosh
6 Comments
Vick Hall
8 Comments
John Holden
9 Comments
Vick Hall
8 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Vick Hall
9 Comments
Matthew Fowler
9 Comments
Jason Halpin
13 Comments
Allan Sellers
23 Comments
Allan Sellers
17 Comments
Vick Hall
6 Comments
Vick Hall
8 Comments
John Holden
1 Comment
Vick Hall
4 Comments
Vick Hall
3 Comments
Eduard Habermann
6 Comments
Eduard Habermann
3 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Matthew Fowler
32 Comments
Allan Sellers
17 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
Vick Hall
7 Comments
Vick Hall
6 Comments
Jason Halpin
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Vick Hall
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Jason Halpin
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
14 Comments
Vick Hall
15 Comments
Vick Hall
2 Comments
Vick Hall
3 Comments
Allan Sellers
12 Comments
Allan Sellers
14 Comments
Allan Sellers
19 Comments
John Blazel
27 Comments
Allan Sellers
19 Comments
John Blazel
8 Comments
Jason Halpin
8 Comments
Allan Sellers
3 Comments
Vick Hall
7 Comments
Mike Jaffe
6 Comments
Vick Hall
10 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Craig Bucknall
6 Comments
Craig Bucknall
7 Comments
Bryce Kalmbach
13 Comments
Stewart Miller
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
David Blair
1 Comment
David Blair
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Vick Hall
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
15 Comments
Vick Hall
3 Comments
Davide Brambilla
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
3 Comments
Andy Shaw
7 Comments
Roberto Ciccotelli
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
16 Comments
Steve Turner
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
18 Comments
Martyn Hathaway
5 Comments
Vick Hall
3 Comments
Vick Hall
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
11 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Steve Turner
9 Comments
Tim Batth
4 Comments
Paul Cockayne
1 Comment
John Holden
1 Comment
Carl Oakes
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
1 Comment
Steve Turner
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Al Sellers
5 Comments
Vick Hall
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
1 Comment
Dave Dowson
1 Comment
Dave Dowson
1 Comment
Andy Bate
4 Comments
Dave Dowson
1 Comment
Gareth Cruz
3 Comments
Allan Sellers
7 Comments
Dave Dowson
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Davide Brambilla
5 Comments
Andy Bate
11 Comments
Davide Brambilla
6 Comments
Vick Hall
8 Comments
Davide Brambilla
13 Comments
Al Sellers
9 Comments
Craig Bucknall
11 Comments
Al Sellers
8 Comments
Steve Turner
4 Comments
Al Sellers
3 Comments
Steve Turner
7 Comments
Dave Dowson
5 Comments
Al Sellers
1 Comment
Bill Bushby
2 Comments
Martin Burroughs
3 Comments
Dave Dowson
1 Comment
Martin Burroughs
4 Comments
Martin Burroughs
7 Comments
Al Sellers
10 Comments
Craig Bucknall
10 Comments
Al Sellers
10 Comments
Dave Dowson
1 Comment
Dave Dowson
4 Comments
John Holden
1 Comment
Martin Burroughs
9 Comments
Rob Peterson
2 Comments
Graham Wilkes
3 Comments
Steve Turner
16 Comments
Simon Bijker
4 Comments
Al Sellers
17 Comments
Mike Parnaby
11 Comments
Al Sellers
13 Comments
Mark Stretch
10 Comments
Carl Oakes
9 Comments
Al Sellers
9 Comments
Mike Parnaby
13 Comments
Al Sellers
9 Comments
Al Sellers
1 Comment
Mike Parnaby
16 Comments
Craig Bucknall
21 Comments
Carl Oakes
10 Comments
Craig Bucknall
6 Comments
Graham Wilkes
5 Comments
Kevin Martin
2 Comments
Steve Turner
5 Comments
Craig Bucknall
20 Comments
Craig Bucknall
6 Comments
Kevin Martin
16 Comments
Rob Lye
8 Comments
Martin Burroughs
1 Comment
Brian Beerman
12 Comments
Al Sellers
3 Comments
Martin Burroughs
8 Comments
 
Tax Rule Change Suggestion
Posted by Eduard Habermann on Saturday, Jun. 29th, 2024 at 8:15 AM

No worries, I like taxes - in simulations at least.

What I don't like is their formula:

3,500k to 4,499k pays tax at 10% of its bank balance

 

This means that if you happen to end up near the 3500k mark, you might have

3499k pre-tax => 0 tax => 3499k post-tax

or

3500k pre-tax => 350 tax => 3150k post-tax

 

Ofc you can micro-manage this, e.g. by avoiding participion money and the like.

