BuzzerBeater Forums

If you train a center to 30+ IS, ID and RB or a SG in 30 JS, HD and DR, you don't get the best you can get, you just get the highest possible salary. .

Are you serious?

If you train a center to 20 ID/IS/RB and have atrocious PA then you need secondaries beyond the levels that are possible to train to add to your 14 ID/IS/RB guy to get anywhere near him... so training a 30+ guy would far surpass anything we can currently create/buy now in terms of performance.

As for guards - the same would be true if you said level 30 JS/OD and HD.. no way you will convince anyone that having secondaries at level 9/10 will suddenly mean that you can stop a mono-skilled guard who can at least catch the ball going off on a scoring frenzy.

I appreciate your efforts to forecast how you envisage the trends but these are not dictated by which skill-set is best... it is being enforced upon us by a) constantly saying that multi-skilled guys are better than mono-skilled guys (which we are all coming around to the idea of) but only because the salary for us to test this theory is preventing us from doing so.

Isn't it more so that our training choices are now even more prohibited because thats the way you wish us to play the game?

Last edited by Superfly Guy at 4/5/2010 10:33:09 AM

Im getting confused with the multiskilled roles... What exactly you consider as a multiskilled players?

-The only multiskilleds players that exists on BB are just some small forwards players with great outside skills and inside ones too, like Tobias, Papalia, Berdomas etc, but apart from that ones i dont consider for example Raúl Iruleta (4545937) a multiskilled one even if he has great secundary skills and he is one of the best PG's on BB.

For example, i dont consider Cisquell a monoskilled player, he is able to shoot from the outside, but his salary is just 500k and when he is on good shape his performance is just great, just take a look on past final on Euro.


The only players that take an advantage on salarys are the SF's, anyway still an imbalance between salarys of outside players and inside ones.

Last edited by Marot at 4/5/2010 10:42:24 AM

I think what you are saying, and I believe is correct, is that mono-skilled players are still rewarded by the game engine compared to multi-skilled players and that the only reason not to train mono-skilled players is that the salary will be too high to sustain. In my opinion the game engine should reward multi-skilled players compared to mono-skilled players from the gameplay point of view and not by enforcing multi-skilled by simply changing the economic landscape. Even saying that I am not sure, as someone else mentioned, a team of all small forwards bodes well for buzzerbeater and it really does not reflect the reality of the NBA where teams have mono-skilled players at the extreme guard and center positions.

Its nearly impossible to train the center you posted............

Ive seen some PF's close to that in JS-DR-handling, but with weaker OD/passing and inside skills with ages around 25-26.

The game doesnt allow to train a player like the one you posted.

Moreover, I think the answer to the "divine trick" problem is that the game engine is always based upon a comparison between offensive and defensive players. The difference between, say, 25 and 26 in JS is going to cost salary but is going to have almost no effect on gameplay unless you are trying to cope with defenders of comparable skill. The real answer is that training somebody to be vastly superior to an opponent simply isn't worth that much. So, sure, you can add a single-skilled player cheaply who will beat an opponent in a single skill but lose in most other skills. But that's rarely a useful thing to do as a general plan, because I doubt that 5 players who are better in just one facet of the game than their opponents would be a very successful team. Look at how those USA teams did that picked 12 scorers (or 11 scorers and a token college guy to sit on the bench).

Monoskilled players are basically useful against other monoskilled players. Whether they are valuable, therefore, really depends upon your opponents. But it's almost certainly the case that if you train a player in a skill where they already dominate their opponents, you will be training them in a way that adds salary faster than you are adding effectiveness. As in real life, players and teams generally gain more rapidly by working on their weaknesses than by working on their strengths.

Well for my experience this is true, not sure 100% but let me say this is true, in the 2 positions hardest to train, SF and PF but for example in the position of center, I've a big doubt that a player with lvl 12 in ID, IS and reb + lvl 7 in all the other skills can stop a monster with lvl 20 in IS, ID and reb but with lvl 1 in all the other skills.
Simply I think that a lvl 14 in the 3 skills can be "competitive" against a lvl 20 in the same skills with half/week salary

Yes it seems easy on the theory but hard on the practice...

From my experience on the nt's, i had a PF which is probably one of the best multiskilled player in his position, but i had serious doubts about what i had to do with him when we were facing teams with high monoskilled players from the inside. Most of the times i avoided to put him to play 30-40 minutes in front of mono-skilleds player, but his performances on the 10-8 minutes he had, wasnt bad.

The fact is that this game engine still give more chances to the monoskilled players than to the multiskilleds or the players that trained their secundary skills over 8-9. I suppose this will change in the future and we will see more options in attack or in defense so the multiskilled players can be more usefull.

Just an example coming back to the PF's, even if you have a PF with a 9 on OD and you are playing a 3-2 zone and theres a play where the other SF trys a shot attempt in front of your PF, even if your PF trained OD as a secundary skill, if the SF is a great shooter its really hard to defend it and most of the times this situation finish with +2 or a foul from your PF.

At least thats what i have seen from my experience on national teams, that we are 2-3 steps forward to the teams, its still important to have in some positions good primary skills, because they can make the differences happens

You forget a "little" thing:the time for training a player with good results is limited,so it's impossible to create a player as you imagine,even if someone has the possibility and the will to do that

Last edited by Steve Karenn at 4/5/2010 3:59:47 PM