BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Training Needs an Overhaul

Training Needs an Overhaul

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
11
325503.18 in reply to 325503.17
Date: 10/17/2024 7:48:43 AM
Internazionale Torreense
II.2
Overall Posts Rated:
150150
Second Team:
Internazionale Sporting
In Portugal we achieved 150 TSP by end of 24, without going the typical route of 1v1, instead a lot of trainings were mixed in and we achieved the same results as the others, so as long as you have the right facilities indeed you can get a player to 140 TSP.

This Post:
00
325503.19 in reply to 325503.18
Date: 10/20/2024 11:04:15 AM
New York Chunks
II.2
Overall Posts Rated:
941941
What's the skill distribution of a typical player with 140-150+ TSP? For a guard is it DR and HA heavy with high JS (relative to JR and PA)? I bet it is.

Don't ask what sort of Chunks they are, you probably don't want to know. Blowing Chunks since Season 4!
This Post:
00
325503.20 in reply to 325503.19
Date: 10/20/2024 12:30:46 PM
Internazionale Torreense
II.2
Overall Posts Rated:
150150
Second Team:
Internazionale Sporting
JS
DR
HA
OD
IS

All these skills are indispensable to every position in the game, add ID as well for SF/PF/C, just search on the market what the goal is for high TSP players and you will understand their skill distribution

This Post:
11
325503.21 in reply to 325503.20
Date: 10/21/2024 9:22:07 AM
New York Chunks
II.2
Overall Posts Rated:
941941
How is DR indispensable?

DR is one of the most common skills in high TSP players probably because it's a two-player skill to train with one-on-one and seems to pop relatively fast. Great for a game that aims to have a bunch of Chris Paul-like PGs or Kobe Bryant-like SGs. I think that's part of the point I've been making, this isn't 2012 anymore, yet the training system is set up to tilt the most efficient training approaches towards developing very similar types of players. It's time to rethink this, in my opinion.

Don't ask what sort of Chunks they are, you probably don't want to know. Blowing Chunks since Season 4!
This Post:
11
325503.22 in reply to 325503.1
Date: 11/3/2024 9:26:30 AM
QQguest
II.3
Overall Posts Rated:
274274
I still feel somewhat dissatisfied with the training proposal I suggested earlier.

- The duo training system (319331.191) may have some side effects or disadvantages (319331.193).
- Regarding the topic of removing training positions, my proposal (323722.9) makes the 48+ arrangement unworkable, eliminating the need to choose between the number of trainees and the risk associated with 48+.
Additionally, for teams in the top league, the difficulty of staying in the top league seems to decrease somewhat.
The related points can be found in these posts by BB-Marin: (273660.21), (273660.38), (273660.39), or in this review of opposing views: (323722.8).

The new proposal I have in mind is to add a new training option.

- Its training speed is just a little slower than 1/2-position training but still acceptable, allowing for greater lineup flexibility and stronger match competitiveness.
- To avoid making it too easy to balance match competitiveness and training in the top league, training speed will be lower when the division level is higher.

The details are as follows:

1. Choose up to 3/6 players, and by accumulating the same playing time as before in the designated two/three positions, then players will receive complete training.
- Training would roughly change like this: https://imgur.com/f5djeSS

2. Designated players will face greater burdens and pressure in higher-level divisions, leading to a decline in training effectiveness.

- The training speed, relative to the existing 1-position training / 2-position training, can be categorized as follows: High ◎, Medium ○, Low △.
In Div. I, it is Low △; in Div. II, it is Medium ○; in Div. III and below, it is High ◎.
However, the division where the "fresh team league" is located is enforced as High ◎.

- Suppose the training speed for 1/2/3-position training are 1 : 0.75 : 0.4.
For two positions with up to 3 players chosen, the training speeds relative to 1-position training can be High ◎ = 95%, Medium ○ = 90%, and Low △ = 80%.
For three positions with up to 6 players chosen, the training speeds relative to 2-position training can be High ◎ = 95%, Medium ○ = 85%, and Low △ = 65%.


Feel free to bring up any possible side effects and disadvantages.

Last edited by little Guest at 11/3/2024 11:21:09 AM

This Post:
22
325503.23 in reply to 325503.22
Date: 11/4/2024 1:26:29 PM
Optic Fibres
II.2
Overall Posts Rated:
549549
Second Team:
Wānaka Lakers
This proposal complicates the training system too much. Your method also pushes managers to make a decision between training homegrown draftees in a lower division with inflated salaries so they still receive quicker training speeds or promoting which allows easier management of salaries but a decrease in training speed.

This then might lead to managers forcing to sell players as training becomes too slow (age already slows training!) in higher divisions. Why should managers be punished for creating good trainees and wanting to become competitive?

I've said many times, there is nothing wrong with the training system. It should not be easy to create players who are upwards of 150+TSP, it is a huge compromise of investing time and money and finding the right balance when having to train out of position. I will continue to bang this drum, but it is the salary formula that is the issue.

Last edited by js8 at 11/4/2024 1:30:17 PM