BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > staff

staff

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
7661.5 in reply to 7661.4
Date: 11/19/2007 5:28:25 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
8080
A related question. Are the wage spans for staff known/investigated?

This Post:
00
7661.6 in reply to 7661.4
Date: 11/20/2007 5:56:10 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
>>One thing to think about is that there is a very good chance that your trainer will drop at least one level in those 11 weeks. My first trainer dropped a level every 5 weeks.<<

I'm truly sorry to learn this. In reality, this never happens. Coaches/trainers learn and get better, they don't get stupid in five weeks time.

These irritating artifacts from Hattrick need to be stomped on, burned, and left for dead by the side of the road if BuzzerBeater is to succeed.

BuzzerBeater needs to rid the game of this lunacy as fast as possible.

Edited by Your_Imaginary_Friend (11/20/2007 5:57:44 PM CET)

Last edited by Your_Imaginary_Friend at 11/20/2007 5:57:44 PM

This Post:
00
7661.7 in reply to 7661.6
Date: 11/20/2007 6:23:24 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
304304
Staff members eventually get complacent in their jobs, and wont perform as well.

That is indeed realistic.

NO ONE at this table ordered a rum & Coke
Charles: Penn has some good people
A CT? Really?
Any two will do
Any three for me
Any four will score
Any five are live
This Post:
00
7661.8 in reply to 7661.6
Date: 11/20/2007 7:27:03 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
I think it is necessary and realistic for staff ability to degrade over time. Complacency could be one reason, another being that the same message becomes less effective or inspiring over time. This is one reason why managers, coaches and the like are fired all the time in every sport.

My one concern is that the skill decline is too fast, at the rate I experienced with my first trainer it would be nearly impossible to keep a trainer for more than one season while maintaining a worth while training scheme. I will say though that I only have experience with the one trainer, my PR manager has kept his ability level for about 9 weeks now without suffering a drop so it seems variable.

I do feel that staff degradation is something that merits keeping an eye on though.

This Post:
00
7661.9 in reply to 7661.8
Date: 11/20/2007 7:59:02 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
137137
I think it is necessary and realistic for staff ability to degrade over time. Complacency could be one reason, another being that the same message becomes less effective or inspiring over time. This is one reason why managers, coaches and the like are fired all the time in every sport.

My one concern is that the skill decline is too fast, at the rate I experienced with my first trainer it would be nearly impossible to keep a trainer for more than one season while maintaining a worth while training scheme. I will say though that I only have experience with the one trainer, my PR manager has kept his ability level for about 9 weeks now without suffering a drop so it seems variable.

I do feel that staff degradation is something that merits keeping an eye on though.


Are your PR guy and trainer at the same level? I wonder if the skill decline is faster at higher levels?

Steve

This Post:
00
7661.10 in reply to 7661.7
Date: 11/20/2007 8:30:17 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
44
There should be limits on the number of talented coaches, so teams can make choices between spending their money on talented players who can win despite the coach, or average players whose coach can get the most out of them.

It would seem reasonable that if there were too many 9 coaches in BB to keep raising the salary demands of new coaches. But then you have the issue of what to do with existing coaches. You could either bump their salary, or as BB has done, degrade their skills.

So I think BB has done a reasonable job of making staff decisions an economic factor.

This Post:
00
7661.11 in reply to 7661.9
Date: 11/20/2007 9:23:33 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
My trainer was a level 10 while my PR manager was and is a level 5, so skill level definitely could be a factor.

Edited by jprochnow (11/20/2007 9:24:55 PM CET)

Last edited by JayP at 11/20/2007 9:24:55 PM

This Post:
00
7661.12 in reply to 7661.8
Date: 11/20/2007 10:34:41 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
>>I think it is necessary and realistic for staff ability to degrade over time<<

Hmm. Think of all the coaches who have 20, 30 year careers and BB has them dropping off after 5 weeks? I don't think that is even remotely realistic.

Why necessary, for the sake of argument?

This Post:
00
7661.13 in reply to 7661.12
Date: 11/20/2007 10:36:35 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
It would render the whole staff idea pointless if it didn't.
Hire a level 10 of each staff position and your done. Neveer have to check back again, because a lvl 10 is a lvl 10.

This Post:
00
7661.14 in reply to 7661.12
Date: 11/20/2007 10:55:22 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
304304
Why necessary, for the sake of argument?


Refer to what Riceball said.

Remember that time is greatly accelerated here. 14 weeks = 1 year

The coaches that have long careers are relatively rare.

That said, could the staff system be improved?

Of course. Not having skill drops is not an improvement, however.

NO ONE at this table ordered a rum & Coke
Charles: Penn has some good people
A CT? Really?
Any two will do
Any three for me
Any four will score
Any five are live
This Post:
00
7661.15 in reply to 7661.12
Date: 11/20/2007 10:58:33 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
>>Hmm. Think of all the coaches who have 20, 30 year careers and BB has them dropping off after 5 weeks? I don't think that is even remotely realistic.<<

All of the coaches with 20, 30 year careers with one professional basketball team? I think that would be approximately 0.

As far as necessary, I guess you could just have set it and forget it staff members, but I think managing staff is a part of the game that would be missed if staff members didn't lose skill over time.


Advertisement