BuzzerBeater Forums

Can anyone tell me what the importance of experience is?

Also is experience is a primary difference in having NT prospects play for the U21 NT?

Why isn't experience a transferlist searchable skill?

I'm just wondering how effective a team of highly experienced older and less skilled players are against inexperienced higher skilled players.

Any information is appreciated.

Can anyone tell me what the importance of experience is?

Experience can come into play during critical situations, like in the final seconds of a close game, or can be the difference whether a player takes a bad shot or passes it. These are the only examples I can think of, and I'm sure someone else can expand on this.

Also is experience is a primary difference in having NT prospects play for the U21 NT?

Experience is less important to NT and U21 managers, as far as I know. Sure they want most, if not all their players to have nice EXP, but it isn't necessarily a deal breaker.

Why isn't experience a transfer list searchable skill?

I'm not sure. Maybe the BBs didn't think it was that important to add it in.

I'm just wondering how effective a team of highly experienced older and less skilled players are against inexperienced higher skilled players.

As for this question, I am also not sure. Other factors such as GS/DMI, enthusiasm, foul trouble, as well as unlucky/unlikely occurrences could change the course of the hypothetical game.

To the last two questions- while you can't search directly by experience, it's pretty much directly correlated to age- if you want a player with higher EXP, generally search for older players.

My perception has always been that skills trumps experience, but having those extra experience points is a bonus in the same way that HCA or PR manager might give you a boost. It's not enough to make up a major skill discrepancy, but it can help separate two otherwise equally balanced teams.

Thanks I was hoping experience may add some value to having older players on your team, but it doesn't seem to have much of an affect unless you are playing players of equal skill, gs, etc.

I also play hattrick (a soccer management game) so I tend to get the game engine effects confused.

Good point. maybe if I added it as part of skill sum.

For example when I calculate a players skill level I do...

(sum of 4 primary skills * 3 ) + (sum of 4 secondary skills * 2) + (sum of 4 tertiary skills * 1) + experience = total sum of skills for that position

It maybe flawed but I think it gives me a little more perspective on what skills can be more productive at a certain position.

Works in theory if you're trying to whittle down a large group of prospects, but I think there are too many intricacies to use this as an effective method to evaluate individual players. For example (obviously an extreme here), you'd have a player with 5 JS/5 JR/16 OD show up with the same number of primary points as a 9/6/12 player when the latter would be more effective. You don't wind up purchasing all too many players, so you might be best figure on what build you're looking for and go from there, rather than trying the shotgun approach to get 1 player that adds up to 75 skill points, or whatever.

Good point. maybe if I added it as part of skill sum.

For example when I calculate a players skill level I do...

(sum of 4 primary skills * 3 ) + (sum of 4 secondary skills * 2) + (sum of 4 tertiary skills * 1) + experience = total sum of skills for that position

It maybe flawed but I think it gives me a little more perspective on what skills can be more productive at a certain position.

That's a decent way to get a rough estimate, but it's a different game than Hattrick and the value of individual skills matters more than just how they contribute to sector ratings. My philosophy here has always been more that I don't want any skills below a certain level regardless of position, so things like handling and driving even for big men for me has to be at or above 7 for the most part (though I've taken somewhat lower in the past when necessary, but only in rare situations).

I haven't watched a ton of games BUT when the game is close or when there are key plays, the higher experienced guy seems to take/hit that important shot. It may not show up on the stat-line as much, but it seems to help win close games. Using more experienced players I have won two of two OT games and several close games. I haven't lost a game in awhile that I was predicted to win and I think experience helps in making sure winnable games are won.

Also the low experience (1) guys seem to make bonehead mistakes. Like fouling a guy going for a half-court at the end of the quarter.

So overall the impact seems to become apparent when it "needs" to be. However, its not going to make a sucky all-around player perform well. It also doesn't seem to have an effect the whole game. Just more important phases of the game. So overall stats matter, but I think a lot of people underestimate the importance of experience.

Just FYI I deal mainly with very high experience players and very low experience players. My tremendous experience shooter is clutch for me in a lot of games. Whereas my rookies will make obvious mistakes in pressure situations. Most of my starters are proficient or better, and my trainees are obviously low.

I like dealing with older players because the price you pay to aquire is cheaper. I think the experience is a nice bonus to have as well.

Last edited by lawrenman at 7/11/2013 3:54:45 PM

I like dealing with older players because the price you pay to aquire is cheaper. I think the experience is a nice bonus to have as well.

I think I may enjoy that same perk if I buy a non-trainee before the playoffs.

Works in theory if you're trying to whittle down a large group of prospects, but I think there are too many intricacies to use this as an effective method to evaluate individual players. For example (obviously an extreme here), you'd have a player with 5 JS/5 JR/16 OD show up with the same number of primary points as a 9/6/12 player when the latter would be more effective. You don't wind up purchasing all too many players, so you might be best figure on what build you're looking for and go from there, rather than trying the shotgun approach to get 1 player that adds up to 75 skill points, or whatever.

Excellent point. I'm be more cautious in judging all players by these standards.

Also, depending on what I run tactically, a positions main skills could differ especially if my players are playing defense on a different position.

This formula may need some fine tuning but I think it might suffice as a first check.

That's a decent way to get a rough estimate, but it's a different game than Hattrick and the value of individual skills matters more than just how they contribute to sector ratings. My philosophy here has always been more that I don't want any skills below a certain level regardless of position, so things like handling and driving even for big men for me has to be at or above 7 for the most part (though I've taken somewhat lower in the past when necessary, but only in rare situations).

wow I have a center right now that I started training at 18 yrs and a salary of 1,600$. I know I'm cringing as well. Now he is pitful in all guard skills and 8+ in most big man skills.

We all make mistakes in BB adolescence lol. However, I think you are absolutely right. It is important to be selective with your players and having a plan on how to use the players you attain will probably give me the most success.