But that's quite likely not the intention.

 

So a simple alternative suggestion:

Adjust the tax rule, so that each additional income can not result in less money post-tax.

For the most common mark, this would simply mean that each balance between 3500k and 3889k would end up with 3500k.

Readers Comments

personally we prefer the idea of a wealth redistribition tax. The tax man takes everything above 3500k and redistributes equally it to those poor teams with balances less than 1000K

Vick Hall on Saturday, Jun. 29th, 2024 at 11:20 AM
 

I'd prefer a tax (50%?) on the difference between what you have and 3500k rather than 100% which Eduard's suggestions mostly amounts to.

I would definitely vote against distributing to the poorer teams.

Steve Turner on Saturday, Jun. 29th, 2024 at 7:06 PM
 

I don't like the proposed change - it's supposed to encourage you from not going over, not to cap the amount you have.

John Holden on Saturday, Jun. 29th, 2024 at 8:35 PM
 

Here's some background on the taxing rules setup...

Originally this was setup (maybe like season 3 or so of U1?; I don't know but is was early on) because I noticed people were hoarding cash.  I felt like that was not a good thing so I put in the rule we have.  I (mostly) remember to apply the rule when people surpass the threshold.  I am guilty of sometimes forgetting.  I would like to automate it.  

I'm open to options on this.  Thanks for the ideas so far.  First a TMVL Primer...

================

In TMVL we do it this way:

a) Each team gets 500 RPs at end of season (RPs/Recruiting Points are the k/cash equivalent for U1/U2).

b) There are some (though not large) RP bonuses at end of season for Cup/league finishes

c) Teams do sign "walk on" players just before end of season which can reduce RP amounts

d) When I run end of season after all of the above if anyone is above 2500 RPs their RPs are reset to 2500.  No XX% tax.  Just a raw number to keep teams from hoarding Recruiting Points.  

Its not perfect.  It can be a little unpredictable and you might get over 2500 with all your winnings.  But I'm not going to feel bad if you do.  So in general I like the approach and it is automated 100%.  😎

================

For U1 and U2 I'd really like to get to something similar...

a) I'd like to automate it (so I don't forget/have to think; see above).

b) I'd like to run it at the end of the season as part of the end season/aging code after teams earn any competition/player bonuses

c) I'd like to keep it to a simple query: If bank is greater than XXXX set bank to 3500

d) I will not add it for this season (current rules would apply).  But I'd like to add it for the end of seasons 49 (U1) and 39 (U2)

As always please feel free to talk me down off the ledge.  However I see this as something that should be rare and keep teams from hoarding too much.

I'd really like to take the approach above, but for #c I need to know what XXXX is.

3500k?

3750k?

4000k?

Something else?

I'd prefer to keep a 3500k threshold heading into a new season.  But you can argue me out of that number if you'd like.  

Allan Sellers on Sunday, Jun. 30th, 2024 at 11:47 PM
 

I would be okay with end of season, post-bonuses, any team over 3500k gets reduced to 3500k. If a team didn't spend more in auctions or trades, that's on them. It does avoid the scenario Eduard presents where a team might avoid commenting or participating in the prediction league to avoid getting extra cash in the last two sessions.  That seems contrary to the goal of more manager participation.

Also, I'm in favor of Al automating this it's easier on Al in the future off-seasons. Good idea, Al.  Get Al on that when you have the chance.

Kevin Martin on Monday, Jul. 1st, 2024 at 12:14 AM
 

For U1 and U2 I'd really like to get to something similar...

a) I'd like to automate it (so I don't forget/have to think; see above).

b) I'd like to run it at the end of the season as part of the end season/aging code after teams earn any competition/player bonuses

c) I'd like to keep it to a simple query: If bank is greater than XXXX set bank to 3500

Ok, a and c are quite trivially achieved ...

case bank of.

3500 <= bank < 4500.

bank_post_tax_1 = 3500

bank_post_tax_2 = bank * .9

 

4500 <= bank < 5500.

bank_post_tax_1 = 4500 * .9

bank_post_tax_2 = bank * .8

 

5500 <= bank.

bank_post_tax_1 = 5500 * .8

bank_post_tax_2 = bank * .7

 

 

bank := max( bank_post_tax_1, bank_post_tax_2 )

So the coding is anything but complex for my suggestion.

The current ruleset would just set

bank_post_tax_1 := 0

in any case.

This would result in eliminating the extra payments for e.g. 3500 vs 3499 - and avoiding the (bad) micromanagement needs, like no participation.

 

Eduard Habermann on Tuesday, Jul. 2nd, 2024 at 3:03 PM
 

b) is a rather bad idea.

