BuzzerBeater Forums

Actually, I think experience effect players performance quite a bit. It just doesn't rise very quickly.

Steve
Bruins

I have two PF, and one consistenly outperforms the other, even though I'd expect them to be about the same. But one has awful experience and the other atrocious.

Outperforms in production or in star rating (or both)?

And I had to dig for it, but I found this tidbit on experience from BB-Forrest:

. . . experience means more than just minutes logged.. it means minutes logged in key situations, having the ability to make key decisions.. etc.. . . .

. . . in terms of how it affects the GE, abstractly i'd say experience helps players make better decisions and more accurately assess what is going on.

the whole post is here: (3709.2)

I've had five or six experience pops on my players, but not to my top players. So perhaps a player needs to struggle in a game or two in order for his experience to increase.

ill get my coat and leave quietly then!!

i'd still be confident to assume that at this early stage of the game the differences are minor..

Maybe when we have some level 15 players with atroc experience we will see them crack under pressure whilst level 10 with average exp have the ability to make the gulf in quality between them not appear as big....

from the rules:

The central part of the game engine is how the half court offense/defense works. The general idea is that a team gets a series of opportunities to score. What kind, and what the quality of those opportunities are is a function of the offense they are running, the matchups between the offensive players and their defenders. A player must decide whether the opportunity presented is good enough to take a shot… this of course changes as a function of amongst other things… the shot clock, the players experience, the score of the game, the history of the quality of shots the team has seen recently, the offense the team is running, and whether that rookie shooting guard of yours thinks he knows better than the coach does how good he is at making jump shots.

The only thing we know is that experience improves very very slow, and some players just start with better experience. Seems like experience is like when some players are referred to as having a good "basketball mind". Some just get it and it's not all that easy to teach.

Isn't this all just about offensive flow?

See:

What kind, and what the quality of those opportunities are is a function of the offense they are running, the matchups between the offensive players and their defenders. A player must decide whether the opportunity presented is good enough to take a shot…

that's the logic and the rules continue:

this of course changes as a function of amongst other things… the shot clock, the players experience

...that means huge volume of key chances could get a high experience?

what do you think?

edit: Experience will affect the opportunity to take a shot, but it seems that the opportunity can get the level of experience higher

I see logic on this

Edited by Iordanou (2/7/2008 6:09:21 AM CET)

Last edited by Iordanou at 2/7/2008 6:09:16 AM

up:)

becouse exp is a very important thing, maybe someone got any new information about this.:)

Maybe it works the same as in the hattrick experience engine.

With chances on gaining more or less experience depending on match situations

in HT we got clear rules about exp, here we got nothing, except that what users says.:( that is very buuuu....:)

from the rules:


The central part of the game engine is how the half court offense/defense works. The general idea is that a team gets a series of opportunities to score. What kind, and what the quality of those opportunities are is a function of the offense they are running, the matchups between the offensive players and their defenders. A player must decide whether the opportunity presented is good enough to take a shot… this of course changes as a function of amongst other things… the shot clock, the players experience, the score of the game, the history of the quality of shots the team has seen recently, the offense the team is running, and whether that rookie shooting guard of yours thinks he knows better than the coach does how good he is at making jump shots.


The only thing we know is that experience improves very very slow, and some players just start with better experience. Seems like experience is like when some players are referred to as having a good "basketball mind". Some just get it and it's not all that easy to teach.

Isn't this all just about offensive flow?

See:

What kind, and what the quality of those opportunities are is a function of the offense they are running, the matchups between the offensive players and their defenders. A player must decide whether the opportunity presented is good enough to take a shot…

that's the logic and the rules continue:

this of course changes as a function of amongst other things… the shot clock, the players experience

...that means huge volume of key chances could get a high experience?

what do you think?

edit: Experience will affect the opportunity to take a shot, but it seems that the opportunity can get the level of experience higher

I see logic on this

These two posts pretty much clear up any confusion as to how experience is boosted. At least it's plain as day to me.

In other words, because the odds of certain players playing during a specific key situation during a game or season, chances are very slim that a player gains tons of experience. This way it evens out the playing field so you are not seeing tons of Legendary Experience players but maybe one player with Legendary Experience. Otherwise there would be no challenge to this game.

Take two players in this non-existant situation:

PG-1 matchups typically consist of close games where situations arise that call for PG-1 to methodically move the ball around into scoring situations where every turnover is costly.

PG-2 matchups typically consist of your normal game where the better team is always ahead and pressure situations are few and far between.

