BuzzerBeater Forums

That is all correct, but if your player has high sublevels he won't have a salary of 80k, he will have more because of the sublevels.
And you can't calculate a players' sublevels so, the salary calculators are only used with the .0 of the skills, for example 7.0, or 8.0, when in fact the player could have 7.9 or 8.9, when a pop to 8.1 or 9.1 has barely any change in salary.

Agreed! So this mean that regular training has slowed down 10% and secondary skill pops depends on luck.

They don't even depend that much on luck, if you're training a player long term. Yes, if you roll a single die, there's a lot of luck in that. But if you roll 50 dice, you're pretty much certain to get some 6's, some 3's, some 1's. Yes, you'll get more of some numbers than others, but it's very unlikely that you'll get 20 of one number, and 1 of one. Rolling lots of dice in games produces less luck than rolling the die once, by far. It'll even out.

Remember that "pops" are not what training does. Training raises sublevels. When that hits thresholds, it produces visible pops, but that's just the visible manifestation of a process. It's like birthdays. Just because today isn't my birthday, doesn't mean I'm not getting older.

*sob*

Yes but let's say you have a 5 or 6 low sublevels and after 2 seasons all of them are medium or high it would have a big impact on salary.

I understand little of the previous training system, but as I see it, part of the problem was with skills like inside shooting and having to play a guard out of position in a game to train in that area. Inside shooting for a Center is different than inside shooting for a guard--that is not to say guards can't learn post play. For the most part, however, I don't want or need to train my guards to shoot or position themselves like Centers; I want them to be able to make layups when they drive to the basket. That is a different skill set and I should not have to play my guards at the Center or forward position to "train" them to shoot a layup inside. The same holds true for inside defense, although less of a complaint here--good defensive technique doesn't vary as much; however, I want my guards to be able to defend other guards inside not learn to defend a post player; those skills aren't learned by playing out of position in a game in order to become eligible for the skill set--that is pure nonsense; same is true for having to play big men outside to train outside defense; an unnecessary distraction that adds nothing to the game for me.

And except for the economic issues--which are lost on me anyway, I'm befuddled by managers complaining about unexpected improvement by a player on their team. What coach doesn't want to see improvement in all areas by any player? Again, I don't understand the training system as well as most, but if the new system makes the training results more realistic, I'm all for it.

Training IS on a guard was no problem in the old system, 1-on-1 and JS for forwards give loads of pops in ISIS.

And what will happen when this SF has a salary of 100k(for example) and his worst skill is around 10? If you continue training him, you will have high sublevels, it happens when you train a SF, it always have high sublevels. You will be happy to watch he pops in JS or rebounds and next season paying him a bigger salary?

With a monoskilled training this system has 0 impact, with multiskilled SF you will have unpredictable(well not really, you will know what skills have high sublevels) skills poping up, when maybe you don't want.

Salary doesn't "pop" like skills, my friend. It increases little by little with every increase in skill, pop or no pop. Of course it jumps every season.
You do realize that training a SG during one full season in JR/JS/OD will, on average, increase his RB by 0.07 (like HD/DR/PA/IS/ID/SB)?
For example his RB will go from 18.95 (phenomenal) to 19.02 (colossal).
His salary will only be $ 200,248 instead of $ 200,000.

Is that too much?

edit: RB, not SB!

Last edited by Thelonious at 7/31/2011 4:18:20 PM

thats funny, those cross training up will affect their salarys by nothing - but ok you think also that when your inside attack hits no basket it have the reason that you play 3-2 and not the opposing defence.

As Knecht said you if you want to train the IS of an outside player with 1n1 or JS in SF-PF is really easy to do it.


If you guys want a training system where 1+1=2 then it's a really boring one. That's the direction, we go to an easy training system, next step is training the players individually because ''it would be more realistic''...


Being realistic doesn't mean it will be more funny i'll repeat you, that if you want something realistic go play 2k11 or try a chance being a coach.

Last edited by Marot at 7/31/2011 11:08:00 AM

That's not realistic.
Cross-training is.