BuzzerBeater Forums

Well the correct way of looking at this issue is indeed the amount of players which will get training by this way.

But in that case we should consider real difference in value between 1 and 2 position training (for example). Lets say that there are 14 pops for 2 players per season and similar number of pops on 4 players. What do you consider as a more effective training? It is still 1 position training, because it squeeze similar amount of skills into only 2 players, which makes them itself way more stronger than these 4 together.

I saw a guess of these skillups if the logic is that simple:

2 player training - .4 increase for 6 players = 2.4 gross
3 player training - .25 increase for 9 players = 2.25 gross
team training - .16 for 15 players = 2.4 gross.

It means that more position training means always the same volume of skillups, however divided between more players, which makes other than 1 position training insanely ineffective. You can consider a fact that you will have more players to sell, but meanwhile they threw away theirs best years for somehow slow training, their real potential (and value) goes down every week. You can ask why are best rookies so expensive, well they still have a chance to make it to the top.

Considering aging process, more room for inefective players which will have no results for longer time and so on, is in my opinion safe to say that the total amount of skillups should increase with wider volume of players, because today are dumb these which are doing 2 and more position training.

If we would get then 21 pops for 3 players, 28 pops for 5 players(2pos), 32 pops for 7 players(3pos), we could get easily 40 pops for 12 players(team) which makes like 3-4 pops on every player per season and still seems fair for me considering that it is everywhere and not on skills you pick.

Last edited by aigidios at 11/21/2010 5:10:28 PM

So basically you want to make training easier + add 25-66% speed value to team training. I disagree, people who are smart are using a mix of training. Depending on witch spot your trainee can effectivly play and which skill he needs upped to remain salary efficiant.

Basically Im saying that people who doesnt use single position training are totally lost. I can imagine current team training kind of effective only if there are whole team 27-29 year old, because in that case it is wasting of recources to focus on single position training. But only in this 27-29 radius I suppose.

In my opinion is training a part of the game for which you have to have a "skill", but there is still no diversity of options. I personally realized too that I might play this game in some sort of automatical training attitude, just taking care of that players dont get too old, it is not a farm game, its way more about tactics and matches, you know. (or I think should be)

Last edited by aigidios at 11/22/2010 5:51:29 AM

The game is built around the necessity for teams to specialize in training, and trade via the transfer market. So what you're suggesting is unlikely to happen, and if it does, it's going to be a step back.

I dont think so, because if the main part of something like that have to be a transfer market, which is a pretty unstable thing, change in the way of managing team would be for lot of teams step forward. You have to understand that not everyone is checking actual prices, volume of new users, following curve of demand. Well it might be interresting for some reason, but I personally see this part of a game pretty confusing and boring.