BuzzerBeater Forums

In BB One of the most important issues is training.

it is one of the things that allows you to win at a sporting or economic level and the rule is clear, a player has to play 48 minutes in his position.

Because of how the game engine is made, the most feasible is to put the player in 1 match for 48 minutes.

Otherwise you will lose 1 player if you try to train him in more than 1 match (if you do a Unipositional train).

That said, given that the game engine does not allow many alternatives to make training efficient, the aggressive factor must be taken into account when training.

What would happen if people didn't buy those players with the aggressive factor?

I hope they renew the issue of fouls or at least that some BB- can comment on this issue since we have 2 threads in the forum (https://www.buzzerbeater.com/community/forum/read.aspx?thr...)

and the people have to be heard.

Have a good day




Last edited by THANKS FOR ALL BB at 1/23/2022 9:22:41 AM

I fully agree with this.

If the issue is that aggressive players get fouled out too quickly in competitive games, the easy solution is to use "sit them" instead of "let them play" and they'll play 25-30' in most games.

If the issue is that aggressive players get fouled out before completing 48' of training, my opinion is that it is good for the game. As it happens in real life, where many top picks in the NBA draft don't end up being good players because they have long-term injuries, because they can't stand the pressure or because they don't have a good lifestyle, the way that Buzzerbeater imitates this is through fouls. Or would we prefer 1-season injuries or brutal skill/performance drops for no reason? That would also be realistic.

Not all 18 HOF players should be able to grow at the same pace, and quick ejections are one of the few ways to achieve this and therefore introduce some degree of uncertainty in the game. Uncertainty is at the core of BB (and of real basketball) and I believe it is one of the keys to its long-term success. Aggressive players should be (and I believe they already are) cheaper than non-aggressive players because the buyer assumes a risk.




Last edited by Darkonako at 1/24/2022 5:55:27 AM

If the issue is that aggressive players get fouled out too quickly in competitive games, the easy solution is to use "sit them" instead of "let them play" and they'll play 25-30' in most games.

Except that it's not realistic at all. BB is meant to be realistic, as realistic as it can in terms of GE.
Take player X who plays for team Y in NBA (real world). In a given game, he has 3 fouls in the first quarter. He gets benched then plays again in Q2 and, hopefully he calmed down and will still be able to play in Q3 and Q4 if needed. This makes total sense.

In BB, some of the most aggressive players will be benched, then play again in Q2, make one more foul, which will send them back to the bench, and he'll most likely make one more foul in Q3 before being sent out in Q4. Total minutes played could very well be under 20 even though he got benched, and this is because under the current GE, aggressive players do not adapt at all, which is pure nonsense.

My point is, with a very aggressive players you have the two following options :

1) "sit them" and he'll eventually foul out late in the game, after playing like 20 minutes
2) "let them play" and he'll foul out after 20 minutes, that is, in the middle of Q2

Neither of these options make any sense, specifically when you consider the fact that aggressive players foul out early in the game repeatedly.

My evidence is that my starting C fouled out 7 times in 36 games last season, which is 20% of his games.

Does that make sense to you? Is it realistic?

Basically I can assume that he won’t be able to finish one game out of five. That’s not a basketball player, that’s a serial killer.