BuzzerBeater Forums

Preamble: english is not my mother tongue and it's difficult for me to be clear in this language.

Right now, it's very difficult (almost impossible) to train good players in the aim to make profits for your team and in the same time remaining competitive. When I say good players, I mean multi-skilled TSP > 120.

Right now, to be really competitive, your team should have a lot of those kind of players.

To create those kind of players, you are obliged to do mono-post training or you'll never achieve TSP > 120. If you do mono-post training, you can train 2 or 3 players of that kind. If you train 2 or 3 player of that kind, you keep them in your team and you only sell them at 32 years old, not before. But 2 or 3 players can't make a team, you need at the very least 3 players to buy.

But how you could buy those TSP > 120 players as nobody want to sell them? IMO, the economic problem of the game is on the supply side. It's very rare to find TSP > 120 players when their formation is over (27-29 yers). They're come only from players stopping playing the game or farm team and their prize rockets accordingly.

My suggestion: erase mono-post training and increase the speed of correlated multi-post training at the same speed of those erased training.

Just to be clear: for example erase shoot-blocking training for C and raise the speed of shoot-blocking training for PF/C at the same speed as the erased one.

This way, we'll be able to train smthg like 5 players. And at the age of 27-29, we'll have too many kind of the same player in our team and so we'll put 2 or 3 of those trained players on the transfer market.

This way, we'll see exactly the same kind of players like before. We are not braking anything. This way, we will have more top-end player. This way, we'll have more quality player on the transfer market. This way, it will be easier for new team to build up and to catch the old Div.I ones.

It will remove some cash from the game as more movement on the transfer market will give more taxations, but is this a real problem?

Last edited by mplume at 2/1/2017 6:07:18 PM

What if we can train 3 mono skilled positions per game? Maybe we can set it in the lineup. Or in the training page.
TRAINING

Match 1

Training Type: xxxxx Position: xx

The same for Games 2 and 3.

The training can be exactly like now or give us the possibility of make more balanced teams.

A simple solution would be to expand the number a staff members that each team can hire by allowing each team to hire a second trainer. Each trainer could be set to train a specific skill each week (so long as it is not the same skill).

For example:

Trainer #1 - SB
Trainer #2 - OD

Pros: More players can be trained at the same time and therefore reach the full training potential sooner. This would keep the market from being flooded with too many newly trained players (and depressing prices). It would also fit well with the forthcoming improvements to draftees. It also shouldn't be too hard to code.

Cons: Downside is prices for trainers would go up but that could be addressed by increasing the number of randomly generated trainers. Also, this would remove more money from the game's economy through increased staff salaries and transfer fees for the new trainers.

Not realy!

If you have that flood of good players, that does'nt mean that all the team will be poor suddenly!

Why? Because for one buyer, there is one... seller!

Let's say, the price is 5M, the selling team earn 5M - 3% (tax) and the buying team spend 5M. In the end, there is only those 3% of tax that is remove from the game. Then the selling team have now money to spend on the transfer market: 4.85M on that number, there will be a tax from 3% and so on and so on.

If they think that it will destroy the economy (with too much deflation), ok right but then they can try too compensate by giving back those 3% in a way (by reducing salary floor? just an exemple)

Would'nt it be nice to have more players to train? I think the game will be more fun like that, maybe I'm wrong.

Last edited by mplume at 2/1/2017 1:40:21 AM

As the market is now we are on the other scale and have another extreme with very high prices. But it encourages training and makes it profitable if done right(not training high potential trainees with a high level trainer).

The market has been inflated for some time now. So we should be seeing some effects by now of the increase in training you speak of. Where are they? They're not being sold. I don't see the increase in numbers of lower potential trainees, except in the Utopian farm world perhaps.

As for making it profitable, and presumably optimal to train players to sell, I want to play basketball, not sell meat on a market.

Surely some of the players trained from the time that prices started to increase have hit the market. If they didn't we wouldn't have seen any players on the transfer.

As you can see when I quote myself I didn't say there were no players on the market, I said there wasn't an increase.

I don't see the increase in numbers of lower potential trainees, except in the Utopian farm world perhaps.

Selling players, training players, setting arena prices, buying players aso aso. They all seem to fit in the management slot.

Of course, but if there's an overemphasis on training, making it the only way to make money, other than tanking, then the transfer list becomes a meat market as their trainees are only an investment and not something for their own use.

Last edited by Gully Foyle at 2/1/2017 11:49:09 AM