Which of those two players, both rated exactly the same, would you think would more experience?

Which of those two players, both rated exactly the same, would you think would gain experience more quickly?

The point is that those opportunities are all different. They rely on a lot of factors where every factor affects another factor maybe 3, 4, 5 times. There are likely thousands, maybe even millions of different little scenerios that could play out. The forgotten fact though is that out of those thousands, even millions of scenerios, you're going to have more than a handful that play out more often than others and maybe only a handful that play out maybe once in a blue moon.

Last edited by kaygdanimal at 4/8/2008 5:30:16 PM

Your point is a very interresting!

So do you think that the increase of the experience depends on a different abilities - for each position specific?

I think that if it's a true (could be), the getting of an experiences depends even on the other players on the field.. you know - they can better pass to each other and so on..

what do you think?

do all rookies now start with atrocious exp? i have 3 picks from season 3 and they all have atrocious (1) exp!
will it be the same next draft round?
i have 5 picks (4x19y,20y) from from season 2 and they have 6,5 and 3 times 4 exp! they are only 1-2 years older than the new picks but the new picks need about 4-6 seasons to reach this level. (only a guess)
so do u think u should focus ur training on the exp players if they have similar ratings?

I believe that Experience is directly tied to Situation Specific as well as Position Specific in those situations.

A Center grabs rebounds. That's one of their pimary jobs. But out of these two situations by these two example players, who would you determine their rebound to be more imporant:

Scenerio One:
Shaquille O'Neal of the Suns, start of the game early in the season, grabs a rebound after the lowly Memphis Grizzlies' Mike Miller misses a wide open two after receiving the pass from rookie PG Mike Conley. The Suns, one of the greater teams in the league, will go on to win the game in dominating fashion, 114-73. The Suns never gave up the lead. Importance of this game is minimal at best because the Suns are already built for a Championship run while the Grizzlies are building for a future Championship run. Neither team has any hatred between the other outside of the fact that they both play in the NBA.

Scenerio Two:
Aaron Gray, rookie Center for the Chicago Bulls, is trying to help his team creep into the last slot of the Eastern Conference Playoffs Bracket. They are up against the Detroit Pistons, a division rival, whom also happens to be trying to win their way into the playoffs. There are 17 lead changes in the game as the score difference never rises above 5 points. Late in the fourth quarter, the Bulls down by one. Aaron Gray sits just outside the paint making sure he avoids any 3-sec rule infraction. Ben Gordon receives a bullet from Kirk Hinrich as the clock ticks down to 4 seconds on the clock. Gordon goes up, ball hits the front of the rim, and in the air go three Pistons and one lonely Aaron Gray. Just as the clock hits the 1-second mark, Gray's fingertips protrude through the sea of Piston defenders' hands to give the ball one little nudge, just enough of a nudge to push the ball through the awaiting net. Bulls pull of the victory, sliding into the playoffs and leaving their hated division rival wondering what might've been.

Out of those two situations, who do you think gained better experience? I'd personally say Aaron Gray. Of course, that is only one situation. Gray would have to experience a lot more of those situations in order to be on the level of Shaquille O'Neal. Shaq's experience is far greater than Aaron Gray's which consequently means that Shaq has an easier time in most situations than does Gray.

While there is no equation (that I know about) that can give an accurate value as to how important an individual rebound is at any given point in a game, as creatures with the ability to use logic, we can deduce the importance of a single rebound at the precise moment it happens. Even following the conclusion of the game, we can use the statistics that are taken from the game and analyze the impact a single player had on that single game.

When it comes to depending on the other players on the field, your remark strikes a resemblance to NBA Live 2007's Player Chemistry franchise feature. Players with great chemistry between each other tend to play better than those without great chemistry. The Knicks suffer from the "Me First" mentality, even in NBA Live 2007. Your star player may be a star on the court but you risk having poor performances if he's always playing with players with whom he has poor chemistry with. Stephon Marbury and Steve Francis love the spotlight and rarely are willing to share. Having both on the court is likely to result in disaster as both players will try to outshine the other and are never playing for the betterment of the team.

I am not sure if BB's Experience has any connection to Player Chemistry though but if not, hopefully that is an extra feature that BB could add in the future. I would think though that players with Atrocious experience would be better off playing with players that have Respectable experience, even more likely to be better off playing with teammates that have Proficient experience.

Last edited by kaygdanimal at 4/9/2008 11:01:55 AM