BuzzerBeater Forums

a. The current training system makes it too difficult to construct the team we want.
Assuming the required players are not available in the transfer market, and suppose the core positions needed are PG, PF, and C.

I find the opposite to be true. It is very easy to train whatever kind of player you want subject to a few limitations that seem reasonable to me. What I oppose are the lineups used to maximize training. They have kind of taken over the game. I am experimenting now on my Utopia team with allowing a player to play 48 minutes a game to obtain max experience, but I do not now and never found that approach to be realistic. It's gaming the game IMHO. There is a game shape penalty for doing such things. I will find out first hand how bad it is. At a certain point--how long can a player maintain 48 minutes a game w/o giving way to complete exhaustion--the penalty needs to be so severe that playing 4 on five is more effective. As a result of using a player to exhaustion, there should be a training penalty, such that an exhausted player gets no training benefit after three or four matches of consecutive 48 minute performances, and the penalty should probably be no training benefit for the equivalent amount of time the player was abused, plus two weeks recovery--no games played. So, with 4 consecutive games of 48 minutes, a player couldn't play another game for 4 weeks. Scrimmages included.

That brings me to the issue of shorthanded lineups. They shouldn't be permitted. Teams should be forced to suit 12 players for each game. Failure to suit enough players and/or have five players on the court at all times would result in a loss of training benefit for all players for 10 weeks and forfeiture of that season's draft picks. Imagine the Lakers showing up and putting three players on the court. What city would support that franchise? It should not be happening in BuzzerBeater.

The training mechanism is fine. The limits are fine. The problem is that we are now playing a basketball training game with matches to support the training, instead of basketball management game, where the emphasis needs to be on the games played each week.

Since

I wouldn't say it's gaming the game at all; it's really a necessary by-product of the training system. So, you can't have it both ways - either the training mechanism and its limits are fine (which results in precisely this 48 minutes scenario), or there is a problem that this is a basketball training game with matches to support the training.

As the game evolves, you have to add limitations to keep the balance. Using a player for 48 minutes in every contest for two years, starting in his rookie season, is absurd to someone like me who prefers a little more "rigid realism" in the game. I've been around since Season 7. Paid for every season. In my view, the training for the U21 and NT teams is out of balance and has skewed game play, the cost of players, and the general economy in ways that need corrected. I tried it myself for the first time this season and hated it. I'm not trying to infringe on anyone's fun--I know it's popular (just look at all of the professional tankers around and how that impacts the draft)--just looking for a little more balance. And I can have my cake and eat it too, if I want

Regards.

If yes, that's definitely not how you train a player, regardless of whether he's a rookie. That guy's (or guys'?) GS will be trash because of the excess of playing time, but you don't need 48 minutes per game for full training, only per one week.

GS is trashed. I believe--and this is my first go at this--the idea is to ratchet up the experience as much as possible. You basically prioritize the training of this player over the success of the team, doing just enough to avoid a fan boycott.

Last edited by LDR at 7/7/2024 6:02:48 AM

I could see literal farm teams doing that, but I wouldn't ever say this is something that's necessary for training NT players.

I don't know. I am researching the forum now. Apparently it makes a difference at the U21 level. "Farm Teams"? I assume they are used for training only.

Here is the first post I have found that discusses the issue 2010: (142938.1)

Last edited by LDR at 7/7/2024 8:17:55 AM

I think this is quite good idea to boost the experience if you have e.g. three 18yo trainees with HoF potential and have to anyway start from lower divisions to be competitive after 5-7 seasons. But the way to go is to still play your 3-6 trainees on training position 48 minutes and then your top prospects will get max minutes on other positions after they got their training minutes. But of course you can't do this and be also competitive so it only works until players are around 21-22 and salaries will start going up more rapidly (and you might want your players to play for U21 NT).

But again, there is injury risks and major issues for winning so I don't think this is an issue even though someone would do this.

Last edited by Lappa at 7/12/2024 7:28:20 AM

Plan A rocked the Vote.

This is a start.

People are comfortable with the Training because this is what they always had, but the Training System is counter-intuitive and a mess. If you came from playing basketball organized, to playing BB, Training would make zero sense and would actually feel broken.

But to fix that, would need ground up redevelopment. So band-aids to add diversity would be good.