BuzzerBeater Forums

So if, instead, anyone would be trainable at any position each week, that just means that training will no longer be a choice or a cost-benefit decision, just a default "everyone does it" option. It will significantly slow down the erosion that causes higher level teams to eventually have to come back to the pack, and basically the richest teams will buy the best trainees and be able to custom-build the best new players while still competing full-bore with the best current players.

I have to say I disagree with this. Right now 25 million is essentially a hard cap. In this market, that is definitely not enough to buy the best trainees and the best players.

Also, I don't see how that new training system would benefit the richer teams more than the current system does. Right now the "richest teams" can just buy the best players and then sell them for virtually the same price (maybe even higher) when they get older and keep repeating this. Instead of focusing on training they can just buy the finished product and consistently have the best players.

I think the reason that erosion occurs is that many of these teams need to run deficits to be competitive at the highest level and so they eventually run out of money. Modifying the training system to allow users to train 5 players wouldn't really change this.

Logical depending on what your view is on training in this game.

Exactly. That's right. Good for you. It is logical, the complete antithesis of what we have now.

So if, instead, anyone would be trainable at any position each week, that just means that training will no longer be a choice or a cost-benefit decision, just a default "everyone does it" option. It will significantly slow down the erosion that causes higher level teams to eventually have to come back to the pack, and basically the richest teams will buy the best trainees and be able to custom-build the best new players while still competing full-bore with the best current players.

The main reasons teams sell the best trainees is because 1) they bring in lots of cash which is necessary to compete in the overheated transfer market and 2) because it takes years to fully train a player and they may not be competitive while doing so.

More likely what would happen if all teams from D.I down to D.IV would prioritize training under this suggestion is:

1) Most teams would spend the full $40k per week on scouting because now it's easier to train.
2) With more players being trained, more teams would spend on Level 5+ trainers to maximize training speed.
3) Teams would spend on acquiring better or retaining existing higher salary players since they could now train players without sacrificing competitiveness.
4) Team salaries would eventually be higher as teams carry a starting lineup and a trainee lineup.

All of those would take more money out of the game and, eventually, might even eliminate the need for the luxury tax. Tanking might even decrease since teams could now train players without sacrificing competitiveness.

Prices aren't problem. Problem is your financial policy. You input new taxes, that cut earnings. I remember more than 7 y ago prices was high. But players had money for shoping on TL.
Now I'm - 20k weekly. And my player salaries are below salaries border. It's stupid.

Too much revenue is one of the reason prices are so high. You say that your revenue aren't able to produce benefit, but you don't talk about your expenses, except low players salaries. What do you spend in staff and scouting ? Also, you might want to take care of your seats prices to generate more revenue.

My revenue and expense are out of controle. And I know about it. But it non sense that I must pay extra charge for low salaries, when my staff earn 3 times more than my players. Why salaries of players and staff are not counted together?

I believe you have been told the BB's view on training...

Of course, I know their feet are set in concrete about it, too, and I know about the declining participation in this game as well.

The suggestion forum is still located at the same place as it always have been and you know how to use it.

And that will make such a difference, won't it?

Add some minor adjustments to training:
1. JS and JR training adds to FT skill. It makes sense. Good shooters make good free throw shooters.
2. Players that are well managed with consistent minutes should get a boost to stamina. If you have an ideal minute management on athletes, their fitness levels will peak and stamina is high. This forever dropping skill until it is trained kills the die hard trainers that care about losing one week here and there to NT prospects. Reward good minute management.

Only minor, but will improve players slightly, balancing out training benefits a little more whilst not going overkill. If you speed up training now, it'll create some super beasts in the future that we have never seen before. Guys with 160+ TSP.

Last edited by whitewind at 3/16/2016 8:07:11 AM

So if, instead, anyone would be trainable at any position each week, that just means that training will no longer be a choice or a cost-benefit decision, just a default "everyone does it" option. It will significantly slow down the erosion that causes higher level teams to eventually have to come back to the pack, and basically the richest teams will buy the best trainees and be able to custom-build the best new players while still competing full-bore with the best current players.

I have to say I disagree with this. Right now 25 million is essentially a hard cap. In this market, that is definitely not enough to buy the best trainees and the best players.

Also, I don't see how that new training system would benefit the richer teams more than the current system does. Right now the "richest teams" can just buy the best players and then sell them for virtually the same price (maybe even higher) when they get older and keep repeating this. Instead of focusing on training they can just buy the finished product and consistently have the best players.

I think the reason that erosion occurs is that many of these teams need to run deficits to be competitive at the highest level and so they eventually run out of money. Modifying the training system to allow users to train 5 players wouldn't really change this.

I'll disagree also but I think you have some good points and I admit I hadn't considered the hard cap recently since it's a new addition. But still, if you have these teams buying older players and then selling them a few seasons on for profit, they're still going to have enough money to throw at players they want to train.

But you're looking (it appears) at only the super high end trainees and trainers - which is always going to be an overpriced market. Where I think the problem with "free" training comes in is not that the top teams will swoop in to buy up all (both?) the All Time Greats each draft - that'd be a wasteful investment that wouldn't really fit in. What I expect would instead happen is that the Superstar/MVP range of players would be picked up, trained on the bench to be SFs primarily and cost effective big men or guards secondarily, and then they'll need to replace even fewer players due to attrition.

I'm not entirely opposed to that - I think it would be nice to have the option to actually be able to draft and develop a team at a pace that leaves a few seasons for FT/stamina training as well. I just know that there's always concern about upward mobility for newer teams and anything that makes it easier for teams to park themselves in the top division is likely to be highly unpopular.