BuzzerBeater Forums

Here's a remainder of how some big changes in the past 20 seasons have caused long-term issues in the game. And I'm not saying these shouldn't have been implemented, because I like them, but that the consequences of these changes should have been realized beforehand, and dealt with much prior, and much better.

1. Gym and youth trainers. They brought more interest in the training, which caused trainer prices to go up, and most importantly, they caused inflation of good players on the market, and made it much more difficult for new users whose main source of income always came from selling trainees. Their trainees aren't trained with these upgrades in the first few seasons, and are thus worse than their competition on the market.

This issue that the game became way too slow for new users was brought to BBs many times, and eventually they realized that they had to do something about it. So they improved starting arena for new users, made their initial roster better, and as far as I know, they are still contemplating further boosts, since the ones made aren't enough.

2. Psychologists. They made short rosters even easier to manage, as did the training court, because the extra time needed to train FT could all be used to train ST & GS. Because of these changes we reached the point where most B3 contenders played with only 6 players.

This issue was brought to BBs season after season, and eventually they decided to do something about it. Without asking for opinions or suggestions, they implemented “Player Exhaustion Effect”, which created a whole bunch of problems regarding training. After a huge backlash from the community, they disabled it until they were able to ”fix” it by changing the amount of minutes specific trainees required. So now if you have 3 trainees ages 19, 26 & 27, the first one needs 45min, the second one 48min, and the third one 40min. A total mess!

Furthermore, the exhaustion effect is unrealistic, because even players with the highest ST play like they are dying after 40-42min on the field. While in rl, we have players like James, Butler, Tatum, Jokic, Murray who are able to play 43-48min on a high level in their "match of the season" games.

This had to be one of the worst changes ever made in bb. Should there have been a change to fix short-roster domination? Absolutely. Should this particular change have been implemented? Absolutely not, because there had to be better choices.

3. Training courts. A few seasons after it's implementation, 90% of players rarely ever missed a FT.

This issue was discussed for many seasons, until finally BBs decided to “fix” the new issue by changing how FT works, so the % would be more realistic.

However, we still have players with FT 30+ without even training FT once in their career, which is dumb. Whether or not that will be fixed in the future, remains to be seen.

I don't have short memory to forget issues that the changes in the past 20 seasons created, and the lingering issues from those changes still remain today. Sure, I was too harsh on Justin and Alonso, intentionally, as I think it's good to put some pressure on them, so our beloved bb wouldn't repeat the same mistakes from the past.

Both plan A and plan B are very attractive for me, but they have at least two problems.

1. It's too easy to train 2~3 players "perfectly" at the same time.
As a team manager, it is more challenging to train 2~3 players "perfectly" simultaneously than to train a single player "perfectly".
The achievement motivation theory suggests that when players reach a state of perfection, they may experience a lack of challenge and achievement, which can potentially lead to a decline in their interest in the game.
Therefore, for those who aim to train multiple players "perfectly" at the same time rather than just an individual player to perfection, if it is too easy, then their interest will decline more quickly.

2. Having the ability to train different kinds of players (for example, inside and outside players) at the same time provide some advantage over only being able to train players of the same kind.
It can provide the team with greater diversity and flexibility.
Generally, a balanced team tends to be stronger than an unbalanced team.
Therefore, we can expect that training different kinds of players simultaneously will become the mainstream, similar to the look inside tactic in the past.
There is a theory that suggests when strategic diversity decreases, players may feel that the game becomes monotonous and lacks variation, leading to a decline in their interest in the game.
Hence, if we can train different kinds of players simultaneously, then it does not necessarily guarantee an increase in training strategy diversity; instead, it may lead to a decline of interest in the game.

I have briefly tried another fast-paced basketball management game where training was not restricted by playing positions but rather by playing time. Each player could have different training settings, but there were additional fixed parameters for each player that influenced the training speed of different skills.
For me, the training of this (another fast-paced) game was a bit monotonous and lacking depth. Perhaps games with different pacing have their own suitable game design.

To avoid these problems, here are my solutions.

Plan C: Add an option to select random or specific skill for cross-training and gym.
- When selecting specific skill options, the total amount should be significantly lower than the total amount of random option.
- We can use a table similar to the skills table in tactics page and add an additional column for drop-down menus. The default value is random.
- It can slightly improve players and make them more perfect. The issue of problem 1 is minor.
- The effect of cross-training is minor. It doesn't have the issue of problem 2.
- The cross-training was introduced in S17 and was designed to penalize particularly one-dimensional players. It would not violate the original design purpose.

Plan D: Add the option "X and Y" to two-position training.
- The position of X and Y training should be different.
- Each player is limited to one training only. How to count the minutes can be discussed.
- The training speed is, for example, 90% of two-position training's speed.
- We can add a "X and Y" option in the first drop-down menu, and add two additional drop-down menu to choose X and Y training.
- It is similar to one-position training. It doesn't have the issue of problem 1.
- The speed is, for example, 90% of original's speed. It doesn't have the issue of problem 2.
- Two-position training may train at most 6 players. It may affect the supply and demand of players in the market.
- It is the solution with the most BB training style.
- Whether we should increase the speed of two-position training is another issue.

Last edited by little Guest at 5/29/2023 12:15:20 PM

A former B3 champion just commented on how he agrees with this idea, a lot of great managers, ex B3 champions, veterans of the game are voicing their opinions here, and on discord as well, while I value your input a lot because I respect immensely what you achieved with Srbija, I have to point out that your view is totally wrong.

Before this thread was even started a lot of experienced managers voiced their opinions on discord, a discussion was done around this topic with atleast 1000 replies.

But I do agree that things should not be rushed out as they normally seem to be, and I'd love if Alonso took more time and care into bringing ideas and formulating them in a way not to get so much pushback from the community.

Regarding this topic tunjevina I would like to know, do you like this idea?

I’m just not understanding your thinking, are you expecting devs to implement changes that are only helpful and not expect any cons? No matter what they implement there will always be a con. It’s hard to correlate RL basketball with bb due to the game engine, I get people want the same realism. But it’s not going to happen too many tweaks and changes will have to be put in place. The human element imo will never be matched with a computer

… - being able to train until 3 different profiles at the same time. Much more fun and currently it's almost impossible (it's impossible from my point of view) to train a real homegrown team able to be champion in D.I. Maybe with this change it will become possible.

To tell you the truth, it is almost impossible to prompte to D.I in bigger nations.

So, i voted for Plan B … maybe the extra-training can be exclusively for Homegrown-players 🤷‍♂️

I’m just not understanding your thinking, are you expecting devs to implement changes that are only helpful and not expect any cons?

Well, that was always the norm in bb, so yes. There were many good changes in bb that didn't have any cons, or the cons were only short-term.

Gdp-implementation:
It's what saved bb back in the days when everyone was playing LI & m2m. It had some short-term cons, as managers had to adapt their teams a bit, but no mid-term, or long-term cons.

GS goes down upon buying a player:
Again, miniscule short-term cons, and no mid/long term cons.

% of sale price fee reduction:
Some short-term cons, and no mid/long term cons.

That's how it always should be. Short-term cons are to be expected with any change, but there shouldn't be any mid/long-term cons. If there are, than whatever change caused it, wasn't implemented properly.

"...maybe the extra-training can be exclusively for Homegrown-players 🤷‍♂️"

I like this...

Homegrown players can get the option to have their own personal training although it will still count towards the maximum a team can train in a given week.

Yeah … with the Homies in da hood 😂

Implementing this training feature for homegrown players only can be fun, having in mind that it would boost the draft and at the same time destroy the market for youngsters.