The bank account after all bonuses cannot be reliably calculated till round 8. And after that there's simply (next to) nothing you can do anymore to gauge it.

WEL e.g. can currently not seriously estimate our bonus money this season - and thus the resulting tax base.

Ofc there are ways of "parking" money for tax evasion, but they are rather boring and tedious - and I actually want to play a football, not a banking sim.

Eduard Habermann on Tuesday, Jul. 2nd, 2024 at 3:08 PM
 

Summing up: I like the current system, I just saw a minor flaw in it - which is easily corrected.

Any major changes should be introduced very carefully and with time to adapt - otherwise some people (me included) might feel robbed, when their account shows up with 1000k less.

Eduard Habermann on Tuesday, Jul. 2nd, 2024 at 3:13 PM
 

To honest cash has never been an issue for me in this game so I dont pay that much attention and usually fall foul of the taxman.

I'd be in favor of the 3500 max but before bonus paid for competition or player bonus's.

My thinking is you should be punished for hoarding or financial mismanagment but not punished on performance

James White on Wednesday, Jul. 10th, 2024 at 6:07 PM
 

I am guilty of what Eduard brings up. I wind up hoarding cash by accident -- mostly due to being busy and not considering that cash is building up -- so I sometimes have a scramble to buy a player just to buy one and/or stop commenting to stop earning cash. Mostly I take this to be that a weakness in my game that I am not effectively using my cash to build my best team. In general, I agree with a cap (and I think I like the idesa of just slashing to 3500 -- or whetever the number is -- at the end of the season). I am not a big innovator, but there coiuld also be cool stuff like "other" things to spend cash on -- maybe stadium improvements, which maybe slightly boost home advantage (but that may be hard to implement and maintain?) 

Mike Cabral on Wednesday, Jul. 10th, 2024 at 10:43 PM
 

I am guilty of what Eduard brings up. I wind up hoarding cash by accident -- mostly due to being busy and not considering that cash is building up -- so I sometimes have a scramble to buy a player just to buy one and/or stop commenting to stop earning cash. Mostly I take this to be that a weakness in my game that I am not effectively using my cash to build my best team. In general, I agree with a cap (and I think I like the idesa of just slashing to 3500 -- or whetever the number is -- at the end of the season). I am not a big innovator, but there coiuld also be cool stuff like "other" things to spend cash on -- maybe stadium improvements, which maybe slightly boost home advantage (but that may be hard to implement and maintain?) 

Mike Cabral on Thursday, Jul. 11th, 2024 at 12:29 AM
 

Firstly I wasn´t being entirely serious in regards to the redistribution of wealth. It would not for certain help the weakest teams and make them more competitive.

Secondly I agree with the sentiment expressed by a few other managers in that it seems fairer to apply the tax before end of season bonuses are added as it would kind of penalise success.

Lastly 3500K seems like a reasonable cap. Anything higher to a degree kind of defeats the purpose in discouraging people hoarding cash.

Vick Hall on Thursday, Jul. 11th, 2024 at 9:45 AM
 

I wonder how big of an issue this really is. 

How many times does the Tax Man come per season on average?

How often do teams get within striking distance of the tax bracket? (3000-3499k)

If we're only talking about like 1-3 times per season AND we don't have a ton of teams that come close to the threshold on a regular basis, then I'd be very in favor of Al's simply end of season solution. There's no need to engineer something complicated - KISS principle.

If, however, it's more like 5+ times per season that the tax man comes, and there's like 5 teams each session that are close to the threshold, then I could definitely see a need to make a more complicated system.

Rob Peterson on Saturday, Jul. 13th, 2024 at 3:07 PM
 

Definitely agree that taxnig, in whatever form, should take place before end season bonuses are applied.  It leaves managers more in control of their destiny, which is a good thing.

I don't have strong feelings about the cash limit, 3500 seems reasonable.

I would prefer some sort of variable tax rate, so balances above 3500 are taxed at 50% (or whatever), which allows managers to do some stockpiling, a legitimate tactic in my view, but the tax rate needs to be high enough to make stockpiling unattractive in nearly all situations.  However, keeping it simple has its attractions, so just reducing balances to 3500 is not unreasonable.

Paul Cockayne on Friday, Jul. 19th, 2024 at 10:57 AM
 

I love C-Ball's post. "Oh, I always have this problem of soooooooo much cash! Sometimes I have to buy players just to spend money, I need to build luxury boxes so I can earn more cash!" How many times can he say "stockpile"  with a straight face? He even posted twice to rub it in!!!!!

Phil McIntosh on Monday, Jul. 22nd, 2024 at 4:34 AM
 
 
 
Terms and Conditions