BuzzerBeater Forums

I play the other games
nothing like this one
they all have their issues..this one BY FAR the best
have fun searching

Which games do you play?

charazay and basketsim

Cool thanks. I just joined those. Guess I'll see what the differences are.

What do you like better about BB?

I play those as well but BB is the best. Height matters more in actual game play. Tactics can be difficult to understand. Training systems are very different. You can get a new youth player every week. Seasons are too long.

The tactics do look very different. I'd love a best of both worlds game...

Yes, there are many times when realism must be sacrificed. But it isn't a necessity to have it in particular areas or particular ways, as there are other games that don't.

Right, it's something that's got to be looked at individually, which is why the blanket statement that something "isn't realistic" is usually the foundation of an argument that is rather poor in merit in terms of game design.

In BB, having essentially "unlocked" training for 3 players per team without regard to when/where/if they played sounds nice, and certainly more "realistic." But it would be an unmitigated disaster. Top teams would benefit because they could not only focus more fully on their competitions but would also gain the ability to create the unique type of players that they could make great use of without any of the sacrifices involved. Likewise, because training players would become so easy, people would be a lot less likely to train players with lower but serviceable potential because they're useful to the team, and instead fill that spot with another veteran and just focus on higher potential players. Before too long, there would be a market flooded with highly trained, high potential players, but nobody to buy them.

For game design purposes, it makes perfect sense to require players to be trained in their position to gain skill in it, just like a player gaining skills in a job class in an RPG.

There is a poor alternative basketball simulator game as well: http://www.bballzone.net/. Interesting idea with only trading and signing of free agents but I gave it up seasons ago. There are other basketball manager games as well but from my experience is the rating of the manager games obvious:
1) Buzzerbeater
2) Charazay
3) Basketsim

Buzzerbeater is outstanding in my opinion among these games and also in comparison with other manager games I tried (and they are plenty).

I agree that there are weaknesses in this game as well. I would very much like to have a game where you can chose your best players in basically all games. One improvement might be to have a fatigue parameter. Something similar exists in Charazay but not sure how well it works. Having a performance loss of % depending on fatigue might be a more reasonable way of handling the fatigue problem. Playing a player with fatigue would then increase injury risk and also force more drastical efforts to get it down again. Playing more than 70 minutes a week could be a way to have a fatigue on player that could be kept on a stable level and playing less fatigue could be no problem at all. As today playing too little could instead set down the game shape. A combination of low fatigue and high game shape would be the optimal and it would require 60-70 minutes just like today.

The training aspect is a more complicated issue but improving the role of the experience for younger players could both be related to a better training efficiency and a better possibility to perform to full capacity while young. However, exactly how it could work is something i have not figured out and I doubt that it would be better than training today. I agree that this randomness in reaching 48 minutes and full training is very annoying and would be greatful if a better solution was implemented.

Yeah, you give the same argument, to which I give the same response. Those points you made about it being too easy etc and it throwing out the economy are valid, but only if a simple change was made. If it was thought through, taking the possible disadvantages into account, these problems could be countered.

hmm, let's, for the sake of the argument, suppose that a model where the training is mostly based on the quality of the trainer instead of played minutes is introduced.. in the long run, this means that with adequate funding and good trainers you could develop a player in a PG with world-class skills without him even playing one minute at that position. yeah, that is a pretty extreme example, but it disproves the "realism" idea..

the good thing about the current model is that it makes you think as a coach who has some good prospects in his team and knows that they won't develop if they are not given playing time, irregardless of the amount of time spent practising in the gym by themselves.. also, it creates more of a balance between very good teams and new ones, which makes this game work.. if you are a good team, you will probably have more strong games per week and therefore won't be able to field all the players you wanted for the required amount of time.. however, you can compensate that by having a world-class trainer and still manage to train some good prospects.. if you don't have the money to afford a world-class trainer, you can still train players by making them play enough minutes, as you'll have less strong games per week.. your proposed model would definitely bias this whole thing towards the richer teams.