BuzzerBeater Forums

Very good topic as I always train players and probably enjoy that part of this game the most.

I think this is what the vast majority of users would claim.
I cannot think how it is enjoyable to play with rosters averaging 34+ years old, mirrored in Utopia top league. I simply don't think it is.

To add on the matter, I still think an extra something on homegrown players would make the difference within the giving importance to training topic. A granted 18yo allstar on new users falls short in my opinion.

I'm against the idea of giving boost to homegrown players, it would be too much for BB players, as someone stated already.

Some other kind of reward would be nice. Maybe cut down their salary a bit, or restructure the merchandise to gain more from homegrown players?

Very nice topic Lemon!

My priority would be to attract more people training skills, rather than just satisfying further those who already train but the number of trainees wouldn't increase much.

So, one option would be to be able to train both skills and GS.

If that can't happen, firstly i would set a very specific weekly minute range, within which a skill trained player would see his GS/DMI behave as if he was trained in GS.
It is unacceptable what is happening so far.
This way those who train but are frustrated with the current disadvantage(and give up) will happily keep on training, while at the same time, those who train GS but manage their minutes, will have a motive to start skill training.

Then, i would guarranty that when "strictly follow depth chart", "let them play" and player set as starter/backup/reserve, are all applied, then the player, no matter what, plays 48 minutes (unless he's injured of course).

I know(we all pretty much do) users who paid for a Utopia team, just so they can train three (usually home)players and couldn't do just that. Without worries about league position, promotion/demotion etc.
All they wanted was to train three youngsters and they couldn't. Others quit their team, others stuck to one trainee, others just abandoned training all together.

Lastly, in that first packet of measures, i would do something about the number of existing trainers, their salaries and of course the fact that their salary increases every week.
It's all a travesty as it stands. Simple as that.

On the 48 minutes for training thing - how about making it so a trainee now only needs 36 minutes in the required position/s, as long as they get 48 minutes in the week overall.

It's only a minor change really but would eliminate most of the issues with foul outs and nonsensical last few minute subs (which are about the most frustrating thing in BB imo). Additionally, it may mean you'd have one or two more trainees taking part in league games (at least as a sub) rather than just scrimmages. Possibly more realistic in some way?

Even better than removing it, would be to plain the field by adjusting GS training according to the trainer level.
Not lke what it is now, that you get the same results in GS whether you have a basic or a world class trainer.
Make it so what you get now from GS training to equal with a level 7 trainer and let's see how many will stick to GS regardless.
I would very much like to see users paying millions every season or two for purchasing low salary trainers(lvl 6/7), or the salary of a NT player...

To be honest, i would prefer it(the training) removed as well.
I believe there should be GS in the game, but regulated stricktly by weekly minutes.

On the 48 minutes for training thing - how about making it so a trainee now only needs 36 minutes in the required position/s, as long as they get 48 minutes in the week overall.

It's only a minor change really but would eliminate most of the issues with foul outs and nonsensical last few minute subs (which are about the most frustrating thing in BB imo). Additionally, it may mean you'd have one or two more trainees taking part in league games (at least as a sub) rather than just scrimmages. Possibly more realistic in some way?

Why not make it 24 minutes (one-half of a game per week)?

That way 1-position training could train up to 6 players and 2-position training could train up to 12 players. Combine it with an increased number of Level 5-7 trainers on the market.

Can you imagine how much better/higher skilled players would end up on the market with that? Instead of cranking out 1-2 80 TSP trainees a team could generate 3-4 or more. Multiply that over enough teams and the prices on the market will eventually reach normal levels.

The issue I see right now is that anywhere from 50-75% of the players on a team's roster get no skill training at all. that just seems like a foolish system to perpetuate.

Can you imagine how much better/higher skilled players would end up on the market with that? Instead of cranking out 1-2 80 TSP trainees a team could generate 3-4 or more. Multiply that over enough teams and the prices on the market will eventually reach normal levels.

If everyone get richer, the poor stays poor.

If the players get better, once a good player will not be as dominant as before and you will just need to buy better players for what will still be considered high prices.

I fail to see how increasing the TSP on a larger number players at once is a bad thing?

Being able to 1-position train 6 players instead of 3 will help teams be competitive sooner through training. If they then sell 1-2 of those they still have a chance to be competitive rather than start all over from scratch.

Plus the teams who buy those players they sell will get higher skilled players.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Or, perhaps separate skills training from player positions and allow each player to be trained in a different skill each week. Let me train my C in Passing and my PG in Inside Shot at the same time.

Either way the problem I see is there are far to many players taking up space with no possibility of being appropriately trained. Ridiculous